1
   

Underwear in Public Not Indecent, Court Says

 
 
Col Man
 
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 03:20 pm
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (Reuters) - Wearing underwear and nothing else in public does not constitute indecency, a Massachusetts court declared on Thursday as it tossed out charges against six animal rights protesters.
Members of the group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals were arrested and charged with indecency and disturbing the peace after a chilly rally in March near Harvard University where they stripped to their skivvies and staged a nearly naked pillow fight to protest against fur.

Six months and three court dates later, a Cambridge, Massachusetts, judge threw out the indecency charges against all six PETA members.

All but one of the protesters -- PETA Vice President Dan Mathews -- were also cleared of disturbing the peace. Mathews was ordered to pay a $300 fine.

Mathews told Reuters he was relieved that the indecent exposure charges were dismissed, noting that a conviction on such a charge would have forced him and the other demonstrators to register as sex offenders in Massachusetts.

link : http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=6089999
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 527 • Replies: 7
No top replies

 
drom et reve
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 03:46 pm
Do you agree with the ruling?

0 Replies
 
Col Man
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 03:59 pm
me? oh now you know we disagree about bodily things Wink Very Happy
why ask me? Wink Razz
i say we should all be cool with our nakedness it is our natural state after all Smile
0 Replies
 
drom et reve
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 04:22 pm
I knew that you would agree to men's being naked ;D.

0 Replies
 
Col Man
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 04:37 pm
Wink Razz Very Happy
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 04:58 pm
actually I think that charges of "extreme lunacy" could be made against P.E.T.A. members with substantial merit.
nakidity aside.
0 Replies
 
drom et reve
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 05:15 pm
Are they like our 'activists,' the ones who think that it's better to kill a scientist than a dog? -- Both are evil, but I thought that we tried to throw out the whole 'eye for an eye' thing some 2000 years ago, not to mention 'half a corpus for a fingernail.'

0 Replies
 
drom et reve
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Aug, 2004 05:16 pm
Col Man wrote:
Wink Razz Very Happy


Heh heh... I mess around with words too much ;D.

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How a Spoon Can Save a Woman’s Life - Discussion by tsarstepan
Well this is weird. - Discussion by izzythepush
Please Don't Feed our Bums - Discussion by Linkat
Woman crashes car while shaving her vagina - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Genie gets sued! - Discussion by Reyn
Humans Marrying Animals - Discussion by vinsan
Prawo Jazdy: Ireland's worst driver - Discussion by Robert Gentel
octoplet mom outrage! - Discussion by dirrtydozen22
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Underwear in Public Not Indecent, Court Says
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/02/2024 at 04:19:09