ShareThis Page
Westmoreland

Trafford man admits to 'peeping' captured on home security video, police say

Paul Peirce
| Friday, Feb. 2, 2018, 4:00 p.m.

A 53-year-old Trafford man admitted to peeping into a nearby home after police confronted him with photographs taken by a hidden security camera, court documents state.

Borough police charged James R. Snyder with five counts each of loitering and prowling and stalking, two counts of defiant trespass, and single counts of possession of obscene material and harassment.

Officer Joseph Riley said police initially were called to a home on Edgewood Avenue after 10 p.m. Sunday by two adults who reported that motion-activated security camera captured an unknown white male, wearing a skullcap and glasses, peering through a window as an underage female was dressing.

“The actor appears to take a photograph as a flash is seen in the video,” Riley wrote in the affidavit.

The victims provided video and photographs of the incident to police.

On Thursday, Snyder agreed to meet with officers at the station, Riley reported. Riley asked Snyder if he knew why he was there, and Snyder said that he believed it was because he had gone onto a neighbor's property “regarding a barking dog,” according to court documents.

“Officers then informed him that (the victims) had security cameras on the property which (Snyder) stated he was unaware of,” Riley said.

Riley said Snyder then admitted that he had looked in the window and taken pictures.

“Snyder also told officers that he had done this several times prior to Sunday's incident,” Riley wrote in the affidavit.

Snyder was ordered held in the county jail after failing to post $5,000 bond. A preliminary hearing is scheduled for Feb. 13 before Harrison City District Judge Helen Kistler.

Paul Peirce is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-850-2860, ppeirce@tribweb.com or via Twitter @ppeirce_trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me