Reminds me of a story I heard....Lady called police and said she could see from her upstairs window her next door neighbor exposing himself in his bathroom. When the police arrived and looked out the window they couldn't see anything. The lady told police to drag the barstool over to the window and take these binoculars and then have a look.

an awful lot of assumptions here. no where in the article did it say the woman stopped and watched or pointed it out to the kid. the 2 windows could have been side by side (which would take a second to walk from one window to the other) and the kid could have seen it and pointed it out to the mom. the windows weren't covered which means the guy was making it public (intentionally or not) I suspect the guy didn't think about the windows and it wasn't intentional

here is one possible scenario:
the mom is walking the kid to the bus stop or baby sitter and walking by the house. the kid sees movement in that house and points it out to the mom. no crime there no peeping tom

the man inside just woke up and didn't know the curtains were left open by room mates. he went about his morning business half asleep. no crime there and no intent to expose

PEEPING TOM:
n. a person who stealthily peeks into windows, holes in restroom walls or other openings with the purpose of getting a sexual thrill from seeing women or girls undressed or couples making love. The term comes from the legendary Tom who was the one person who peeked when Lady Godiva rode her horse naked through the streets of Coventry to protest taxes. Being a peeping tom is treated as a crime based on sexual deviancy, with various names in different states. It forms the basis for a lawsuit by the victim on the basis of invasion of privacy.

a side walk or where ever they were walking is not necessarily private property and when the windows are uncovered then it's not invasion of privacy or peeping...it's out there for the neighborhood to see

INDECENT EXPOSURE:
n. the crime of displaying one's genitalia to one or more other people in a public place, usually with the apparent intent to shock the unsuspecting viewer and give the exposer a sexual charge

again...no intent was done. it was an accident

That's gender bias, would you have said the same if it was a man walking his son by a house were a woman was naked in the kitchen? I doubt it.

And by saying no intent, would you feel the same knowing someone was looking in your living room window watching television with you? No sexual intent.

hmmm wait I'm going the other way,

No where on the article does it say that this mother just glimpsed in his window, was she staring in waiting for him to get his coffee? also article didn't state how long she looked/peeped/scoped/stared in the window, does it make a difference only if he's very well endowed

I'd have run home and gotten my camera, no pictures hence no proof -

kinda my point. no one really knows but some assume on both sides.

I'd camp outside with a good camera, not on his property of course, cuz them I'd be trespassing

yes you would ya hoochie

and you'd be my lookout

Wow. Talk about taking interpretation of the law to a whole new level. As someone said earlier, she and her kid should be charged for peeping in his windows to begin with.

Yeah, probably bc it was you walking by the window ;)

I'd walk back and forth if it were you in window

Unforunately, you would be tresspassing to get that close of a look...lol
(if you can't laugh at yourself, then why bother)

I have high-tech toys will not be guilty of trespassing

besides YR is my look out

Oh ok, then it's all good...lol
The only difference is that I get up at 4:15am everyday...just in case you really need to make a schedule or something ;)