Posted on 12/20/2009 3:01:27 PM PST by ConservativeStatement
FAIRFAX, Va. - As Erick Williamson sees it, being naked is liberating, and if passers-by get an eyeful while he's standing in front of a picture window, that's not his problem.
A Fairfax County judge saw it differently Friday, convicting Williamson, 29, of indecent exposure in a case that raised questions about what's OK when you're in your own home.
Two women said they saw much more of Williamson than they cared to in October, even though he never left his home. He received neither jail time nor a fine but is appealing anyway, saying a larger principle is at stake.
(Excerpt) Read more at philly.com ...
The original story, like this one, suggested that the woman and her son were taking a shortcut through this guy’s yard. If so, then that’s their problem.
But this story says that a second witness, the librarian, saw him naked through a picture window from her car on the street. If so, that strikes me as another matter entirely.
Sure, you can run around your home or property naked, but I don’t think you have a right to do it where people can see you from the street or sidewalk or other public property. Pull the curtains, or put some clothes on.
It certainly sounds as if this jerk was not just naked in private, but was deliberately flashing himself in public. That’s not right.
That this case made it to a courtroom is shocking. A woman, on private property without permission, looks in someone’s window and then calls the cops because she sees someone naked? Arrest her for being a peeping tom, and overturn this idiotic conviction.
What sort of nonsense is this that he get dragged into court just because some busybody was walking by and reported him? They (the police) should have just laughed at this woman - even if her own husband is a cop too. Hell, if I was a cop and my wife reported something like that, I'd laugh at her too.
There used to be a time in America when old cranks and nutcases just got laughed at. These days, we give them way too much attention.
Meanwhile...the place is crawling with registered "sex offenders".
Do you think that a 29 year old man exposing himself over a couple of hours from his windows would be ignored in 1790, or dealt with in a much more harsh manner than today.
He'd likely be "clothed" with tar and feathers.
“Yes officer - he’s walking around naked. If you’d care to step into the bathroom and step on the toilet and if you stretch yourself real high and lean to the left a bit you can focus your binoculars on his bedroom window” ...
As I recall, Benjamin Franklin was fond of “air baths”. . .
Nobody seems to be looking down on HIM. . .
We'll never know because the person trespassing on his property would have been shot and killed.
If I recall the story correctly, this guy was making his morning coffee alone in his kitchen, when some woman decided to cut through his property on her way to somewhere else, and, not content with that, peered into his window. She should have been convicted both of criminal trespass and of peeping.
“What ifs..” You can play that game forever.. it wasn’t a kid and it didn’t happen.
Kind a like TV.. you don’t like what you see change the channel. I don’t go around looking in peoples windows even from the street... apparently this b-itch did.
They talked about this on Fox this morning and they brought up an interesting comparison, if it was a woman naked and a guy saw her the guy would be convicted of a peeping tom..
Come back to earth, a mother and her 7 year old child walking on a path by a house would not have been gunned down in 1790, and especially by a naked man that wanted to expose himself.
By the way, two hours before that a woman that witnessed him from her car, called the police, who responded, but saw nothing when they came to look.
Did Franklin expose himself to the women and children of the neighborhood?
Give me the source so that I can learn more.
Did this guy ? He was in his house. Last time I checked, the “Home is your Castle” doctrine was still in effect. .
I’m going to guess that you were taking liberties when you implied that Ben Franklin used to expose himself to the women and children of the neighborhood.
In this case, over two hours, two different women said that their attention was drawn by noises to the sight of a naked man exposing himself. One woman from her car through the large front window and another woman and child when the man opened his screen door and stood there, exposing himself to the women and child.
The second incident involving the child, happened after the police had already responded to one report of his exposing himself.
I think any sane judge would understand this. The problem lies in people that will take this ruling (if found not guilty) and use it for other purposes. Imagine a person that gets large screen tv's and put them up showing porn 24/7 where it is viewable from the road and sidewalks.
I can see people donating (a collection jar like some Christmas homes use) to walk around yards where women are naked in a house to skirt anti nude rules in a town.
The potential for abuse would be huge.
Innocent ... walking around the house after a shower to get a glass of tea before getting dressed to cool off around the back kitchen area and someone gets an eyeful while crossing your lawn.
Not innocent..... standing in a uncovered backlit window doing lewd behavior in plain view of those at sidewalk distance for hours at a time.
Well, in all honesty, in the "best case" scenario, I think that the woman and child who were TRESPASSING on the "sex-offender's" property (had he seen them) would be far more likely to be bearing the effects of ROCKSALT from a shotgun than even DREAMING of whining to the local constabulary!
In 1790, this woman would have been pilloried and punished for her lack of respect for property, her husband would have been laughed out of town, and the whole family would forever be stained for their association with criminal trespass, even though only mama was the perp.
You asked...
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.