I think that y'all need to read, or re-read, the OP's posts. Her kid was not trespassing, and the photos were not of any specific wrongdoing on her DS's part. Geez.
The picture-taking creeps me waaaay out. I am not a shrinking violet, though, and I likely would stand outside his house on a pubic sidewalk with a camera and take pictures of his house, and take pictures of him when he takes out the trash, checks the mail, mows his lawn, etc. (I know we don't know it's a "him", just didn't want to say him/her, she/he, his/her a million times).
Yes, the OP's DS was in a public place, but people can have a reasonable expectation of privacy even in public places. There is a fine line between photography and surveillance, and since the HOA said that they were "watching" him and that video was taken too, I think this borders on surveillance especially since this monitoring appears to be endorsed by the HOA rather than the rogue actions of an individual. I think it's completely reasonable for people to want to exist in public without having their actions recorded covertly.
Ramama, what is the difference between photography and surveillance? Is it just wrong if it's covert? Like, if this man (according to ds, a man lives there) stands on the sidewalk recording them, is it ok? Or is that harrassement? I kind of think the idea that a person could be recording/photographing everything you do outside with the anticipation you'll do something is wrong. Because that's what the letter said, that he's "being watched."
Of course, if my DS was trampeling all over his property or damaging his property, or damaging common area property, and he wanted evidene, I think that would be different.