April 19, 2006
Insert Madams Organ Joke Here
Wonkette received an interesting tip today that we are, unfortunately, unable to substantiate. According to their source:
...walking down 18th Street across Columbia Road was a 40ish, very white, very blond, VERY naked woman. Not your garden variety crazy woman, either - she seemed quite sane and pleasant, saying hello with a smile to everyone she passed. Not exactly sure on the public exposure laws in DC - I’d heard that being topless was legal, and that the only thing that was illegal was showing pubic hair. If so, well, let’s just say this woman wasn’t breaking any laws...
We're waiting for the Wonketteers to update us on this with a yay or nay or grainy cell phone image, but in the mean time, we thought we'd check out the D.C. Code to see the veracity of the tipster's claim regarding the District's indecent exposure laws. To whit:
§ 22-1312. Lewd, indecent, or obscene acts.(a) It shall not be lawful for any person or persons to make any obscene or indecent exposure of his or her person, or to make any lewd, obscene, or indecent sexual proposal, or to commit any other lewd, obscene, or indecent act in the District of Columbia, under penalty of not more than $300 fine, or imprisonment of not more than 90 days, or both, for each and every such offense.
(b) Any person or persons who shall commit an offense described in subsection (a) of this section, knowing he or she or they are in the presence of a child under the age of 16 years, shall be punished by imprisonment of not more than 1 year, or fined in an amount not to exceed $1,000, or both, for each and every such offense.
That seems pretty vague to me. Lawyer types, can you direct us to something a bit more specific?
|
My older brother used to work at the Woodward & Lothrop in PG Plaza (this was back in the '80s). One day when he was going to work, he saw a police car pull up to the mall entrance, lights flashing and siren wailing, and two officers got out and ran into the mall, with one of them carrying a big trench coat.
Apparently, some lady from the apartments next door was high on PCP and had wandered into the mall, stark naked, talking to herself, etc etc. The police were there to restore order, and the trenchcoat was to cover up the woman.
what's the test from the supreme court? something like, "i can't tell you waht's obsene, but i know it when i see it"
only in DC would a story about a naked lady turn into a legal discussion.
Check it out.
This is from a 1986 case (Duvallon v. District of Columbia, 515 A.2d 724):
"Our statute refers to the 'indecent exposure of his or her person.' It is the indecent exposure of the comparable portions of the male and female anatomy that constitutes the crime. In other words, the indecent exposure of human genitalia is the offense. Since Ms. Duvallon did not expose her genitals, she did not violate § [22-1312]."
Maybe she's the pioneer of dc's Improv Everywhere.
I want to do the cell phone symphony one.
I had a interesting run in with nudity in the District last year. I was riding my bike down in West/East Potamac parks, I had just rode under a bridge (I think it was the Metro bridge) and on the other side there were two people, a guy and a girl, laying on a blanket sunbathing.
I suddenly realized what I saw and did a double take... the man was butt naked except for a single sock. I guess he would pass the law. Though that is one vague law.