Wow. As opposed to like, my country where you can go nude hiking. This better get thrown the fuck out of court and the police department sued to high heaven. Motherfuckers are clearly ineffective if this is what they're focussing on.
Wow. As opposed to like, my country where you can go nude hiking. This better get thrown the fuck out of court and the police department sued to high heaven. Motherfuckers are clearly ineffective if this is what they're focussing on.
You can do that in Australia????
Well, not on just like, any track. But AFAIK there are nude hiking tracks. And we like, have reasonable discourse on whether to add more.
Wow. As opposed to like, my country where you can go nude hiking. This better get thrown the fuck out of court and the police department sued to high heaven. Motherfuckers are clearly ineffective if this is what they're focussing on.
You can do that in Australia????
Well, not on just like, any track. But AFAIK there are nude hiking tracks. And we like, have reasonable discourse on whether to add more.
Of course, it's Australia, so the spiders keep all this in the realm of theory.
Is there a 911 tape of this anywhere? I would love to hear it.
"911, what is your emergency?"
"There is a man exposing himself to me and my child"
"ok, ma'am where is this man?"
"He is in his kitchen"
"He is in your kitchen?"
"NO! He is in his kitchen."
"ok, ma'am. Where are you?"
"I'm strolling through his front yard. I didn't notice at first, but then my son said, 'Mommy, peepee'."
I'm surprised the legal code isn't posted on a website somewhere.
The problem is that there isn't just a legal code.
A lot of law in the United States is based on common law. That is, law that isn't written into some piece of legislation, but instead is based on legal precedent. And establishing what legal precedent is... well, that's an enormous amount of work. I'd be happy to detail it in a new thread if you like.
But, think about it... you've got 50 states, all with their own legislative bodies, and each with their own court systems containing trial, appellate, and supreme courts. On top of it, you have the federal system: the United States Congress and the legion of organizations they've delegated their duties to (e.g. FCC, FTC, FAA), plus the federal court system.
On top of it, all of these systems have some overlapping jurisdiction. If the 6th Federal Circuit Courts say that the precedent is X, and the 9th Federal Circuit Courts say the precedent is Y, that means that, until the issue goes up to the US Court of Appeals to say "X is right and Y is wrong," the law is effectively different in two parts of the country. Or the situation we're all probably familiar with: feds say no marijuana, state says it's legal for medical purposes. What's the law?
The short of it is that our system wasn't designed for scalability or accessibility, and the only people who've managed to make any headway at all in organizing it are organizations like Westlaw and LexisNexis, and even then, figuring out what the law actually is requires an enormous amount of time and effort in case research, statutory construction, etc. It's not like you log on to Westlaw and say "hey, what's the law in Michigan about premises liability" and just have it explained to you in plain English. Not in any way you can cite as authority, anyway. And you still pay a fortune for access to that database.
No Sign - they can walk up to your front door and ring the doorbell, but not loiter.
"No Trespassing" sign - If they walk on your property its classified as Civil Trespassing.
"POSTED : Private Property - Trespassers will be prosecuted." sign - If they walk onto your property with one of these babies up, then its Criminal Trespassing.
Orochi_Rockman on
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
There's a whole series of tubes. There is no excuse not to be able to require statutes to be posted on the webz.
There's a whole series of tubes. There is no excuse not to be able to require statutes to be posted on the webz.
Pick any statute. State, federal, etc. They're virtually all available on the web, freely. The entire US Code, containing most federal law, is available in at least three locations that I can think of off the top of my head. Most state statutes are posted on the state legislature's website. For example, here is Michigan's.
The problem is that in terms of sheer bulk, the vast majority of what we'd call law in the United States has to be teased out of case law, and that controls most of the statutes, too. Think about it: X runs afoul of some statute. He says "it means A!" And Y says "it means B!" So Y sues X, the issue at trial being "what does that statute actually mean?" Trial court reaches a decision. X doesn't like the decision, and appeals to the appellate court. They reverse and find in favor of X on the merits. And now it's precedent. And now, that statute alone isn't enough to tell you what the statute's actual legal effect is.
I agree. That's the way it should be. But who's going to pay for it? And where's the political pressure going to come from to effect that change?
Will never ever happen. A big portion of a legal education is learning how to navigate Westlaw/Lexis in order to figure out what the current state of the law is on a subject. Politicians tend to be lawyers, to the likelihood of them working to open that process up is slim to none. :P
According to the article, the woman and her daughter were on a "well-travelled path between two public tennis courts."
Fuck, 5 cops showing up, pushing a taser into his fucking face and calling him a pervert? Yeah, this sounds like abuse of power to me. The wifey complains and husband orders a raid to get the "evildoer".
Kipling217 on
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
According to the article, the woman and her daughter were on a "well-travelled path between two public tennis courts."
Fuck, 5 cops showing up, pushing a taser into his fucking face and calling him a pervert? Yeah, this sounds like abuse of power to me. The wifey complains and husband orders a raid to get the "evildoer".
Either way, even if she ISNT a police wife, this is still stupid. Knock on the door, wake him up, inform him.
Don't storm the house and throw him in the squad car.
According to the article, the woman and her daughter were on a "well-travelled path between two public tennis courts."
Fuck, 5 cops showing up, pushing a taser into his fucking face and calling him a pervert? Yeah, this sounds like abuse of power to me. The wifey complains and husband orders a raid to get the "evildoer".
Yeah, if his side of the story is anything near what actually happened, the whole situation is pretty fucked up. I mean, even if you were going to arrest him...why do you have to go into his house and look around?
You have to ask, though, who takes the curtains down in the kitchen and then fixes breakfast and walks around all morning in the buff? And if it turns out that this path next to his house is frequently used by kids going to school, things get even more suspect. The whole story is weird and has a lot of huge gaping holes on both sides.
I agree. That's the way it should be. But who's going to pay for it? And where's the political pressure going to come from to effect that change?
Some U.S. caselaw is available through WorldLII (U.S. stuff here). It is mostly courts of appeal for various circuits (which I do not understand what they are - states don't have their own courts of appeal?) and Supreme Court.
Canada's coverage is pretty good - I can find any statute (federal or provincial), any Supreme Court of Canada decision, probably all provincial Court of Appeal decisions and lots of lower court and tribunal decisions online for free at CanLII. Pretty much all LexisNexis and Westlaw are good for is more complete coverage of cases, commentary and better searching tools.
I agree. That's the way it should be. But who's going to pay for it? And where's the political pressure going to come from to effect that change?
Some U.S. caselaw is available through WorldLII (U.S. stuff here). It is mostly courts of appeal for various circuits (which I do not understand what they are - states don't have their own courts of appeal?) and Supreme Court.
Canada's coverage is pretty good - I can find any statute (federal or provincial), any Supreme Court of Canada decision, probably all provincial Court of Appeal decisions and lots of lower court and tribunal decisions online for free at CanLII. Pretty much all LexisNexis and Westlaw are good for is more complete coverage of cases, commentary and better searching tools.
I think most US codified law is pretty readily available. I've never had a problem finding a state or federal statute online, for free, and usually on the state's website.
The problem is that much state law in the US is common law, and there's simply not a easy way to set out the black-letter common law for each state in a way that is easy for non-lawyers to understand. A lot of it hinges on interpretation of precedent and the specific situation the case involves and is just not clear-cut in a way that people who aren't lawyers expect the law to be. Even something as seemingly straightforward as trespassing can get complex quickly based on the specific facts involved.
According to the article, the woman and her daughter were on a "well-travelled path between two public tennis courts."
Fuck, 5 cops showing up, pushing a taser into his fucking face and calling him a pervert? Yeah, this sounds like abuse of power to me. The wifey complains and husband orders a raid to get the "evildoer".
Either way, even if she ISNT a police wife, this is still stupid. Knock on the door, wake him up, inform him.
Don't storm the house and throw him in the squad car.
But what if the dangerous pre-vert pulls out his gun?
The problem is that much state law in the US is common law, and there's simply not a easy way to set out the black-letter common law for each state in a way that is easy for non-lawyers to understand.
The same goes for Canada, and no, there's no way to really set it all out in an easy-to-understand format for non-lawyers. The best that can be done is making decisions available for free (but they are still difficult to read and interpret for non-lawyers), which at least has been done for superior courts in the U.S.
The problem is that much state law in the US is common law, and there's simply not a easy way to set out the black-letter common law for each state in a way that is easy for non-lawyers to understand.
The same goes for Canada, and no, there's no way to really set it all out in an easy-to-understand format for non-lawyers. The best that can be done is making decisions available for free (but they are still difficult to read and interpret for non-lawyers), which at least has been done for superior courts in the U.S.
One thing that US courts really need to do is make the dockets public and accessible over the internet without paying a fee. Court papers are public information, but for the most part you either need to (a) pay for access to a database like PACER or (b) physically go to the court clerk and request copies.
I personally think that it's ridiculous that in this day and age there's still no way to get federal court documents online for free. Don't even get me started on Supreme Court audio an video recording
I remember when I first heard this story, my first reaction was, wtf was that bitch doing in his yard at 530 in the morning?
But then I got to thinking, it's not about walking around in your house naked, but it's walking around your house naked with the blinds open for people to see you. I don't doubt this woman saw this guy naked. Regardless if he intentionally meant to flash his junk or not he committed indecent exposure.
Now if I was the investigating officer on this one, I would not make a physical arrest. I'd get all my statements, type up my report and send it to the city or county prosecutor and let them decide if they wanted to bring it to court.
According to the article, the woman and her daughter were on a "well-travelled path between two public tennis courts."
Fuck, 5 cops showing up, pushing a taser into his fucking face and calling him a pervert? Yeah, this sounds like abuse of power to me. The wifey complains and husband orders a raid to get the "evildoer".
Yeah, if his side of the story is anything near what actually happened, the whole situation is pretty fucked up. I mean, even if you were going to arrest him...why do you have to go into his house and look around?
You have to ask, though, who takes the curtains down in the kitchen and then fixes breakfast and walks around all morning in the buff? And if it turns out that this path next to his house is frequently used by kids going to school, things get even more suspect. The whole story is weird and has a lot of huge gaping holes on both sides.
That's not what the article says. The roommate states that the curtains, which belonged to the guy who got arrested, were up when he left and not installed when they got home. That's all.
The guy was moving out. There's nothing to say that he took down the curtains, then undressed, then walked around. Its far more likely he was seen in the morning, and later on in the course of packing for the move the curtains were taken down. Especially as it seems there was several hours between the sighting and the arrival of police.
Raynaga on
0
Options
PasserbyeI am much older than you.in Beach CityRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
It seems a bit off to me that they have no problems releasing the information of the innocent-until-proven-guilty "suspect" and interviewing him and his buddies for national TV, not to mention ruining his rep in his own neighborhood (thus forcing him to move), but they won't even anonymously interview his accuser.
Wow. As opposed to like, my country where you can go nude hiking. This better get thrown the fuck out of court and the police department sued to high heaven. Motherfuckers are clearly ineffective if this is what they're focussing on.
It seems a bit off to me that they have no problems releasing the information of the innocent-until-proven-guilty "suspect" and interviewing him and his buddies for national TV, not to mention ruining his rep in his own neighborhood (thus forcing him to move), but they won't even anonymously interview his accuser.
She's the wife of a police officer. Police and their families don't have to go through the same justice system we do.
Wow. As opposed to like, my country where you can go nude hiking. This better get thrown the fuck out of court and the police department sued to high heaven. Motherfuckers are clearly ineffective if this is what they're focussing on.
It seems a bit off to me that they have no problems releasing the information of the innocent-until-proven-guilty "suspect" and interviewing him and his buddies for national TV, not to mention ruining his rep in his own neighborhood (thus forcing him to move), but they won't even anonymously interview his accuser.
Well, he's the one that called the Fox affiliate, which is why he's getting interviewed. I doubt he expected it to backfire quite the way it did.
Reminds me of when my wife came in from walking the dogs with her older sister about 2 months ago. She was giggling with her sister, it was maybe 11 at night. I asked what they were giggling about.
"Well, you know the kid who lives accross the street? I think he's a jr or sr in high school? Apparently he likes to walk around the house naked when his parents are out of town."
Bitch should be locked up for being a peeping tom on a child! This has no relevence to the story we are discussing other than that my wife saw a naked teenager by accident, and it is funny.
jeddy lee on
Backlog Challenge: 0%
0/8
PS2
FF X replay
PS3
God of War 1&2 HD
Rachet and Clank Future
MGS 4
Prince of Persia
It seems a bit off to me that they have no problems releasing the information of the innocent-until-proven-guilty "suspect" and interviewing him and his buddies for national TV, not to mention ruining his rep in his own neighborhood (thus forcing him to move), but they won't even anonymously interview his accuser.
Well, he's the one that called the Fox affiliate, which is why he's getting interviewed. I doubt he expected it to backfire quite the way it did.
Backfiring?
Everybody who's heard of the story is saying how absurd it is that he's even being arrested.
According to the article, the woman and her daughter were on a "well-travelled path between two public tennis courts."
Fuck, 5 cops showing up, pushing a taser into his fucking face and calling him a pervert? Yeah, this sounds like abuse of power to me. The wifey complains and husband orders a raid to get the "evildoer".
Yeah, if his side of the story is anything near what actually happened, the whole situation is pretty fucked up. I mean, even if you were going to arrest him...why do you have to go into his house and look around?
You have to ask, though, who takes the curtains down in the kitchen and then fixes breakfast and walks around all morning in the buff? And if it turns out that this path next to his house is frequently used by kids going to school, things get even more suspect. The whole story is weird and has a lot of huge gaping holes on both sides.
That's not what the article says. The roommate states that the curtains, which belonged to the guy who got arrested, were up when he left and not installed when they got home. That's all.
The guy was moving out. There's nothing to say that he took down the curtains, then undressed, then walked around. Its far more likely he was seen in the morning, and later on in the course of packing for the move the curtains were taken down. Especially as it seems there was several hours between the sighting and the arrival of police.
As for what really happened, the roommate said, "anything's possible." All he knows is that the kitchen curtains, which he said were Williamson's, were not installed when he left for work Monday morning but that they were up when he got home.
Seems it's the other way around according to the link...
According to the article, the woman and her daughter were on a "well-travelled path between two public tennis courts."
Fuck, 5 cops showing up, pushing a taser into his fucking face and calling him a pervert? Yeah, this sounds like abuse of power to me. The wifey complains and husband orders a raid to get the "evildoer".
Yeah, if his side of the story is anything near what actually happened, the whole situation is pretty fucked up. I mean, even if you were going to arrest him...why do you have to go into his house and look around?
You have to ask, though, who takes the curtains down in the kitchen and then fixes breakfast and walks around all morning in the buff? And if it turns out that this path next to his house is frequently used by kids going to school, things get even more suspect. The whole story is weird and has a lot of huge gaping holes on both sides.
That's not what the article says. The roommate states that the curtains, which belonged to the guy who got arrested, were up when he left and not installed when they got home. That's all.
The guy was moving out. There's nothing to say that he took down the curtains, then undressed, then walked around. Its far more likely he was seen in the morning, and later on in the course of packing for the move the curtains were taken down. Especially as it seems there was several hours between the sighting and the arrival of police.
That's not how I read it. The article says, "All he knows is that the kitchen curtains, which he said were Williamson's, were not installed when he left for work Monday morning but that they were up when he got home." I take that to mean that when the roommate left for work in the morning there were no curtains on the window, and when he got home the curtains were back up.
Also, the woman's story is that he also opened the door and stood in the doorway staring at them, so it's not necessarily just him passing by a window naked.
Wow. As opposed to like, my country where you can go nude hiking. This better get thrown the fuck out of court and the police department sued to high heaven. Motherfuckers are clearly ineffective if this is what they're focussing on.
Passerby: You're forgetting the inequity in the system re: sex offenders, which they are clearly treating this guy as.
Should be like that everywhere, I am no nudist but being afraid of nakedness is silly.
Technically, there is no law against public nudity in England. For a naked person to be arrested, it has to either be a breach of the peace (which, to be fair, only really requires someone to complain), or indecent exposure, which explicitly requires a sexual motive.
According to the article, the woman and her daughter were on a "well-travelled path between two public tennis courts."
Fuck, 5 cops showing up, pushing a taser into his fucking face and calling him a pervert? Yeah, this sounds like abuse of power to me. The wifey complains and husband orders a raid to get the "evildoer".
Yeah, if his side of the story is anything near what actually happened, the whole situation is pretty fucked up. I mean, even if you were going to arrest him...why do you have to go into his house and look around?
You have to ask, though, who takes the curtains down in the kitchen and then fixes breakfast and walks around all morning in the buff? And if it turns out that this path next to his house is frequently used by kids going to school, things get even more suspect. The whole story is weird and has a lot of huge gaping holes on both sides.
That's not what the article says. The roommate states that the curtains, which belonged to the guy who got arrested, were up when he left and not installed when they got home. That's all.
The guy was moving out. There's nothing to say that he took down the curtains, then undressed, then walked around. Its far more likely he was seen in the morning, and later on in the course of packing for the move the curtains were taken down. Especially as it seems there was several hours between the sighting and the arrival of police.
That's not how I read it. The article says, "All he knows is that the kitchen curtains, which he said were Williamson's, were not installed when he left for work Monday morning but that they were up when he got home." I take that to mean that when the roommate left for work in the morning there were no curtains on the window, and when he got home the curtains were back up.
Also, the woman's story is that he also opened the door and stood in the doorway staring at them, so it's not necessarily just him passing by a window naked.
One post up from yours.
And if I remember right, and as we've seen that's a sixty forty split, the article said doorway which could easily be a door with glass. Hard to tell.
Police are especially concerned because the house is located across the street from a bus stop for school children. So on Wednesday, officers canvassed the neighborhood with fliers, asking anyone who may have been subject to an exposure to come forward.
The department spokesperson says in a rare move, they're releasing more information about the case.
"Because this was being spun into a national story, and the idea you can't be naked in your own house-- we wanted to come forward and say in this case our officers believed there was probable cause the law had been violated," said Jennings.
They all but accused him of being a pedophile. This is ridiculous because of some inane wife and the newest curse word in the English langauge, children.
Posts
You can do that in Australia????
Well, not on just like, any track. But AFAIK there are nude hiking tracks. And we like, have reasonable discourse on whether to add more.
Not like they needed another one, the place fucking sucks.
Of course, it's Australia, so the spiders keep all this in the realm of theory.
Police chief's wife? Where the fuck is my popcorn?
and WTF, Australia. Nude hiking? In my mind it's all :winky:, but in reality it's probably full of
Gold star
The problem is that there isn't just a legal code.
A lot of law in the United States is based on common law. That is, law that isn't written into some piece of legislation, but instead is based on legal precedent. And establishing what legal precedent is... well, that's an enormous amount of work. I'd be happy to detail it in a new thread if you like.
But, think about it... you've got 50 states, all with their own legislative bodies, and each with their own court systems containing trial, appellate, and supreme courts. On top of it, you have the federal system: the United States Congress and the legion of organizations they've delegated their duties to (e.g. FCC, FTC, FAA), plus the federal court system.
On top of it, all of these systems have some overlapping jurisdiction. If the 6th Federal Circuit Courts say that the precedent is X, and the 9th Federal Circuit Courts say the precedent is Y, that means that, until the issue goes up to the US Court of Appeals to say "X is right and Y is wrong," the law is effectively different in two parts of the country. Or the situation we're all probably familiar with: feds say no marijuana, state says it's legal for medical purposes. What's the law?
The short of it is that our system wasn't designed for scalability or accessibility, and the only people who've managed to make any headway at all in organizing it are organizations like Westlaw and LexisNexis, and even then, figuring out what the law actually is requires an enormous amount of time and effort in case research, statutory construction, etc. It's not like you log on to Westlaw and say "hey, what's the law in Michigan about premises liability" and just have it explained to you in plain English. Not in any way you can cite as authority, anyway. And you still pay a fortune for access to that database.
No Sign - they can walk up to your front door and ring the doorbell, but not loiter.
"No Trespassing" sign - If they walk on your property its classified as Civil Trespassing.
"POSTED : Private Property - Trespassers will be prosecuted." sign - If they walk onto your property with one of these babies up, then its Criminal Trespassing.
Pick any statute. State, federal, etc. They're virtually all available on the web, freely. The entire US Code, containing most federal law, is available in at least three locations that I can think of off the top of my head. Most state statutes are posted on the state legislature's website. For example, here is Michigan's.
The problem is that in terms of sheer bulk, the vast majority of what we'd call law in the United States has to be teased out of case law, and that controls most of the statutes, too. Think about it: X runs afoul of some statute. He says "it means A!" And Y says "it means B!" So Y sues X, the issue at trial being "what does that statute actually mean?" Trial court reaches a decision. X doesn't like the decision, and appeals to the appellate court. They reverse and find in favor of X on the merits. And now it's precedent. And now, that statute alone isn't enough to tell you what the statute's actual legal effect is.
We here in Denmark have our laws online and search-able for our citizens convenience.
According to the article, the woman and her daughter were on a "well-travelled path between two public tennis courts."
Will never ever happen. A big portion of a legal education is learning how to navigate Westlaw/Lexis in order to figure out what the current state of the law is on a subject. Politicians tend to be lawyers, to the likelihood of them working to open that process up is slim to none. :P
Fuck, 5 cops showing up, pushing a taser into his fucking face and calling him a pervert? Yeah, this sounds like abuse of power to me. The wifey complains and husband orders a raid to get the "evildoer".
Either way, even if she ISNT a police wife, this is still stupid. Knock on the door, wake him up, inform him.
Don't storm the house and throw him in the squad car.
Yeah, if his side of the story is anything near what actually happened, the whole situation is pretty fucked up. I mean, even if you were going to arrest him...why do you have to go into his house and look around?
You have to ask, though, who takes the curtains down in the kitchen and then fixes breakfast and walks around all morning in the buff? And if it turns out that this path next to his house is frequently used by kids going to school, things get even more suspect. The whole story is weird and has a lot of huge gaping holes on both sides.
Canada's coverage is pretty good - I can find any statute (federal or provincial), any Supreme Court of Canada decision, probably all provincial Court of Appeal decisions and lots of lower court and tribunal decisions online for free at CanLII. Pretty much all LexisNexis and Westlaw are good for is more complete coverage of cases, commentary and better searching tools.
I think most US codified law is pretty readily available. I've never had a problem finding a state or federal statute online, for free, and usually on the state's website.
The problem is that much state law in the US is common law, and there's simply not a easy way to set out the black-letter common law for each state in a way that is easy for non-lawyers to understand. A lot of it hinges on interpretation of precedent and the specific situation the case involves and is just not clear-cut in a way that people who aren't lawyers expect the law to be. Even something as seemingly straightforward as trespassing can get complex quickly based on the specific facts involved.
But what if the dangerous pre-vert pulls out his gun?
Like, his "this is my rifle, this is my gun" gun.
Tase first and ask questions later imo.
You say that like successfully suing the police is an easy thing to do, Henroid.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
One thing that US courts really need to do is make the dockets public and accessible over the internet without paying a fee. Court papers are public information, but for the most part you either need to (a) pay for access to a database like PACER or (b) physically go to the court clerk and request copies.
I personally think that it's ridiculous that in this day and age there's still no way to get federal court documents online for free. Don't even get me started on Supreme Court audio an video recording
He said, she said.
But then I got to thinking, it's not about walking around in your house naked, but it's walking around your house naked with the blinds open for people to see you. I don't doubt this woman saw this guy naked. Regardless if he intentionally meant to flash his junk or not he committed indecent exposure.
Now if I was the investigating officer on this one, I would not make a physical arrest. I'd get all my statements, type up my report and send it to the city or county prosecutor and let them decide if they wanted to bring it to court.
That's not what the article says. The roommate states that the curtains, which belonged to the guy who got arrested, were up when he left and not installed when they got home. That's all.
The guy was moving out. There's nothing to say that he took down the curtains, then undressed, then walked around. Its far more likely he was seen in the morning, and later on in the course of packing for the move the curtains were taken down. Especially as it seems there was several hours between the sighting and the arrival of police.
Face Twit Rav Gram
Forget hiking. We can go nude through most of the state. ;-)
Passerby: You're forgetting the inequity in the system re: sex offenders, which they are clearly treating this guy as.
She's the wife of a police officer. Police and their families don't have to go through the same justice system we do.
Should be like that everywhere, I am no nudist but being afraid of nakedness is silly.
Well, he's the one that called the Fox affiliate, which is why he's getting interviewed. I doubt he expected it to backfire quite the way it did.
"Well, you know the kid who lives accross the street? I think he's a jr or sr in high school? Apparently he likes to walk around the house naked when his parents are out of town."
Bitch should be locked up for being a peeping tom on a child! This has no relevence to the story we are discussing other than that my wife saw a naked teenager by accident, and it is funny.
PS2
FF X replay
PS3
God of War 1&2 HD
Rachet and Clank Future
MGS 4
Prince of Persia
360
Bayonetta
Fable 3
DS
FF: 4 heroes of light
Backfiring?
Everybody who's heard of the story is saying how absurd it is that he's even being arrested.
Seems it's the other way around according to the link...
That's damned weird, then.
That's not how I read it. The article says, "All he knows is that the kitchen curtains, which he said were Williamson's, were not installed when he left for work Monday morning but that they were up when he got home." I take that to mean that when the roommate left for work in the morning there were no curtains on the window, and when he got home the curtains were back up.
Also, the woman's story is that he also opened the door and stood in the doorway staring at them, so it's not necessarily just him passing by a window naked.
Technically, there is no law against public nudity in England. For a naked person to be arrested, it has to either be a breach of the peace (which, to be fair, only really requires someone to complain), or indecent exposure, which explicitly requires a sexual motive.
One post up from yours.
And if I remember right, and as we've seen that's a sixty forty split, the article said doorway which could easily be a door with glass. Hard to tell.
They all but accused him of being a pedophile. This is ridiculous because of some inane wife and the newest curse word in the English langauge, children.