?‘± Bonnie Reynolds (@bonniereynolds) July 14, 2016
**Updated June 9, 2017
The Dani Mathers case may be over?‘±the former playmate plead no contest and agreed to 30 days of community service (including graffiti removal) and three years of probation?‘±but more information on how the body shaming case impacted the victim is still coming out.
You May Also Like:??Female Bodybuilder Faces Major Backlash for Fat-Shaming Woman at Gym
In a new interview with the Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles city attorney Mike Feuer spoke on behalf of the victim and detailed how the incident affected the 70-year-old woman. ??She has been humiliated,?? said Feuer. ??She??s relieved that she didn??t have to endure a trial and testify, but she was willing to do so. She wishes the whole chapter, this painful chapter, would close?‘±the impact of the photograph being taken and disseminated and what that??s meant to her, as well as what it??s meant to hear that Ms. Mathers be held accountable for what she did.??
As far as restitution is concerned, the victim, who remains anonymous, had just one very simple request. ??She used the word, that it had been ??humiliating,???? recounts the attorney. ??There??s nothing that exemplifies that more than this: When the outcome of this case was being reached, the topic of restitution came up, and she sought restitution of, like, $60??she had to buy a new backpack. Because the photograph depicted her in the shower, her backpack was hanging there, and it was a way people could identify her. She had to replace that with another backpack.??
Although the case never went to trial, Feuer assures that the victim was ready to tell her story, even if it meant prolonging the ??humiliation she had already endured. “This is an individual who had the courage to come forward and was prepared to testify to endure atrial,” he added. “She cooperated throughout the preparation of this case. But you might imagine, she wanted nothing more than to try to turn the page in her life.”
As far as Mather??s recent interviews on the topic, Feuer states that to his knowledge, she has not made any attempts contact the victim: ??She claims that she??s tried to contact the victim, I presume to apologize. I will share with you, that surprises the victim, who told me she is unaware of any attempt by Ms. Mathers to reach out to her.??
**Updated May 16, 2017
Former Playboy playmate Dani Mathers’ attempt to evade trial for the infamous naked body-shaming snap from July 2016 has failed and the Los Angeles court has ruled that she will face trial after all. According to the New York Daily News, Mathers’ attorney filed a motion arguing that the California??s Peeping Tom law is unconstitutional due to its ambiguity.
The law states that it??s illegal to secretly photograph an identifiable person in a residence, tanning booth or changing room without their consent. Mathers’ defense attorney, Dana Cole, claimed the 70-year-old victim in the photograph is not ??identifiable?? because you cannot clearly make out her features in the snapchat image. “This was a far-away shot, and the victim, her features cannot be identified,”??said Cole. To back up his claim, he argued that to locate the woman in the photo took ??a lot of hours and a lot of work”??for the Los Angeles Police Department.
The Los Angeles judge presiding over the case, Gustavo Sztraicher, disagreed and ruled against the motion. ??The court finds the statue is constitutional and not void for vagueness,?? said Judge Sztraicher. The trial is now tentatively scheduled for May 26. Mathers plead not guilty in November 2016 to the misdemeanor charge of invasion of privacy. If convicted, Mathers could face fines and up to six months of jail time.
Originally published November 6, 2016
Remember that Playboy model who??body shamed a woman on Snapchat while changing at the gym???Well she??s in big trouble now, and it??s more than just public outrage.
Dani Mathers, 29,??is being charged with invasion of privacy by the Los Angeles city prosecutor. According to the complaint, the charges that were filed on Friday were for secretly photographing a naked woman, who is reportedly in her 70s, ??with the intent to invade the privacy of that person.??
Just for a quick refresh, Mathers posted a picture on Snapchat back in July of a woman changing at the gym with the caption: ??If I can??t unsee this, then you can??t either.?? And, as you can imagine, people were not happy. Almost immediately, comments on Twitter and other forms of media came rolling in slamming Mathers. ??It must be nice to be so perfect that you feel like you can publicly shame other bodies. Please educate yourself,?? tweeted plus size model Tess Holiday.
She did make a public apology, stating: ??That was absolutely wrong and not what I meant to do.?? Adding, ??I know that body shamming is wrong. That is not the type of person I am.??
In a statement, the city attorney stated, ??While body shamming, in itself, is not a crime, there are circumstances in which invading one??s privacy to accomplish it can be. And we shouldn??t tolerate it.??
He added, ??Body shaming is humiliating, with often painful, long-term consequences. It mocks and stigmatizes its victims, tearing down self-respect and perpetuating the harmful idea that our unique physical appearances should be compared to air-brushed notions of ??perfect.’??
Mathers is facing up to six months in jail and $1,000 fine for the misdemeanor. She??s scheduled for arraignment on November 28.