North Texas mom seeks help to identify "Peeping Tom" seen at teen daughter's window
Nedra Bounds said that at first, it was a man's face suddenly appearing in her 13-year-old daughter's window, then he started to linger.
"He'll come, he's stumbling drunk," she said. "He's clearly at this point targeting her."
Determined to protect her daughter, she installed blackout curtains, floodlights, and additional security cameras, hoping it would scare him off.
"We've made about four to five phone calls to police at this point, and it just keeps escalating," she said.
Bounds said the man exposed himself.
"That's really the most concerning thing is that is that he's been caught with his pants down, he's seeking her window," she said. "She's a little girl. She doesn't want to think about those things."
Bounds posted a picture of the man on social media, hoping someone would be able to identify him. She said the response has been overwhelming.
"Everybody is just, 'I'll give you a camera,'" she said. "'Can I bring you a camera?' 'I'll sit outside your house.'"
Plano police confirm they're investigating and detectives are reviewing the videos of the man.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate Democrats walk out of committee vote to advance Trump court pick Emil Bove
Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats walked out before Republicans voted on Thursday to advance President Donald Trump's nomination of Emil Bove -- the controversial top Justice Department official who formerly served as Trump's defense attorney -- to a seat on the powerful Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. The Democrats left before Republicans forced the vote for Bove's lifetime appointment on the appeals court that oversees districts in Delaware, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Bove has repeatedly drawn criticism from Democrats in the opening six months of Trump's presidency for cultivating a reputation as one of President Trump's chief enforcers at DOJ. The Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee's vote to advance Bove means he will next face a vote in the full Senate. MORE: Why do Trump's MAGA followers care so much about the Epstein files? Democratic Sen. Cory Booker spoke furiously from the dais, pleading with Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley to allow further debate on Bove's nomination, but Grassley declined. "What are you afraid of about even debating this?" Booker asked Grassley. "Sir, with all appeals to your decency, with all appeals to your integrity, with all appeals to past jurisdictions and past precedent, why are you doing this?" Booker asked. More than 900 former Justice Department employees sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday urging lawmakers to vote down Bove's nomination. He has fired scores of one-time career officials at Main Justice and the FBI, including prosecutors who worked on former special counsel Jack Smith's investigations of Trump as well as the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol by a pro-Trump mob. Bove also was at the center of the department's controversial decision to drop the federal corruption case against New York Democratic Mayor Eric Adams, which led to the resignations of multiple prosecutors who argued the effort appeared to be a 'quid pro quo' to secure Adams' cooperation with the Trump administration's immigration enforcement actions. Adams and Bove have both denied any such "quid pro quo" arrangement, but in agreeing to drop the charges the federal judge overseeing Adams' case dinged the Justice Department writing, "Everything here smacks of a bargain." "Mr. Bove's trampling over institutional norms in this case, and in others, sent shockwaves through the ranks -- cratering morale, triggering mass departures, and eroding the effectiveness of DOJ's vital work," the prosecutors wrote of Bove's actions. "Prosecutorial authority carries profound consequences on individuals' lives and the integrity of our public institutions; wielding it without impartiality is a flagrant abuse of that power." MORE: Trump admin live updates More recently, however, Bove's actions have come under scrutiny as the subject of a whistleblower complaint by fired DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni, who has accused Bove and other top DOJ officials of repeatedly discussing how they could potentially disobey court orders that seek to restrict the Trump administration's immigration actions. Reuveni's complaint alleged that in one meeting Bove suggested saying "f--- you" to courts who may try to block deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. During his confirmation hearing, Bove disputed much of Reuveni's complaint -- though he only said he could "not recall" using such an expletive to describe their response to a court order. "Each one of the undersigned would testify, under oath, that we have never -- and would never -- tell a Justice Department attorney to consider defying a court order," the letter said. "Moreover, the Justice Department's later defiance of judicial mandates in the cases where Mr. Bove previewed doing so further suggests that disregarding court orders was Mr. Bove's intent all along." Republicans on the committee rushed to Bove's defense in the wake of the whistleblower complaint, and accused Reuveni of partnering with Democrats in seeking to tank Bove's nomination by filing it with the committee just 24 hours before he was set to appear publicly before them. Responding to the former DOJ officials' letter Wednesday, department official Brian Nieves attacked Justice Connection as a "political hit squad masquerading as a support network" and said "they certainly don't speak for DOJ." "They speak for a bitter faction angry they no longer call the shots," said Nieves, a deputy chief of staff to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. "Their attacks on Emil Bove are dishonest, coordinated, and disgraceful."
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Denise Richards restraining order against husband alleges abuse, death threats
Denise Richards has been granted a temporary restraining order against estranged husband Aaron Phypers after he allegedly abused and threatened to kill the reality star. Phypers, 52, must stay 100 yards from the 54-year-old 'Real Housewives of Beverly Hills' alum as well as her home, vehicle and place of business through Aug. 8, when the exes are slated to appear in court, according to new court documents obtained by TMZ. 'Throughout our relationship, Aaron would frequently violently choke me, violently squeeze my head with both hands, tightly squeeze my arms, violently slap me in my face and head, (and) aggressively slam my head into the bathroom towel rack,' alleged the 'Wild Things'-turned-OnlyFans star, who married Phypers in 2018. Richards also included a photo of her with a black eye, which she claims Phypers gave her during a 2022 attack. Among the alleged incidents described by Richards was one earlier this month, wherein she says Phypers screamed at her to give him her phone and 'squeezed my arm extremely tight and aggressively' when she gave him pushback. Richards says she ultimately told Phypers she'd call the police, to which he responded: 'I would like to see the cops take me away, I will blow everything up if they try.' Richards also claims Phypers owns at least eight unregistered firearms. It's unclear whether the alleged July incident occurred before or after Phypers filed for divorce last week, citing irreconcilable differences. He listed their date of separation at July 4. An insider told Us Weekly shortly thereafter that the two 'love each other but they haven't been happy,' in large part because Richards has had to shoulder the financial burden in the relationship. A representative for Richards did not immediately respond to the Daily News' request for comment.
CNN
11 minutes ago
- CNN
Meta investors, Zuckerberg reach settlement to end $8 billion trial over Facebook privacy litigation
Mark Zuckerberg and current and former directors and officers of Meta Platforms agreed on Thursday to settle claims seeking $8 billion for the damage they allegedly caused the company by allowing repeated violations of Facebook users' privacy, a lawyer for the shareholders told a Delaware judge on Thursday. The parties did not disclose details of the settlement and defense lawyers did not address the judge, Kathaleen McCormick of the Delaware Court of Chancery. McCormick adjourned the trial just as it was to enter its second day and she congratulated the parties. The plaintiffs' lawyer, Sam Closic, said the agreement just came together quickly. Billionaire venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, who is a defendant in the trial and a Meta director, was scheduled to testify on Thursday. Shareholders of Meta sued Zuckerberg, Andreessen and other former company officials including former Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg in hopes of holding them liable for billions of dollars in fines and legal costs the company paid in recent years. The Federal Trade Commission fined Facebook $5 billion in 2019 after finding that it failed to comply with a 2012 agreement with the regulator to protect users' data. The shareholders wanted the 11 defendants to use their personal wealth to reimburse the company. The defendants denied the allegations, which they called 'extreme claims.' Facebook changed its name to Meta in 2021. The company was not a defendant. The company declined to comment. A lawyer for the defendants did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 'This settlement may bring relief to the parties involved, but it's a missed opportunity for public accountability,' said Jason Kint, the head of Digital Content Next, a trade group for content providers. Zuckerberg was expected to take the stand on Monday and Sandberg on Wednesday. The trial was scheduled to run through the end of next week. The case was also expected to include testimony from former Facebook board members Peter Thiel, Palantir Technologies co-founder, and Reed Hastings, co-founder of Netflix. Meta investors alleged in the lawsuit that former and current board members completely failed to oversee the company's compliance with the 2012 FTC agreement and claim that Zuckerberg and Sandberg knowingly ran Facebook as an illegal data harvesting operation. The case followed revelations that data from millions of Facebook users was accessed by Cambridge Analytica, a now-defunct political consulting firm that worked for Donald Trump's successful US presidential campaign in 2016. Those revelations led to the FTC fine, which was a record at the time. On Wednesday, an expert witness for the plaintiffs testified about what he called 'gaps and weaknesses' in Facebook's privacy policies but would not say if the company violated the 2012 agreement that Facebook reached with the FTC. Jeffrey Zients, a former board member, testified on Wednesday that the company did not agree to the FTC fine to spare Zuckerberg legal liability, as shareholders allege. On its website, the company has said it has invested billions of dollars into protecting user privacy since 2019. The trial would have been a rare opportunity for Meta investors to see Zuckerberg answer probing questions under oath. In 2017, Zuckerberg was expected to testify at a trial involving a lawsuit by company investors opposed to his plan to issue a special class of Facebook stock that would have extended his control over that company. That case also settled before he took the stand. 'Facebook has successfully remade the 'Cambridge Analytica' scandal about a few bad actors rather than an unraveling of its entire business model of surveillance capitalism and the reciprocal, unbridled sharing of personal data,' Kint said. 'That reckoning is now left unresolved.'
