Details slim in tanning case
By Josh Kowalkowski
Collegian Staff Writer
During the six-week investigation of Tanfastique Tanning Salon, 159 S. Garner St., the State College Police Department did not inform customers that owner Ron Hanslovan was suspected of spying on tanners.
"We couldn't say anything to the public about the case until we had enough evidence for probable cause," State College Police Chief Tom King said. "We couldn't go on suspicion alone or else it would create harm to [Hanslovan]."
King also said police did not have the authority to plug the peep holes during the investigation because the building or property owners are the ones who have the power to do so.
HFL Corp., the owner of the Tanfastique property complex, 401-407 E. Beaver Ave., could not be reached for comment yesterday, and it is unclear whether police notified the building owner of the investigation.
King said the main goal throughout the investigation was to make the public aware as soon as the charges were filed.
"It would be irresponsible of us to release information on just what we suspected," he said.
The State College Police Department's investigation began Feb. 4 when police executed a search warrant of the salon.
Police said a search of Hanslovan's office found a hinged board that, when lifted, revealed a large hole, 18 inches by 24 inches, with the first layer of drywall and all of the insulation removed.
Police determined that several small holes had been cut into the remaining drywall, which police say allowed Hanslovan to illegally view customers in tanning room 7, next to his office.
Hanslovan was charged March 24 with invasion of privacy and possessing instruments of crime.
Sgt. Mark Argiro said the police only deal with the immediate incident.
He said the best analogy to describe the situation would be a DUI arrest, although nothing was directly comparable to this case.
"Once the arrest has been made, there's only so much we can do -- we can't take their keys away," Argiro said.
"And in this case we couldn't baby-sit him."
Lead Detective Ralph Ralston and Argiro said an arrest does not complete an investigation.
"Now if we had reason to believe there was another potential victim, then we'd start investigating again," Argiro said.
Kim Hassler, a 20-year Tanfastique client, said she thinks she might have been spied on because Hanslovan directed her to the tanning room next to his office three times during spring break, as well as numerous other times.
Hassler said the salon was empty during spring break, and added that she found it strange that Hanslovan would direct her to the same room each time.
"He cleaned up the bed right after someone had left [room 7]. ... He couldn't just say 'go into room 8 or room 9,' "she said.
Debra Greenleaf, director of counseling and advocacy at the Women's Resource Center, 140 W. Nittany Ave., said the center would help any potential victims.
"We would consider it to be sexual violence because of the viewing of sexual body parts without permission," she said.
Assistant District Attorney Lance Marshall said invasion of privacy is a third-degree misdemeanor that carries a maximum of one year in prison, and possessing instruments of crime is a first-degree misdemeanor and carries a five-year maximum sentence and a $10,000 fine.
"Most likely the sentence would be shorter, and a lot of the time the person would get probation," he said.
Hanslovan was charged 10 years ago with harassment in connection with a similar case, but found not guilty.
Hanslovan's preliminary hearing is scheduled for April 27.
Source