Posted on 10/25/2009 12:24:37 PM PDT by AJKauf
So what if he was nude and drunk in his own house? That’s the whole point - he was in his own home.
Personally, that’s not something anyone in our home would ever do. I think it’s gross for someone to be in a kitchen without clothes. But, in his own home, the guy is allowed to be both drunk and naked.
How about standing in the open outside doorway without clothes?
No it wasn’t. She was on private property (not her own) when she saw the frank and beans.
Oh yes it was!
I see you are ignoring being caught lying. You might as well use the term ‘jack-booted thug’ here now that you have been exposed.
Keep the kitty treats to the left of the keyboard, that way you have your zone and little precious has his/hers.
I wasn’t lying. I wasn’t caught. Your reading comprehension is inadequate for us to debate.
Ah, OK, I see I missed a couple of your posts so that brilliant analysis must be what you're claiming I ignored. You had me baffled there for a minute.
He was too drunk to even call the cops. And if they had come he was too drunk to sign the complaint. And I don't think the cops would have given much sympathy to a guy greeting them nude but for his hard hat on.
Very likely all true. And all that is the mechanism leading to her good fortune in not being charged with trespassing. Duh. That's what I SAID.
Really? You would not have mentioned it if you really felt that way.
I said what I meant and meant what I said. How you compose your posts is your business.
After reading those damning indictments, my opinion is the same. I don't care if the woman is a cop's wife or not, except to some small degree feeling that she should have known better. I don't know if I've ever used the phrase "jack-booted thugs" or not, but if I did so, I'm sure it was merited based on the available facts in THAT case. I don't think incidental trespassing on someone else's property, then complaining about what you see while you're where you're not supposed to be deserves any sympathy, but it's not jack-booted thuggery and I never said it was.
If you have something rational to say to me, say it. If you just want to rant and intentionally misread my posts, which have been perfectly consistent and as clear as I know how to make them, go fook yourself.
You wouldn’t happen to be the husband of the woman who saw this man, would you?
Oh NO! That’s the MUG SHOT! Eyew!
LOL
“I guess the fact that his roomate contradicts his story and he later said in a phone interview with a reporter that he couldn’t exactly remember doesn’t count since you have your bias and the facts be d@mned.”
???????????????? I didn’t see anything on the news report about a roommate. Those WERE big windows though.
I keep my curtains drawn for more then one reason. Mostly the Les Paul in the Living Room! LOL!
I meant prior to the incident.
Son.
Don’t be confused by the poster who didn’t pay attention to details.
“She was on private property (not her own) when she saw the frank and beans.”
And what if she was on the public street in front of the house and happened to see a naked body go by the “private” window?
Point is he exposed himself by not couching himself behind closed windows, doors or walls. He made himself visible, and that doesn’t matter if you’re on your property or not.
She did not deliberately peek; that is NOT the same.
There are times one cannot help what one sees. That includes seeing things on another property from her yard or from the public street.
If your aunt had balls your uncle would be really confused. If she was on the street or sidewalk when she got "the vision" or on other private property where she had a legal right to be (like say a neighbor with facing windows), she'd have a complaint. Since she wasn't, she doesn't. Do we actually know if the guy would have been visible from public property? Even if he were, it wouldn't be relevant because that wasn't where she was. Plus, the statute on indecent exposure in his state may require intent, which doesn't seem to be present here anyway.
He made himself visible, and that doesn’t matter if you’re on your property or not.
Certainly does, if you're on his property without his permission or knowledge. If it doesn't, it should, and somebody needs to get about fixing that oversight.
And was she in her yard or on the street? NO. Every news story I’ve found says she was cutting through HIS property. She should not have been walking on his property. End of story.
“If she was on the street or sidewalk when she got “the vision” or on other private property where she had a legal right to be (like say a neighbor with facing windows), she’d have a complaint. Since she wasn’t, she doesn’t. Do we actually know if the guy would have been visible from public property?”
THE POINT is this, regardless of the woman’s illegality or not WRT property: YOU CAN BE SEEN incidentally through uncovered windows and be cited for it. Certainly your neighbor can complain about your exposed nudity even on your own property, as sure as they can complain about the noise you make from your property. (At least, that is probably the case in most jurisdictions.)
The woman being on someone else’s property is another matter. I’m speaking strictly of nudity on one’s own property.
Er, what is wrong with my post?
Not your son.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.