Rivera, 445 Mass. 119, 833 N.E.2d 1113 (2005). In Rivera, a convenience store's surveillance camera recorded a violent robbery. The victim refused to open the cash register despite numerous requests from two masked robbers. The robbers then left the shop and the victim chased them. One of the robbers then shot the victim and fled. Id. at 11.16. Similar to Rivera, Dr. Knowles' camera was installed by a private individual for security purposes, but the court found that the convenience store recording was not secret because the surveillance camera was in plain sight, where a person is likely to know to be are recorded. Id. Based on this decision, the police department can distinguish its case by arguing that, even if the cameras are installed for security purposes, they constitute an invasion of privacy if not obvious to the public. See also Commonwealth v. Jackson, 370 Mass. 502, 349 N.E.2d 227, 339 (1976) ("It is clear that the legislature intended the statutory restrictions to apply . . . to the covert use of such devices"). Police could argue that the cutting-edge ocular equipment was undetectable. Since this is a webcam from a private investigation firm, it is meant to remain undetected by nudes