[Chloé Palmas]

Exactly on the former - she (Gina) did not report the act yet they (police) deleted the materiel anyway. That is a total cop out on the statute even being proposed here.

So long as the act is interpreted as written it will not allow for prosecution of images taken which are not "under the person's crotch" imo.

Which makes it impossible to retrospectively prosecute as to act as if the victim was "unaware at the time".

It just not believable that a non remote device can operate under your skirt without your knowledge. That requires all kinds of mental gymnastics that beggar belief.