Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
she didn't know him, he wasn't a friend, he was some guy hanging out on a park bench/table
for 5 mins staring at her kids, and she felt violated by it ...
He was there first. He said he tried three times to get a picture; she did not object. How long he spent trying to get a picture is not clear. After he gave up trying, another five minutes went by without a peep from her. It is not clear if he was even still watching the kid. It was only after those five minutes had passed, as they were leaving, that she accosted him. So how did that protect her kids, anyway?

she had every right to act the way she did,
She was unreasonable. She accosted him, creating a disturbance, by yelling at him "You're a sick pervert for photographing my kids!"
So--anyone who takes a picture of her kid is a sick pervert. Is that reasonable?
Is it anyone's right to loudly attack someone else just because they don't like what that person is doing? She sounds to me like a bit of a nutcase, not behaving as a reasonable person would.

i know he didn't literally attack her, but he violated her which to ME is the same as an attack.
Violated how? He tried to take a picture of her kid jumping over a bench, in plain view of everybody. Her child entered his field of view, his viewing space; he did not follow or pursue the child, or even move to get a different angle. Just because she FELT violated, it doesn't mean she WAS violated.

As I said earlier, what are we supposed to do? Avert our eyes whenever children are around?