Man arrested for being naked in his own house

[bob000555]

At 5:30 in the morning a few days ago a woman and her seven year old son where walking through another person’s yard. While walking through the yard they spotted the naked owner of the property they where trespassing on naked in his own house, making his morning coffee. At this point they did the perfectly logical thing and decided to call the police and report the man for indecent exposure. The Springfield Police department proceeded to come and arrest the man for being naked in his own home claiming that he “wanted to be seen naked.” Does this seem reasonable to anyone?

 

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/101909_man_caught_making_coffee_naked_faces_charges

 

Imagine the roles where reversed; if a man was walked through a woman’s yard and spotted her naked in the window you can bet money she wouldn’t be arrested for indecent exposure but he would be arrested for voyeurism. Can he press charges on the women and her kid for trespassing?

 

UPDATE: In a completely logical move the police have decided to put taxpayers’ money to good use by scouring the neighborhood for any person who may have violated by looking into the man’s house while he was naked in the past.

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/102109_naked_man_arrested_after_making_coffee_update

 

What the hell is going on?

[Horza2002]

Please tell me this is a joke....what the hell is happening to this country!

[insane_alien]

i could understand if he was standing right up at the window and waving his wang about at schoolkids but if he's just going about his life(making coffee) then i see no problem at all.

[Sisyphus]

Please tell me this is a joke....what the hell is happening to this country!

 

What country? You're in England. This happened in America. Has either country seen a rash of people being arrested for indecent exposure in their own homes? Or is this just an anecdote searched out for its quirkiness and to illicit a particular response?

 

That said, assuming FOX gave an accurate overview of the facts, I hope this guy countersues and wins.

[Dudde]

I'm glad the police found a noble cause to dedicate themselves to

 

'Yes, I wasn't wearing any clothes but I was alone, in my own home and just got out of bed. It was dark and I had no idea anyone was outside looking in at me.

 

all places I check online say this was at 5:30 AM... hopefully that police department is hit hard for wasting time and money, frivolous legal suits in this country are getting out of hand

[dr.syntax]

At 5:30 in the morning a few days ago a woman and her seven year old son where walking through another person’s yard. While walking through the yard they spotted the naked owner of the property they where trespassing on naked in his own house, making his morning coffee. At this point they did the perfectly logical thing and decided to call the police and report the man for indecent exposure. The Springfield Police department proceeded to come and arrest the man for being naked in his own home claiming that he “wanted to be seen naked.” Does this seem reasonable to anyone?

 

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/101909_man_caught_making_coffee_naked_faces_charges

 

Imagine the roles where reversed; if a man was walked through a woman’s yard and spotted her naked in the window you can bet money she wouldn’t be arrested for indecent exposure but he would be arrested for voyeurism. Can he press charges on the women and her kid for trespassing?

 

UPDATE: In a completely logical move the police have decided to put taxpayers’ money to good use by scouring the neighborhood for any person who may have violated by looking into the man’s house while he was naked in the past.

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/102109_naked_man_arrested_after_making_coffee_update

 

What the hell is going on?

 

 

 

 

 

REPLY: Another example of the erosion of privacy rights in " THE LAND OF THE FREE AND THE HOME OF THE BRAVE ". Why wasn`t she arrested for trespassing and beining A PEEPING MOM ? This is outrageous and I hope he finds the means to sue her and the police for this a truly contemptuous disregard for any previous privacy rights that might have existed in our Nation. Snooping on fellow citizens has become somewhat of a National pastime in our Nation that seems to me to be encouraged by many involved in law enforcement and portrayed by many as some sort of virtue.

I despise such activity and hope people start fighting back. ...Dr.Syntax

[jackson33]

At 5:30 in the morning a few days ago a woman and her seven year old son where walking through another person’s yard. While walking through the yard they spotted the naked owner of the property they where trespassing on naked in his own house, making his morning coffee. [/Quote]

 

I also would like to see a counter suit on this and IMO the Police Department itself is complicate in 'Child Neglect'. I know places where both the mother and child could have been legally harmed in that position. For what reason does any mother have in walking around at 5:30 AM with a 7 year old, regardless whether it's a public sidewalk or worse yet some persons private property. Sounds like an activist trying to make a nanny statement, possibly with prior knowledge of something not disclosed...

[Moontanman]

They may as well come and get me now! I seldom if ever wear clothes inside my house. I hate wearing clothes! I have a privacy fence around my yard and I often go outside nude. I go to nude beaches and have been known to go to nudist camps and clubs. No one, no matter what their age, is going to be scared for life due to seeing someone naked (well disgusted maybe in my case but not scared) the whole idea of nudity being some sort of horrendous thing to protect the innocent from is worse than any possible actual exposure to nudity! We see death, blood, and gore all the time on TV but seeing someone naked is going to some how destroy someones mind? Give me a break!

[Mr Skeptic]

He should ask the ACLU for help, or failing that ask online. I'd give him a dollar towards his legal fees (offensive or defensive).

[iNow]

I'd give him a dollar towards his legal fees (offensive or defensive).

I suddenly got an image of him wearing a speedo and you stuffing your dollar bill into the elastic band as if he were a chip-n-dale dancer.

[bascule]

For the record, this is retarded

[A Tripolation]

How could he NOT win a counter-suit?

[dr.syntax]

How could he NOT win a counter-suit?

 

REPLY: If he sues her, the police,any and all involved in the decision to arrest him he will eventually prevail. As others have pointed out: if this had been a man trespassing and peeping on a naked woman in her own home at 5:30 A.M. you can be certain HE would be the one arrested. I expect to see some big time lawyers chomping at the bit for the chance to fight this one out. Number one she was trespassing at a time of day people have no business walking through her neighbor`s yard. A very many people walk about their homes naked just getting out of bed and such. She had no right to going through his yard at anytime of day as far as that goes. This will be an interesting one to watch as it works it`s way throgh the courts. ...Dr.Syntax

[Syntho-sis]

But at about 8:30 a.m. on Monday morning, a neighbor walking her son to school says he deliberately exposed himself-- not once, but twice. First, she says it happened as he was standing in the glass doorway in the kitchen, and then again at a front window.

 

If he was doing it to gain "attention" then, yea, she has a case against him.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

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.

 

This is especially gross/weird. Apparently nobody read the rest of the article, because most of you assumed it was at 5:30 am when in reality the incident occurred at 8:30. Why would someone be walking a kid to a public school at 5:30 in the morning?

 

The lady and anybody else who saw the man nude, IMHO, has a legitimate case against this fellow.

[padren]

The lady and anybody else who saw the man nude, IMHO, has a legitimate case against this fellow.

 

If they saw the man from public I would agree. If they saw him from their own private property, then possibly. If they saw him from his own private property than she has absolutely no case, IMO.

 

It's also worth noting that she alleged he exposed himself on purpose. We don't actually know that, he very well may have, but she could also have misconstrued that conclusion. For all we know it could have been too light inside and he may not have even seen her. He could have been half asleep and not very aware of his surroundings.

 

• If he intentionally exposed himself to her and/or her kid and they were on his property, they are both in the wrong but he has the right to be nude on his property.
  
• If he intentionally exposed himself viewable from public areas than he very much is in the wrong.
  
• If he unintentionally exposed himself from a public viewpoint than he's probably just careless, a case of negligence, not maliciousness.
  
• If he unintentionally exposed himself from a viewpoint on his property he is completely in the clear and she is in the wrong.
  

 

What bothers me is not only could it go either way depending on where it happened, but there is a huge difference between exposing yourself intentionally in public and doing so accidentally. However, that is probably not going to factor and someone who wakes up and hasn't realized the blinds are open gets charged just the same as someone who intentionally streaks a children's busstop.

[A Tripolation]

All hail padren's awesome bullet list that defintively defines the situation.

[Severian]

In the mornings, on my way to work, I walk past some 'garden flats' which are flats that are set back from the pavement (sidewalk for the US folks) by about 3 feet and maybe 6 feet lower. These have windows that look straight into the person's house, so on dark winter mornings, when they have the light on, if you look to the side while walking you see straight into their flats and can see them having breakfast or whatever.

 

Every time I walk past these flats, I make a deliberate point of looking away from the windows to give them privacy. When I was young we were taught that to look into someone's window in this way was very bad manners. It is a shame that good manners seem to have vanished from the world.

[Syntho-sis]

If they saw the man from public I would agree. If they saw him from their own private property, then possibly. If they saw him from his own private property than she has absolutely no case, IMO.

 

It's also worth noting that she alleged he exposed himself on purpose. We don't actually know that, he very well may have, but she could also have misconstrued that conclusion. For all we know it could have been too light inside and he may not have even seen her. He could have been half asleep and not very aware of his surroundings.

 

• If he intentionally exposed himself to her and/or her kid and they were on his property, they are both in the wrong but he has the right to be nude on his property.
  
• If he intentionally exposed himself viewable from public areas than he very much is in the wrong.
  
• If he unintentionally exposed himself from a public viewpoint than he's probably just careless, a case of negligence, not maliciousness.
  
• If he unintentionally exposed himself from a viewpoint on his property he is completely in the clear and she is in the wrong.
  

 

What bothers me is not only could it go either way depending on where it happened, but there is a huge difference between exposing yourself intentionally in public and doing so accidentally. However, that is probably not going to factor and someone who wakes up and hasn't realized the blinds are open gets charged just the same as someone who intentionally streaks a children's busstop.

 

Absolutely no case? Come on, what good are lawyers then? I can think of at least 4 reasons she could sue this man in a court of law, legally.

 

That does not necessitate her pressing charges against him, the police may not care. But if he did in fact, make a habit of exposing himself to the bus-stop (or other people from his property), even unintentionally, there is a very legitimate case against him and charges could in fact, be pressed.

 

We prosecute people all the time for their carelessness, ever hear of manslaughter?

 

Being on his property still does not give him the right to stand in his window with his wang hanging out for the whole neighborhood to see, as he sips his coffee.

 

Would you want your child exposed to that on a daily basis? What if he isn't convicted? Perhaps pedophiles everywhere would see this as an opportunity to gleefully expose themselves to children without consequence. They could cite reasons:

 

1. Being on one's own property.

2. Having no malicious intent.

 

The fool should at least be fined or something. I have absolutely no problem wearing clothes in my home, even at 5 in the morning, if I'm going to be standing in front of windows.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

In the mornings, on my way to work, I walk past some 'garden flats' which are flats that are set back from the pavement (sidewalk for the US folks) by about 3 feet and maybe 6 feet lower. These have windows that look straight into the person's house, so on dark winter mornings, when they have the light on, if you look to the side while walking you see straight into their flats and can see them having breakfast or whatever.

 

Every time I walk past these flats, I make a deliberate point of looking away from the windows to give them privacy. When I was young we were taught that to look into someone's window in this way was very bad manners. It is a shame that good manners seem to have vanished from the world.

 

Well your neighbor would do you good, not to be applying copious amounts of shaving cream to their genitals with the window open. Just in case you happen to glance in the window, or you're walking by with your mother and she happens to look in.

 

Common sense is not common. There are too many loopholes in this sort of thing for people to take advantage of.

[Dudde]

...did we just compare indecent exposure to manslaughter? Hardly on the same debate grounds - personally I REALLY don't see what harm would have come of this child for seeing some guy in his house naked. Maybe that kid thinks he wants to grow up to walk around his own house nekked - SO DO I

 

I can see like a fine or something if he habitually exposes himself to children at a bus stop, but I wouldn't offer jack for compensation to people affected, especially some lady walking through his yard to begin with - 8:30 or not, he doesn't pay rent to have to wear clothing just so people can convenience themselves with his property

 

Syntho-sis, sir, I see where you're coming from, I just don't see the actual harm in kids seeing a naked guy. or girl. would be. Can you elaborate?

[A Tripolation]

We prosecute people all the time for their carelessness, ever hear of manslaughter?

 

Being on his property still does not give him the right to stand in his window with his wang hanging out for the whole neighborhood to see, as he sips his coffee.

 

No, Syntho-sis, your logic is completely wrong

 

Manslaughter [math]\ne[/math] unintentional flashing in your own home while someone trespass on your property.

What it would be equivalent to is you driving in the middle of night and someone just jumping out in the road in front of you, and you killing them.

 

The man was in his own home, at an early hour. I seriously doubt that he was trying to expose himself.

 

The fool should at least be fined or something. I have absolutely no problem wearing clothes in my home, even at 5 in the morning, if I'm going to be standing in front of windows

 

Well see, that's whats great about the law. We all don't have to feel the same way as you. Just because you feel that way is not grounds for punishing someone else for feeling differently about the topic.

 

She was walking through HIS yard, looking through HIS windows. If the situation were reversed, he would probably be charged for...attempted rape or something by this woman.

 

As a child, I was more "harmed" by people yelling in public (I come from a family that wouldn't scream if they were on fire), than I would have been to see a naked man.

Edited October 27, 2009 by A Tripolation

[DrP]

My 2 pence: Clearly the guy is innocent and the woman (who whose trespass would have been overlooked at first had she not acted like an idiot by reporting the bloke for exposure) should be done for wasting police time. I'd be interested to see how the case pans out.

[Syntho-sis]

...did we just compare indecent exposure to manslaughter? Hardly on the same debate grounds - personally I REALLY don't see what harm would have come of this child for seeing some guy in his house naked. Maybe that kid thinks he wants to grow up to walk around his own house nekked - SO DO I

 

I can see like a fine or something if he habitually exposes himself to children at a bus stop, but I wouldn't offer jack for compensation to people affected, especially some lady walking through his yard to begin with - 8:30 or not, he doesn't pay rent to have to wear clothing just so people can convenience themselves with his property

 

Syntho-sis, sir, I see where you're coming from, I just don't see the actual harm in kids seeing a naked guy. or girl. would be. Can you elaborate?

 

 

A fine for a man who habitually exposes himself to children? What if he had been diddling himself in the window, or worse? I can understand if this happened on only one instance, but what if this occurred multiple times, but people were too embarrassed to report it?

 

We send people to prison for junk less than this.

 

She had no right to be in his yard, yes. But where exactly does it say in the constitution that you're allowed to walk around the house naked and stand in windows and what not? (Which most people have the sense not to do.)

 

I fail to see your logic sir.

 

As far as the extent of child harm? Who cares! Most parents still don't want a 29 year old man exposing himself to their kids. For one, it's just plain nasty. Secondly, if it's okay for them to see him nude, then what makes it wrong for 29 year old men to see children nude? What makes it wrong for them to have the children pose for photos and videos?

 

Someone please explain to me, why it is okay for a grown man to habitually expose his naked body to children?

 

The predominant consensus seems to be that it's okay.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

No, Syntho-sis, your logic is completely wrong

 

Manslaughter [math]\ne[/math] unintentional flashing in your own home while someone trespass on your property.

What it would be equivalent to is you driving in the middle of night and someone just jumping out in the road in front of you, and you killing them.

 

The man was in his own home, at an early hour. I seriously doubt that he was trying to expose himself.

 

 

 

Well see, that's whats great about the law. We all don't have to feel the same way as you. Just because you feel that way is not grounds for punishing someone else for feeling differently about the topic.

 

She was walking through HIS yard, looking through HIS windows. If the situation were reversed, he would probably be charged for...attempted rape or something by this woman.

 

As a child, I was more "harmed" by people yelling in public (I come from a family that wouldn't scream if they were on fire), than I would have been to see a naked man.

 

Apparently you didn't read the entire articles. There were reports that this has occurred MULTIPLE times. And it was 8:30 in the morning, when most people are taking their kids to school and heading off to work.

 

What makes you seriously doubt that the man was trying to expose himself?

[Fuzzwood]

Oh my god, dudes other than myself/my husband have a wang? To the police!

[The Bear's Key]

As a child, I was more "harmed" by people yelling in public (I come from a family that wouldn't scream if they were on fire), than I would have been to see a naked man.

My god that didn't even occur to me! I've caught plenty of grownups naked when a kid, and yet was more "harmed" by other stuff that is perfectly legal in the social world.

 

 

If convicted on the misdemeanor charge, he would face up to one year in jail...

A person's minding their own business going about everyday life and suddenly can kiss one year of that life goodbye -- a whole year (5,840 slow hours) abruptly taken from one's daily schedule, work earnings, family time, projects, relationships, and other life variables, just because some unknown person's offended by a nosy glimpse while cutting inapproprately through the yard -- without the accuser giving even a blink of thought to how severely the accusation can disrupt the relevant person's life.

 

It's no wonder there's lots of people I've found disregarding "Tough on Crime" mentalities as a joke, or detesting the law. How about instead being Tough on Nonsense?

[Severian]

Someone please explain to me, why it is okay for a grown man to habitually expose his naked body to children?

 

A better question might be "Why is it wrong?" Isn't it just a matter of (your) social convention that a naked body is something to be ashamed of? In a more balanced society, there wouldn't even by an eyebrow raised by nudity, nevermind the implication of raising something else implied by making nudity a taboo.