1
   

Priest Charged for Jogging Naked

 
 
martybarker
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:37 am
Never been there either.
0 Replies
 
martybarker
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:38 am
Boy, all this talk is making me want to get naked right now! I'm a bit of a rebel.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:38 am
martybarker wrote:
I'm not sure about the sex offender thing. Maybe it has to do with the proximity of the school


In drug cases, proximity to school can affect the seriousness of the crime. Cool
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:52 am
It was 4:30 a.m. and it was dark out. Admittedly the guy should have had shorts on, but come on!
0 Replies
 
martybarker
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:54 am
I'll agree with indecent exposure buit the sex offender thing is overboard IMO
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:55 am
I think that's the point marty - the law says if he's convicted of indecent exposure he automatically has to register as a sex offender.

It's half of why I posted this.
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:55 am
maybe he had drugs on him....somewhere?
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:56 am
Serious question here: doesn't "indecent exposure" require evidence of intent to shock, arouse or offend other persons? And, for that matter, doesn't it require other persons to be around?
0 Replies
 
martybarker
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:58 am
cjhsa wrote:
I think that's the point marty - the law says if he's convicted of indecent exposure he automatically has to register as a sex offender.

It's half of why I posted this.


What a wacky law!
0 Replies
 
martybarker
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 12:01 pm
If the priest is an American then he should be familiar with the fact that indecent exposure has its consequences. I'm not saying that I agree about the sex offender part. I agree that he should have known not to jog in the nude. My word, put some shorts on!
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 12:02 pm
old europe wrote:
Serious question here: doesn't "indecent exposure" require evidence of intent to shock, arouse or offend other persons? And, for that matter, doesn't it require other persons to be around?


No. You can sunbathe topless in your backyard and if you can be seen by others, it is considered 'indecent exposure'. In other words, it doesn't require evidence of intent to shock, etc...
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 12:03 pm
martybarker wrote:
I have a confession.....I've peed in the woods and a cornfield. I've exposed cleavage and ankles too. I guess we're a little liberal in Seattle


I'm not going to say, what I did once in Oak Park, Illinois... Cool
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 12:06 pm
martybarker wrote:
Boy, all this talk is making me want to get naked right now!


So run out into the street and do your thing...
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 12:07 pm
Mame wrote:
old europe wrote:
Serious question here: doesn't "indecent exposure" require evidence of intent to shock, arouse or offend other persons? And, for that matter, doesn't it require other persons to be around?


No. You can sunbathe topless in your backyard and if you can be seen by others, it is considered 'indecent exposure'. In other words, it doesn't require evidence of intent to shock, etc...


Do the rules concerning airspace apply here?
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 12:09 pm
Mame wrote:
It was 4:30 a.m. and it was dark out. Admittedly the guy should have had shorts on, but come on!


At 4:30, it's starting to get light. That's how the cops saw the nude in the first place.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 12:18 pm
No, he had to shine his flashlight on him, remember? And didn't it say that dawn was an hour away? He probably just saw movement or maybe he heard something. I probably would have just given the guy a warning.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 12:25 pm
Miller wrote:
At 4:30, it's starting to get light. That's how the cops saw the nude in the first place.


no.

read cjhsa's original post.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 12:39 pm
Miller wrote:
Mame wrote:
It was 4:30 a.m. and it was dark out. Admittedly the guy should have had shorts on, but come on!


At 4:30, it's starting to get light. That's how the cops saw the nude in the first place.



That's what really annoys me: either we discuss what and how everyone likes it to be or we use one source.

However:
- are the given data wrong, Miller? Why?
- you didn't say anything avout this vefore, even when the time and policeman's flashlight was mentioned. Why now?
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 12:52 pm
last summer a young local fellow fellow was pulled over by police for driving naked .
the judge dismissed the charge , stating that it was NOT indecent exposure to drive naked since it was necessary for the police to actually look down into his car to notice that he was not wearing any clothes .
GOOD FOR THE JUDGE !
(the police must have been particularly busy that afternoon catching escaped prisoners from our many local prisons ) .
hbg
0 Replies
 
happycat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 01:41 pm
Mame wrote:
No, he had to shine his flashlight on him, remember? And didn't it say that dawn was an hour away? He probably just saw movement or maybe he heard something. I probably would have just given the guy a warning.


C'mon, a cop sees a naked guy running around the HIGH SCHOOL track in the middle of the night (4:30am is still almost the middle of the night,)
it doesn't matter who he is, it's still weird and against the law. I don't buy the crap about sweating too much....because he could still have on a light pair of cotton shorts.
The argument about Europe's nudity laws isn't valid in this case, simply because it wasn't in Europe; it was in good ol' Denver Colorado in the US, and the US has different laws and customs, and despite all our proclamations to the contrary, we're still a bit puritan in this country.
With all the reports in the media lately about pedophiles, we are extra extra cautious.

There are fabrics that wick moisture away from the body, so no one needs to jog naked.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/07/2025 at 09:08:37