Posted on 12/18/2009 9:06:08 PM PST by myknowledge
A US man has been charged with indecent exposure for being naked in his own home.
Erick Williamson, 29 was observed without clothes through a doorway and a window, by a seven-year-old boy and his mother who were walking by.
Williamson argued that it was his home, and therefore he could choose to go nude.
But a judge found against him, saying that he intended to make himself visible to passers-by.
The Virginia man said he will appeal the decision.
"I think that being tried and found guilty of something like this is outrageous," Williamson said after he was convicted and sentenced.
"I feel like I'm living in a fishbowl."
Williamson testified that he never intended to expose himself and was simply exercising "personal freedom" as he spent several hours naked in his Springfield home packing up belongings.
Police, prosecutors and two witnesses, though, said Williamson's actions were designed to draw attention to himself.
The first woman who passed by, school librarian Joyce Giuliani, said she heard some loud singing as she left her home and drove to work. As she drove by Williamson's home, she saw him naked, standing directly behind a large window.
A few hours later, Yvette Dean was walking her seven-year-old son to school along a trail that runs by Williamson's home.
She heard a loud rattle, looked to her left and saw Williamson standing naked, full frontal, in a side doorway.
"He gave me eye contact," Dean said.
As she turned the corner, she looked back at the home, in disbelief at what she had just seen.
Again, she saw Williamson, naked in the same window.
One of Williamson's housemates testified that Williamson had been nude well before dawn.
Timothy Baclit testified that he woke up around 5am to go to work and saw Williamson walking around "naked ... with a hard hat."
He said he warned Williamson that he would be visible to passers-by but that Williamson did not respond.
Williamson, 29, said the conversation with Baclit never occurred and that he never noticed that two women had seen him.
He said "it did not occur to me" that people outside the home might see him naked.
Regardless of whether he was seen, Williamson's conduct does not constitute indecent exposure, said his attorney, Dickson Young.
Under Virginia law, the charge requires "an obscene display or exposure" and must occur in "a public place or a place where others are present."
Young argued that neither prong had been met.
"Mere nudity is insufficient to declare conduct obscene," Young said, noting that none of the women testified that Williamson was aroused or that he made any sort of obscene gesture.
"Nudity in one's own home is not a crime."
Wouldn't that be cruel and unusual punishment?
AND how in h3ll does this EVER equate to the childrape perpetrated by that creep0 pedophile Polanski.
That is an outrageous comparison.
Nowhere does it say carport, garage, anything more than " a doorway and a window".
Lots of folks testified against him and the judge found the guy GUILTY. Yet, like many liberals, conservatives will buy some perv's defense that it's his right to get naked in his own home, more on this later.
The fine, fine Williamson fellow just loves to assert his property rights and this includes his right not to wear clothes in his castle if he so chooses. Conservatives, like many liberals, not bothering to use common sense, jump to his defense. Also like the idiots who defend Roman Polanski. They don't stop and think it through. They don't bother to get the facts. They say it wasn't REALLY a rape-rape, or it's HIS house, or some other kneejerk answer that satisfied what they WANT to believe.
Williamson likes to get naked in his own home at precisely the time he knows school children or women are walking by. He likes to stand in front of a big window or open door in his nakedness but hey, it's HIS property, right? Let's get knee jerk and look like dumb liberals and defend the guy, okay?
The woman told police it was 8:40 a.m. when she was walking her son to school along a path between houses. She said they first spotted Williamson naked in an open door in the car port of his home. She also told police that Williamson then walked across the house to a large window, facing the way she was walking..
The above is from :
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/21/dumb-outrage-of-the-day-man-arrested-for-being-naked-in-own-home/
Note that this guy stands in front of a large window. Note that bit about the car port. THIS article is not the only one written about this guy.
Cause this guy just looooooves to opine about his property rights and he can count on fools to defend him. But here we got a judge found him GUILTY and how about all those folks who testified against him?
He loves you all, counts on you all, goes to bed smiling, knowing that all he has to do is mention property rights and the right wing nuts will defend his desire to stand in car ports nakes as school children walk by because just like the liberals of our planet, conservatives often don't use their noggin either.
Now I don't know what a car port means in this context but I do associate it with an outside type of thing. We have a garage on our house. It's connected to the house and when you are inside of the garage you are, technically, inside of our house.
But the garage has a great big ole door and hey, I could stand naked inside of my garage and be INSIDE of my house, but every school child walking by would be able to see me very plain from the street and maybe you all think this is okay because hey, it IS my house, evidently that stupid judge and all those people who testified against this guy would not agree with this.
Knee jerk is all it is. Why on earth do you serve this pervert's bidding? He uses this "my home is my castle" defense and hey, there's always idiots who will defend it.
The post about this on my True Crime Blog, from October 21 for God's sake, is below:
http://fishtruecrime.blogspot.com/2009/10/102509.html
Heh. Not that it would occur to you that maybe, heh, there were OTHER articles about this guy.
This pervert loves you man.
We all comment on the information presented in the article, inaccurate, or as incomplete as that may be.
You seem to have more information that the rest of us, or are you just making it up?
I’m sorry. Please read my post 44. It has all the links, etc. I know my original comment was kind of vague but I was busy and didn’t have time for a longer rebuttal at the time. But I’d argue that I kind of made it clear that there was more to the story. My reference to a car port was about that “more” to the story.
Anyway, sorry for the confusion but this guy has pulled so many legs he gets on my nerves. He’s still smiling at all the people he keeps fooling, his pervert self. I love FreeRepublic but every time this guy’s story goes online you get a bunch of knee jerks believing his stupid story and frankly I think it makes US look stupid. But hey, he loves it man.
This guy’s story goes back to October of this year. Now he got found guilty and STILL he says he’s all innocent, he was only walking around nude in his own home, he’s mistreated and put upon. I got a bridge to sell anyone who continues to buy this...cheap.
He just loves to use that “my home is my castle” defense and there’s always loons, like the liberals before him, who jump to his defense.
Thanks, that DOES put a whole different light on this.
If he really was out in the carport, seesh, I gotta agree with you.
I tried to read your posting, but instead of concentrating on correcting the MSM REPORTERS, you choose instead to be OFFENSIVE.
Therefore, I consider YOU to be a Blog Pimp AND I assure you that I'm not about to read any more of your contemptuous contemptible diatribes.
You don't seek to enlighten & communicate -- you HATE conservatives and choose to come to a conservative website and demean them.
How DARE you post such a nasty offensive posting to me, DON'T bother to ever post to me again, and take your blog ADVERTISEMNEBNT AND SHOVE IT !!!!!!!!
Okay.
I have no contempt for conservatives. I’ve been a member of this site for ten years now.
But hey, you really have to read the post, not go on a nut case rage that makes no sense.
Not to mention that silly act of notifying Jim Robinson, an admin moderator and the FBI.
I’ll leave you alone.
While you, heh, have been a member since...October 2009?
Maybe you ought to check up on how to behave. First thing, you do NOT notify Jim Robinson when a comment upsets you.
Heh.
YOU DESPISE CONSERVATIVES. You prolly get your "jollies" writing about perverts & pedophiles and then yelling at your readers, you are SICK0.
I know you’re upset and I’m truly sorry about that. Leave the thread and don’t go onto threads of this particular poster. Come to the worthwhile threads. I’ll ping you.
I will keep posting to you so long as you respond to me.
Cause frankly I love seeing you continue to make a fool of yourself. Second, I am allowed, you can’t stop me, and that bit about notifying Jim Robinson and an admin moderator will get YOU kicked off for being silly. So keep answering me. I’m having fun.
Again, I certainly do not hate conservatives. Again, I’ve been a member of FreeRepublic for TEN YEARS! In fact, I am on the committee that invites new members to FreeRepublic, am a regular poster on many threads while you joined in October of 2009.
Keep responding to me. oh and be sure and include the Admin moderator and Jim Robinson in your responses cause...heh, that’s how it’s done.
I do have a problem with conservatives that respond knee jerk to perverts who use the “my home is my castle” defense without getting the facts. My comment was no Blog pimp but I don’t suppose you have a clue what that’s about.
Please continue to respond to me and tell me not to respond to you as that’s how it’s done. Call me names and make sure you include an admin moderator and Jim Robinson in all your responses.
Most of all, make sure you do NOT, by your own admission, read the full comment.
I dont’ remember a lot about my exchanges with FishTalk over the years . . .
My sense, though, is that FishTalk
is a pretty harmless FREEPER with some somewhat typical conservative concerns.
Good grief, that was one thin-skinned whine.
Gee whiz, so you support “peep-houses”? A cottage industry will spring up in your neighborhood.
Have you considered he wanted to be seen?
“I feel like I'm living in a fishbowl.”
Then close your blinds, you idiot.
If anybody remembers when the BBC sitcom “The Young Ones” was on MTV, this guy looks strikingly like Nigel Planer as Neil the hippie. And I’m pretty sure that not even Nigel Planer’s exes really wanted to see Neil naked.
Thank you so much Quix. Your assessment of me is correct.
I also thank Onyx for her nice comment, which she could have, go with me here, sent in private. Class, some of us just don’t have it.
This commenter’s only been on this forum since October of 2009. By his own admission he didn’t even read the comment.
I do take conservatives to task but...hey, you really gotta read the comment. It’s how it’s done.
He’s a newbie and I think he needs to learn to READ the comment. By his own admission he did not.
And Onyx...what a class act there.
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.