A PERVERT who took photographs of teenage girls' bottoms has had a conviction against him quashed - because the girls didn't realise they had been photographed.

The decision has been slammed by personal safety campaigners who said even if the pictures were taken covertly, a crime had still been committed and the privacy of women had been violated.

A court heard that stalker Daniel Edmunds, 20, struck with a mobile phone camera - even though he was banned from having photographic equipment of any kind.

The court was told Edmunds - who has admitted that he found girls as young as six attractive - had earlier been convicted by Hyndburn Magistrates Court of breaching a Sex Offences Prevention Order (SOPO) which was imposed in June 2004.

Jeremy Grout-Smith, for the Crown, said the order had prohibited Edmunds from acting in a manner likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress, leading anyone to fear sexual or personal harm.

Mr Grout-Smith told Burnley Crown Court the appellant filmed covertly with a mobile phone and the young women were not aware of this so could not be upset - but would have been had they known.

Police officers also voiced ongoing concerns over Edmund's behaviour.

However the court was told that the conviction was not sustainable in law.

Judge Beverley Lunt agreed the conviction was unsustainable and allowed Edmunds's appeal against conviction.

But speaking after the case, a spokesperson for the Suzy Lamplugh Trust, an organisation which campaigns for better personal safety, said: "The law must take this seriously and accept that behaviour like this does cause women immense distress.

"Their privacy has been invaded whether or not they knew they were being filmed and a prosecution should be sought under new privacy laws.

"The fear of a crime like this should not be underestimated as women do not know how far someone who could do this type of thing would go." Mr Grout-Smith told the court on March 3 last year Edmunds was sent to a Young Offenders' Institution for three years for breaching the SOPO and for exposure.

The order was originally obtained because Edmunds had stalked women and children.

He was released on March 20 this year and as part of his licence conditions was sent to live at a probation hostel in Accrington.

Two days later his licence was revoked because a probation officer found Edmunds in possession of a camera mobile phone containing images of teenage girls - for the most part focusing "on their behinds".

Mr Grout-Smith said when the appellant was questioned, he admitted taking photos of older women for sexual gratification but denied snapping children deliberately or that they were for sexual gratification.

The barrister said the SOPO had originally been imposed for five years. Last year it was amended so the appellant was not allowed to possess photographic equipment of any kind and had been extended indefinitely.

Mr Grout-Smith added Edmunds was still currently serving a custodial sentence.