Last week in British Columbia Daryl Clark, who had been found guilty of indecency for masturbating while visible through a window, won his appeal. Canada’s top court decided that because his home is not a public place and there was no evidence of intent on the part of Clark, he was innocent of any bad acts. Maybe it’s me and my devil-may-care attitude, but I ask you, who are the real sickos in this case?

Complaints from a “Mrs. S,” Clark’s next-door neighbor, were what brought Clark to court. She and her two young daughters were watching television in the rumpus room when she noticed Clark through his window. She called her husband over and together they went into their dark bedroom, watched Clark for between 10 and 15 minutes, admittedly with the aid of binoculars AND a telescope, and then called the police. I think if anything was to come of this case, Mr. and Mrs. S should have been charged with two counts of Tom Peepery.

Before the Supreme Court of Canada decided to overturn the ruling, Clark was sentenced to four months in prison for indecent acts. Let us weigh the options for Mrs. S: Your neighbor serves four months in prison, or you pull down your blinds. Which of the two are simple and painless for all involved?

I am curious to know who was watching Mrs. S’s two precious daughters during this 10-15 minute jaunt that the parents took to the bedroom to spy on their neighbor (and I say spy because they neglected to turn the lights on, apparently because it would have rendered their night vision goggles useless). Have any of you seen the public service announcement in which the mother leaves her child, just for a second to answer the phone, only to return to her daughter’s screams and deformed body after she has scalded herself with hot water. Think about it, Mrs. S. Think about it.

I suppose the best part of the case is that the police reported that Clark’s torso could be seen from just under the navel up. That’s right, no penis visible, even with the myriad of aids from the spy kit at Mrs. S’ eager little fingertips. She tried and she tried, but she just couldn’t get a look. I hope the police at least had the decency to let the poor man finish before they scaled Clark’s house and crashed in through the skylight.

Justice Morris Fish seems to have said it best: “In my respectful view, the trial judge … erred in concluding that the appellant’s living room had been converted by him into a public place simply because he could be seen through his living room window and, though he did not know this, was being watched by Mr. and Mrs. S from the privacy of their own bedroom 90 to 150 feet away.”

At this point in his speech I like to think that the judge looked over at Mrs. S and gave her the look that my mom gives my dad when he has done something to piss her off – a look known only as “the slow burn.” After receiving the fire from his eyes, I envision Mrs. S’s own eyes began to get all shifty as she slouched in her seat, full of guilt for the humiliation that she had caused Mr. Clark, and the sudden realization of the shame she had brought upon herself in the process.

It’s a good thing this whole mess didn’t happen in the United States. I would begin to worry that we were becoming a nation of uptight busy bodies; prudes who were too concerned with what others are doing in their living rooms, bedrooms, and dare I say bathrooms, that we wouldn’t have the energy to take care of ourselves and our own families. Yeah, good thing.