What's new

Welcome to Offtopix 👋, Visitor

Off Topix is a well-established general discussion forum that originally opened to the public in 2009! We provide a laid-back atmosphere, and our members are down to earth. We have a ton of content, and fresh stuff is constantly being added. We cover all sorts of topics, so there's bound to be something inside to pique your interest. We welcome anyone and everyone to register and become a member of our awesome community.

Join Our Facebook Page Today!

Join the conversation and help spread the word about offtopix on Facebook! Your voice matters—let’s make an impact together!

Join Our X.com Page Today!

Join the conversation and become a champion for Offtopix on X.com! Your voice is powerful, and together, we can create meaningful change!

Join offtopix Discord Server Today!

Join the conversation and become a champion for Offtopix on Discord! Your voice holds incredible power, and together, we can create impactful change!

Naked in own home not indecent

Nebulous

Hakuna Matata
MOTM
Joined
Sep 20, 2009
Posts
82,632
Reaction score
18,257
Points
3,640
Location
California
Website
neb8.net
Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36239042/ns/us_news-weird_news/



A man charged with indecent exposure after two women said they saw him naked inside his own home was acquitted Wednesday by a Virginia jury.



Erick Williamson, 29, has argued since his October arrest that he should not be punished for being naked in the privacy of his own home.



Police and prosecutors, as well as the two women who testified against him, said he intended to expose himself and made no attempt to conceal himself in a residential neighborhood filled with children.



It's really a weight off my shoulders after these last six months, Williamson said after his acquittal. I think (the verdict) kind of sets the record straight. It was an innocent action.



In December, a judge in Fairfax County's General District Court convicted Williamson of misdemeanor indecent exposure, but imposed neither jail time nor a fine. Still, Williamson appealed his case to the county's circuit court, risking a maximum punishment of a year in jail to clear his name.



When you know you've done nothing wrong, it's hard to take these kind of accusations and not stand up to it, said Williamson, an out-of-work commercial diver who racked up thousands of dollars in legal fees.



At the time of his arrest, Williamson was sharing a home in Springfield with other commercial divers. He testified Wednesday that his roommates had gone to work and left him alone in the house for the first time in months. He was moving out, and decided to pack his belongings and make breakfast in the nude.



Two women testified that they saw him naked that morning. The first, a school librarian, said she heard a loud moan and drunken singing. Then, as she drove by Williamson's house at about 6:40 a.m., she saw him in the buff and called 911.



A police officer came by the house, saw nothing unusual and left.



Drunken singing alleged

Then, two hours later, Yvette Dean testified that she was walking her 7-year-old son to school when she saw a naked Williamson standing in an exterior doorway on the side of his home with the screen door wide open.



Dean testified that she made eye contact, angrily gave him the finger and hustled her son away. As she turned the corner, she looked back and saw Williamson from a front window, again completely naked.



Williamson did not dispute that the women may have seen him, but said he did not see them and did not make eye contact with Dean. He testified that if he had known he'd been seen, he would have put his pants on and gone outside and apologized.



Under Virginia law, indecent exposure occurs when a person intentionally makes an obscene display of his or her private parts. The law does not necessarily require the exposure to be in a public place — it allows for prosecution when the exposure occurs in a place where others are present.



Prosecutor Marc Birnbaum said the circumstances of the case, from the librarian's testimony about loud moaning and drunken singing to Dean's testimony about eye contact, showed that Williamson intended to expose himself.



This isn't a case about being naked in your house. This is a case about intentional exposure, Birnbaum said.
 
Wow that is stupid, inside his own home. Why were the old people even looking into his house then. People like that really confuse me, they should be the ones getting arrested for wasting police time.
 
This story is just asinine
laugh.gif
 
If I saw a guy naked in his house with the windows and doors open, I would think that he wanted to be seen. When I walk around naked in my house, I keep everything shut. I dont want to scare my neighbors.
tongue.gif
 
Nebulous said:
If I saw a guy naked in his house with the windows and doors open, I would think that he wanted to be seen. When I walk around naked in my house, I keep everything shut. I dont want to scare my neighbors.
tongue.gif



We were all born naked, I dont see the problem, Maybe he wanted to have a naturists type of morning
laugh.gif
 
What they fail to mention here is )Yvette Dean testified that she was walking her 7-year-old son to school when she saw a naked Williamson standing in an exterior doorway on the side of his home with the screen door wide open) was that this woman and her son where taking a short cut on HIS property to get to the school. IMO, that is trespassing and that woman should have been fined. The other two women are female versions of a peeping tom.
 
That is the worst thing I have ever read, regarding a story from a news website.. How pathetic.
 
Sam said:
That is the worst thing I have ever read, regarding a story from a news website.. How pathetic.



Their job is to report the news, no matter how stupid it is.
tongue.gif
 
Jazzy said:
What they fail to mention here is )Yvette Dean testified that she was walking her 7-year-old son to school when she saw a naked Williamson standing in an exterior doorway on the side of his home with the screen door wide open) was that this woman and her son where taking a short cut on HIS property to get to the school. IMO, that is trespassing and that woman should have been fined. The other two women are female versions of a peeping tom.



Basically. Trespassing is wrong, but if they were not trespassing, than I would have said that it was wrong!
 
Depends on how big the front lawn is. If they didnt cut through his property, perhaps they would have seen exactly the same thing. lol
 

Create an account or login to post a reply

You must be a member in order to post a reply

Create an account

Create an account here on Off Topix. It's quick & easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Welcome to Offtopix 👋, Visitor

Off Topix is a well-established general discussion forum that originally opened to the public in 2009! We provide a laid-back atmosphere, and our members are down to earth. We have a ton of content, and fresh stuff is constantly being added. We cover all sorts of topics, so there's bound to be something inside to pique your interest. We welcome anyone and everyone to register and become a member of our awesome community.

Theme customization system

You can customize some areas of the forum theme from this menu.

  • Theme customizations unavailable!

    Theme customization fields are not available to you, please contact the administrator for more information.

  • Choose the color combination that reflects your taste
    Background images
    Color gradient backgrounds
Back