- Jun 5, 2000
- 36,413
- 616
- 126
WTF!!! sex offenders??? get a grip. :|
http://www.dailycamera.com/new...stering-sex-offenders/
Video of the event NSFW!!!!
http://goldpumpkin.blip.tv/#742241
Twelve of the runners who streaked the Pearl Street Mall on Friday night wearing nothing but pumpkins on their heads will have to register as sex offenders if they are convicted of indecent exposure.
The 10th year of the Naked Pumpkin Run started as usual ? with laughter, beer and a whole lot of pumpkin carving. But the nude run, which has grown in recent years to include well over 100 people, ended with police citing 12 of the streakers for indecent exposure, a Class 1 misdemeanor. Police have warned runners in the past that the activity isn?t legal, but this is the first time officers showed up en masse to enforce the law.
Now the ticketed runners, whose names have not yet been released, will have to register as sex offenders ? a scarlet letter that could mark their professional and personal lives for years ? if the charge of indecent exposure sticks.
?It?s very nasty,? said Alexander Garlin, a local lawyer who has experience defending sex-related criminal charges. ?Over the years, the system, the way of responding to individuals who are called sex offenders, ultimately has become institutionalized. There?s a whole industry around this, and certain critics have charged that the industry is too much one-size-fits-all.?
Convicting a naked pumpkin runner of indecent exposure in court, however, may not be completely straightforward. According to state law, the prosecution must show that the defendant ?knowingly exposed his genitals to the view of any person,? which is the easy part in this case, and that the exposure likely caused ?affront or alarm? to someone.
The ?affront and alarm? is the obvious place to begin a defense, Garlin said. In the case of the pumpkin run, which didn?t start until nearly 11 p.m., many of the people packed onto the mall said they were there specifically to see the nude runners.
?How does a jury figure out if someone is guilty (of affronting and alarming) beyond a reasonable doubt?? Garlin said. ?I would guess the average Boulderite is not likely to be affronted or alarmed ? entertained, maybe.?
If the cited runners don?t want to test their luck in court, they could try to plead to a lesser charge. In this case, the obvious alternate would be ?public indecency.?
Oddly, public indecency may sound worse on paper ? it includes doing such things in public as having sex, masturbating or fondling someone else ? but it carries far less serious consequences. Public indecency is a Class 1 petty offense and does not require registration as a sex offender.
?Public indecency has a real kicker ? it?s generally nakedness plus some pretty hard-core conduct,? Garlin said.
Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner said his officers cited the runners because ?first of all, it?s illegal,? he had a high enough staffing level that night and he was concerned that the event was getting out of hand.
?This isn?t OK,? he said. ?It is against the law. You can?t do this with immunity.?
Indecently exposed
Nudity in Boulder isn?t exactly uncommon, and in the past couple of years a growing number of people have been questioning how nudity is dealt with by police under different circumstances. For example, why weren?t a group of naked cyclists given tickets in July when a naked jogger was cited for indecent exposure in June?
Large naked events, such as Friday?s Naked Pumpkin Run and the Naked Bike Ride, haven?t typically drawn much police attention. But this year, a dozen people were cited with indecent exposure after jogging down the Pearl Street Mall wearing nothing but a carved pumpkin over their heads.
Here are a few recent examples of indecent-exposure cases:
http://www.dailycamera.com/new...stering-sex-offenders/
Video of the event NSFW!!!!
http://goldpumpkin.blip.tv/#742241
Twelve of the runners who streaked the Pearl Street Mall on Friday night wearing nothing but pumpkins on their heads will have to register as sex offenders if they are convicted of indecent exposure.
The 10th year of the Naked Pumpkin Run started as usual ? with laughter, beer and a whole lot of pumpkin carving. But the nude run, which has grown in recent years to include well over 100 people, ended with police citing 12 of the streakers for indecent exposure, a Class 1 misdemeanor. Police have warned runners in the past that the activity isn?t legal, but this is the first time officers showed up en masse to enforce the law.
Now the ticketed runners, whose names have not yet been released, will have to register as sex offenders ? a scarlet letter that could mark their professional and personal lives for years ? if the charge of indecent exposure sticks.
?It?s very nasty,? said Alexander Garlin, a local lawyer who has experience defending sex-related criminal charges. ?Over the years, the system, the way of responding to individuals who are called sex offenders, ultimately has become institutionalized. There?s a whole industry around this, and certain critics have charged that the industry is too much one-size-fits-all.?
Convicting a naked pumpkin runner of indecent exposure in court, however, may not be completely straightforward. According to state law, the prosecution must show that the defendant ?knowingly exposed his genitals to the view of any person,? which is the easy part in this case, and that the exposure likely caused ?affront or alarm? to someone.
The ?affront and alarm? is the obvious place to begin a defense, Garlin said. In the case of the pumpkin run, which didn?t start until nearly 11 p.m., many of the people packed onto the mall said they were there specifically to see the nude runners.
?How does a jury figure out if someone is guilty (of affronting and alarming) beyond a reasonable doubt?? Garlin said. ?I would guess the average Boulderite is not likely to be affronted or alarmed ? entertained, maybe.?
If the cited runners don?t want to test their luck in court, they could try to plead to a lesser charge. In this case, the obvious alternate would be ?public indecency.?
Oddly, public indecency may sound worse on paper ? it includes doing such things in public as having sex, masturbating or fondling someone else ? but it carries far less serious consequences. Public indecency is a Class 1 petty offense and does not require registration as a sex offender.
?Public indecency has a real kicker ? it?s generally nakedness plus some pretty hard-core conduct,? Garlin said.
Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner said his officers cited the runners because ?first of all, it?s illegal,? he had a high enough staffing level that night and he was concerned that the event was getting out of hand.
?This isn?t OK,? he said. ?It is against the law. You can?t do this with immunity.?
Indecently exposed
Nudity in Boulder isn?t exactly uncommon, and in the past couple of years a growing number of people have been questioning how nudity is dealt with by police under different circumstances. For example, why weren?t a group of naked cyclists given tickets in July when a naked jogger was cited for indecent exposure in June?
Large naked events, such as Friday?s Naked Pumpkin Run and the Naked Bike Ride, haven?t typically drawn much police attention. But this year, a dozen people were cited with indecent exposure after jogging down the Pearl Street Mall wearing nothing but a carved pumpkin over their heads.
Here are a few recent examples of indecent-exposure cases:
But, I do love the English....
Facebook
Twitter