December 1, 2011, - 3:19 pm

OUTRAGE: Libs Charge Man w/ FOUR! Felonies For Looking Out of His HOME Window

By Debbie Schlussel


There’s a reason my late father (Of Blessed Memory) used to call Ann Arbor, “Moscow on the Huron” at the time the Soviet Union was still in existence.

Liberal Dem Prosecutor Brian L. Mackie Proves You Don’t Have to Be Jewish to Be a Total Schmuck

Take the case of Dr. Howard Weinblatt, an Ann Arbor, Michigan pediatrician.  My father would have been sickened by this. At age 65, Dr. Weinblatt’s whole career and life has been ruined by ridiculously overzealous far-left prosecutors.  It’s incredible that in two other areas of the country, coaches, universities, police, and, yes, prosecutors did nothing as two men repeatedly molested young boys; but, yet, Washtenaw County prosecutors are charging Dr. Rosenblatt with FOUR(!) felonies for looking out the window of his house as a neighbor girl apparently undressed without pulling the shades.  Dr. Weinblatt didn’t use a telescope or trespass on someone else’s property.  He merely looked out his own window while in the confines of his own home.

Apparently, police and prosecutors have solved all crime in Ann Arbor and have nothing better to do.  Even if the charges are dropped, who is going to take their kids to be examined by Dr. Weinblatt, now that he’s been vilified all over the news locally here in the Detroit area?  The initial stories on Tuesday and Wednesday didn’t even note that Dr. Weinblatt looked out his own window.  Instead, as I read them, it appeared that the doctor had been spying on a young patient through a window in his office.  But that wasn’t the case at all. Yet, Dr. Weinblatt could do up to eight years in prison for all of this. He has never had a criminal incident, let alone one involving peeping Tomism or something involving minors.  Washtenaw County Prosecutor Brian Mackie–a liberal Democrat–ought to be ashamed . . . and run out of office.  Sadly, neither of those will happen.  More:

The attorney for an Ann Arbor pediatrician accused of watching a young girl change her clothes says the case against the 65-year-old doctor isn’t simple.

The charges against Dr. Howard Weinblatt say he was in his own house and was just looking out of his window at the time of the alleged incidents, Weinblatt’s attorney Larry Margolis said Wednesday. . . . Police have released few details about the case. . . .

Weinblatt is accused of window peeping on Olivia Avenue in Ann Arbor, where he lives, south of the University of Michigan’s campus. Court documents state Weinblatt watched a 12-year-old girl change clothes on four different occasions in October.

The documents say the girl was in a position where she had “a reasonable expectation of privacy.”

Um, here’s a tip: If your neighbor can see you changing clothes from inside his own home, with his naked (no pun intended) eye, you probably have the blinds or drapes wide open and have zero expectation of privacy.

Police said a witness saw Weinblatt looking into the girl’s window, but did not release details about the witness. Officers executed a search warrant at Weinblatt’s house last week and seized a computer, Ann Arbor police said.

Weinblatt, who has had his medical license since 1977, works for IHA Child Health — Ann Arbor. He has been placed on leave, according to a brief statement posted by the company on its Web site. He is not seeing patients, the statement said.

Weinblatt is out of jail on bond. His preliminary exam will be 1 p.m. Jan. 4. Each of the felonies carries a maximum of two years in prison.

The lesson in all of this?  Don’t look out the window.  You might find your freedom taken away for the privilege.

And this incident isn’t unique. It’s part of a larger trend. While we hear day after day about authorities doing nothing despite charges against college football and basketball coaches molesting boys, there is a flip side. Often, prosecutors seeking grandstanding and headlines go way overboard in prosecuting innocent people for sex crimes that simply never happened.

In this case, the circumstances are quite clear. This is an innocent man looking out his window.

And at age 65, he’s been treated worse than a common criminal thug in Southeast Detroit. Plus, his whole practice has been ruined, not to mention the tens of thousands he has to pay his defense attorney.

Think this couldn’t happen to you? Think again. What happened to Dr. Weinblatt could happen to any of us, especially White males–because society has decided that, even when they are inside their homes, merely looking out the window, they are “creepy sexual aggressors against children.”

That’s the thinking in Ann Arbor, or as my late dear father used to call it, “Moscow on the Huron.” He’d always add that he, of course, was wrong to insult Moscow with the comparison.

**** UPDATE: I forgot to mention that in 2002-2003, this same overzealous prosecutor, Brian Mackie, prosecuted a man for killing an Eastern Massassauga Rattlesnake, a poisonous rattlesnake native to Michigan, when it was about to strike a kid and the kid’s mother. The man–who went on my CBS radio show with his lawyer–was prosecuted for killing an endangered species. Better that the kid should be bitten by an endangered species than the endangered species should die. This is how this schmuck, Mackie, thinks. He’s a statist, arbitrary piece of crap.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

37 Responses

Dear Debbie,

I was once a “liberal”, I believed that the governmnet should protect us from the criminals out there. The problem, is that the governmnet can make criminals out of ordinary citizens. For example, public urination can land people on the sex offender registry, a small amount of pot can put someone in jail (which makes someone a violent criminal where one was not before), and a traffic infraction can result in DUI charges even when someone did not drink prior to the arrest (example, someone has an eye condition correctable by lenses, but does not pass the officer’s “flashlight test” due to a wandering eye. Example 2: someone who drinks fermented milk/active cultures, such as Kefir, may fail a breathalizer test and spend the night in jail). I do not consider myself a “conservative”, but do believe that by seeking protection from the government, we create a society that criminalizes people easily for everyday behavior, and allocate government spending towards further criminalization of citizens.

“Milk does not come from the supermarket, and safety does not come from policemen” –Robert Heinlein (sorry if I butchered quote). Likewise, safety does not come from criminalizing public urination, looking out of their own window, jailing non-violent offenders, and confiscating nail clippers and shampoo at airports.

Ilya on December 1, 2011 at 3:41 pm

    The government makes laws for people to break. If Debbie has a business out of her home, yes in some cities she would need a business license and pay a fee on top of that and not just what she got a state license with her state bar exam. My point being, many of the rules and regulations ensnare people and have nothing whatsoever to do with protecting society. We need more protection from government’s good intentions than we do from any possible harm we might inflict on ourselves.

    NormanF on December 1, 2011 at 3:51 pm

      “There’s no way to to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who want’s a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted—and you create a nation of law-breakers—and then you cash in on the guilt. Now that’s the system, Mr. Rearden, that’s the game, and once you understand it, you’ll be much easier to deal with.”
      Atlas Shrugged Page 406

      Ayn Rand warned us and showed us how a totalitarian government would come to America with the approval of the sheeple.
      Can anyone honestly say that today in America we have too few “law”s and regulations?
      To bad so few of us heard her and too bad so few today can see the signs and wonders she warned us about which show America is one small step away from the tyranny and totalitarianism she so prophetically spelled out in “Atlas Shrugged”….

      Who cares? on December 2, 2011 at 9:48 am

G-d forbid a man simply admire an undressed woman in another room. Is human nature for men to look at women. If its that’s now a capital crime, G-d help this country. Its not like this doctor exposed himself in front of her or did anything indecent. I guess looking at a neighbor is now a felony. Its an absolute disgrace!

NormanF on December 1, 2011 at 3:45 pm

Planned Parenthood has repeatedly failed to report the statutory or actual rapes of underage girls who are brought to its “clinics” for abortions, usually by the rapists themselves or by one of their relatives. An example is what occurred in Kansas with Phil Kline’s efforts to expose this and how he was stopped by Kathleen Sebelius (the current Secretary of HHS) and others. See Jack Cashill’s articles on this abomination. Yet the good doctor faces felony convictions for looking out his window. If the doctor had simply performed an abortion on the underage girl and not reported the rapist, no problem!

Concerned Citizen on December 1, 2011 at 3:52 pm

Its like out of Kafka. We all remember “The Trial” – one day Joseph K. – a respectable citizen gets arrested and put on trial and he doesn’t know what he’s being charged or what his fate is going to be. I never thought doing nothing illegal can land you in trouble with the law. As we see in Washtenaw County, it takes little for the state to seek to convict you, even no one else was injured by your own conduct. We live closer and closer to the spirit of that nightmare world. I pray for Dr. Howard Weinblatt. He has done nothing to deserve having his life ruined for looking outside his own home window in the “wrong” direction.


NormanF on December 1, 2011 at 4:00 pm

It has been estimated that you can not live in the US one day without breaking a law, rule, regulation. DA’s brag that they can put anyone in jail. The fact is that we do not live in a free society. We govern by taking away the freedom of 90% of people for the actions of 10%. Take the example of drugs. Why do we have such strict laws. Breaking of these laws results in enormous numbers of nonviolent people in prison. Why can’t we use any medication and have free access? Because 10% of people would abuse the situation. Yet they are not productive people in any case. Lets get government out of our lives.

david7134 on December 1, 2011 at 4:16 pm

    Debbie didn’t note it but there’s this elderly guy in California who invented an iodine purification treatment to help hikers and travelers avoid Montezuma’s revenge on vacation.

    The federal and state narcotic agencies closed down his business cuz meth cookers were using it to make pure meth batches. Yup, its not the bad guys they really go after, its innocent people who have done nothing more than to help others.

    That and stories like this one reveal what’s wrong in this country.

    NormanF on December 1, 2011 at 6:13 pm

I wonder what they are doing to the “witness” who was looking IN the Dr.’s window to see the Dr. looking OUT.

Jennifer on December 1, 2011 at 4:23 pm

I am wondering if the charges are based on what they found on the computer (i.e. Pictures of the girl changing).

I_AM_ME on December 1, 2011 at 4:37 pm

The man is a pediatrician. He presumably sees girls in his practice, and presumably all of them are under age, say, 14. He has seen them naked thousands of times. They come into his office specifically for that purpose. He even touched them. By the prosecutor’s standards, how is that any more legal than what he’s being charged with?

Louie Louie on December 1, 2011 at 4:39 pm

    There is no crime at looking at an undressed child. Its a crime to touch a child for lewd gratification. I think intelligent people understand the difference between the two situations. A pediatrician sees more naked kids at work than most parents see in their first few years. What’s missing here is plain, good old-fashioned common sense!

    NormanF on December 1, 2011 at 6:28 pm

The witness saw him do this four times? Does it take four times to be a crime? If it wasn’t a crime the first three times it happened, why is it a crime the fourth?

Somebody is lying.

dave on December 1, 2011 at 4:54 pm

This is bizarre. Do we know if he was using a visual aid?

BC: No, there were no visual aids. More details here–even though this columnist has flat-out lied about me and other facts in the past, he’s spot on here:

Brian Cuban on December 1, 2011 at 4:58 pm

Meanwhile, the U of M campus rapist(s) is relaxing at his crib on X-box, waiting for his/their next field trip to the campus. Sick as all hell.

samurai on December 1, 2011 at 5:13 pm

So watching porn is legal but looking our of the window isn’t… hilarious!

GG on December 1, 2011 at 5:23 pm

I say put the old white guy away.

Just make sure he does not have a window in his cell, or he will be doing it in jail.

Michigan has turned into a commie state.

Panhandle on December 1, 2011 at 5:26 pm

Like I said, Debbie, there are fewer than 5 attorneys I really like in the entire world. You, of course, are one of them. But the majority are Dhmmicrats.

One only hopes the Prosecutor gets sued after he loses this case.

Occam's Tool on December 1, 2011 at 6:02 pm

Debbie, thanks for the update.

Unbelievable. A human life is more important than an animal’s. We’re not allowed to defend ourselves? I bet that prosecutor would have been singing a different tune if it had been his kids in harm’s way.

There’s no expectation of equal treatment under the law, let alone justice from this schmuck Brian Mackie.

NormanF on December 1, 2011 at 6:08 pm

Kafka-esque nightmares are the worst. They scare the crap out of me.

If this goes to trial (and he has a jury) I hope they are like the stupid Casey Anthony jury (who would NOT convict her unless they had a map and a flashlight and a video of her killing her child) and the second stupid jury that let Amanda Knox go free.

But it will prolly be the opposite of the above…they’ll make him guilty of other crimes as well and throw the book at him.

Skunky on December 1, 2011 at 9:00 pm

The “witness” was probably a peeping tom himself, who was surprised when he turned around to see the Dr looking at him. So it’s a race to the phone to see who gets arrested.

Ender on December 1, 2011 at 10:59 pm

The comedian, Jack Douglas, once wrote that if the authorities in Hollywood don’t like a man, he can be arrested for loitering in his own bathtub. That just stopped being funny. Keep up the good work and Shabbat Shalom.

Miranda Rose Smith on December 2, 2011 at 4:27 am

Maybe just maybe
Liberal Dem Prosecutor Brian L. Mackie
is seeing this whole scenario from a different perspective

Tommy on December 2, 2011 at 10:34 am

If it was the other way around with the good doctor undressing no doubt he would be charged with exposing himself. This is clearly gender discrimination. It is interesting to note that if this happened under Islamic Sharia the young girl could be found guilty and stoned to death.
Also note what if it were a young male undressing? Would the male looking out his window more likely to be prosecuted if he was a priest, or a football Coach?
For Christ’s sake, this is Ann Arbor. Do you think that old men like myself go to the Art Fair just to look at the art?(ahem).
Lastly, If the doctor a dermatologist could he be excused?

Ron Wolf on December 2, 2011 at 12:45 pm

Maybe it’s because I have a 12-yr-old daughter, but I’m having a hard time defending this guy. If my next door neighbor was checking her out, he’d be looking for his teeth.

Blayne on December 2, 2011 at 1:56 pm

    Blayne, if your daughter is undressing in front of an open window, and you’re getting mad at the guy who’s inside his own home instead of at her, then you’re bound to be raising a girl who feels entitled to have the world kowtow to her. Rethink your position, buddy.

    Louie Louie on December 2, 2011 at 7:01 pm

How does anyone know he was actually watching HER? Has no one ever looked out thier window on a lovely night, just to stare at the stars, or even stare into space, while breathing fresh air?
And what about the witness? How did he/she know what direction the Dr. was looking, and what was happening in that direction, at that very moment, unless that witness was also looking?

This is ridiculous.

Michelle on December 2, 2011 at 3:21 pm

Louie, you’re an idiot.

Blayne on December 6, 2011 at 9:02 am

I completely agree that this sounds very unusual and the mother’s behavior was very questionable. And Dr. Weinblatt’s (not Rosenblatt) career is likely ruined, innocent or guilty. His identity should have been protected like the victims. But to blame it on a liberal prosecutor and community? That is an unfair stretch. I am sure a quick google search will find similar examples of conservative prosecutors pursuing bogus cases. Let’s call it what it is, overzealous and just plain bad prosecuting.

JS on December 8, 2011 at 11:46 am

This was my pediatrician and there’s no way in hell he would ever harm or exploit a child… sickens me that he would be accused of anything so ludacris…trust me he is an innocent man…I will be praying that the truth will prevail.

holly on December 30, 2011 at 10:25 pm

Perhaps you should write a follow-up to this, now that the FACTS are in.

Joan on January 26, 2012 at 1:01 am

i know howard. we were once neighbors, he was my kids’ pediatrician. although it’s been years since we crossed paths, i know that he’s a good guy and an excellent pediatrician.

here’s the problem: the first time he saw the girl doing whatever with her window uncovered, he should have told his wife and together suggested to the neighbor that it would be prudent to instruct their daughter on how to protect privacy.

i assume that didn’t happen. but, once the neighbor found out, why didn’t she confront howard or his wife? instead, she must have assumed he was a pervert (for lack of a better term) and engaged her daughter to catch him in the act.

can you imagine how that conversation must have gone?

“mom. i caught the guy next door watching me get dressed. it was so-o-o gross!”

“that’s outrageous! he should be arrested! but we’d need evidence. tell you what: we’ll set up a camera to watch him watching you and then turn it over to the police.”

“uh, mom? do i have to, you know, like get naked and stuff?”

“well of course, honey. we need to get the goods on this creep.”

“omg! that’s like so totally gross. i don’t want this guy looking at me. why do i have put on a show?”

“well, honey, how else are we going to prove what a creep he is?”


i would imagine there must have been history between howard’s family and this mother to get her to go to that extreme. however, i blame the mother for putting her child in that position rather than doing the sensible thing: yell at the kid to close her drapes and go next door to yell at howard.

once the solid evidence was handed off to the ann arbor police, their hands were tied. they had no choice but to hand it off to the city attorney who, in turn, had no choice but to seek a search warrant to determine if they had a true sexual threat on their hands. the few pictures on his computer must have been sufficiently salacious to support the fear of howard’s being a threat to kids, even though there is zero evidence that he has ever done anything wrong outside of this series of incidents.

it’s just so sad: howard could have prevented this with mature behavior; or, the neighbor mom could have dealt with this civilly rather than criminally. however, to label this as a political issue is ludicrous. whoever this woman debbie schlussel is sounds like a reactionary screamer. this is not about left vs right. this is about neighbors who don’t act as neighbors. once the system is involved, everything else needs to take its natural course.

had that been the case in happy valley, joepa would have died an untainted saint. so, kudos to the ann arbor police and judicial system for taking this seriously. it’s just too bad that the mother next door saw that as the best option.

bob on January 31, 2012 at 10:41 am

I had two early twentysomethings next door peering into my bathroom window from a truck parked in their driveway. My immediate reaction was to pull the drapes. It’s too bad the mother didn’t give her daughter that same advice. The man is perverted, but why tempt a pervert? He may be getting Alzheimer’s or a similar dementia also. I have heard that sexual indiscretion can be an ealy sign.

Stop The Game on March 21, 2012 at 7:55 pm

Some have already noted the behavior of the so-called witness: how does the witness KNOW that the doctor was looking from his window to a girl undressing at her window, unless the witness also was looking at the girl undressing??? And why shouldn’t the girl be charged with exhibitionism? After all, she obviously is undressing in front of her open window on multiple occasions.

Russ on December 13, 2014 at 10:57 pm

The video of him watching her clearly showed he was not wearing pants and masturbating. Two minutes of it are available at

Sophia on December 23, 2014 at 10:16 am

Being one of his victims of inappropriate touchings (while a pediatric patient). I wish this man nothing but hell.

JF on May 28, 2018 at 12:07 am

Leave a Reply for NormanF

Click here to cancel reply.

* denotes required field