The Santa Barbara District Attorney's office has said that he [Jackson]will be charged under section 288(a) of the California Penal Code, which outlaws "lewd or lascivious acts" against a child under the age of 14. "[The law] requires that there be some touching of the body of the child or the outside part of the clothing of the child by the alleged perpetrator," DeSales explained. "It can include rape, it can include sodomy, it can include oral copulation, things like that. But it does require some touching by the adult with the minor somewhere on his body."
From the California Penal Code Section 288(a): Any person who willfully and lewdly commits any lewd or lascivious act, including any of the acts constituting other crimes provided for in Part 1, upon or with the body, or any part or member thereof, of a child who is under the age of 14 years, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of that person or the child, is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years.
this 288(a) says just what it says above. The subsequent numbers (b) (c) etc. elaborate. When the Santa Barbara guy was giving his news conference, he made it a point to say that it wasn't oral copulation, just LEWD AND lascivious behavior. He pointed it out because he didn't want the press to get it wrong. I dug up a transcript of the news conference yesterday, I'll try to find it again today to make sure what I'm saying is backed up. But I think this kind of thing that MTV is putting out is exactly what he was trying to stop.
"DeSales explained. "It can include rape, it can include sodomy, it can include oral copulation, things like that. But it does require some touching by the adult with the minor somewhere on his body."
By "somewhere on his body" I take it he meant "anywhere on his body".
So, under that definition, an adult can be charged with lewd and lascivious acts on a child as a result of a simple hand shake or a hug?