Don't go naked in your own home--you might get arrested.

[The Brain]

How often do you molest your wife's children? Types like you (step fathers) are most common offenders in pedophilia cases. I hope the local police have an eye on you.

Putting aside the ad hom attack, do you have any statistics on that?  I would have thought that the most common offenders would be the biological father.  Not that your stat couldn't be true either.

He's from Poland. They rarely know who is the father.

[DGuller]

For what it's worth, I agree with the woman reporting the guy.  He obviously has issues, and probably wouldn't stop at just flashing strangers.  Today he flashes strangers, tomorrow he might flash his wife (and may not even stop at just flashing her).

[Martinus]

How often do you molest your wife's children? Types like you (step fathers) are most common offenders in pedophilia cases. I hope the local police have an eye on you.

Putting aside the ad hom attack, do you have any statistics on that?  I would have thought that the most common offenders would be the biological father.  Not that your stat couldn't be true either.

yeah, what the statistician said.

[Martinus]

Anyway, what about nudist families? Are the people who walk naked in nudist families in front of their children (and children walk naked too) pedophiles too?

I love how people here are equating nakedness with sex. Fucking puritan prudes.

[DisturbedPervert]

I've been trying to flash the Japanese chick in the next apartment for weeks now but she never opens her curtains.   

[grumbler]

Actually, yes. If people routinely walk on your property with your permission (and presumably they would not be doing so without it), then yes, it does seem reasonable to presume that you won't be going out of your way to parade around in the buff, within reason. 

So if one hasn't given permission, on can parade around in the buff beyond reason?

I don't think the permission aspect applies at all.  If he gives people permission to corss his property, they do so at the risk of seeing him nude inside his home.

Obviously the case is going to come down to whether there is reason to believe that his being seen naked was his intent, or simply an accident. If it is an accident, the case goes nowhere, I imagine.

I agree.  I just don't think the trespass issue is relevant.

I don't think being on your own property gives you 100% freedom to walk around naked and flash the neighbors kids out the doorway.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

My house faces onto a cul-de-sac where there are almost always a bunch of kids playing. Do I have a right to privacy that includes me parading around in my garage with the door open nude?

I shouldn't think so, but feel free to make your case. 

[ulmont]

Putting aside the ad hom attack, do you have any statistics on that?  I would have thought that the most common offenders would be the biological father.  Not that your stat couldn't be true either.

A study of child abuse registers in the United Kingdom found that 46 percent of paternal offenders were nonbirth fathers, compared to 54 percent who were birth fathers.  Given the fact that during the study time frame only 4 percent of British children resided with nonbirth fathers, father-substitutes appear "substantially over-represented" among perpetrators.  As one researcher concluded, "a stepfather was five times more likely to sexually victimize his stepdaughter than was a genetic father."  In more than one study, stepfathers actually outnumbered natural fathers as abusers, a telling result given the disproportionately greater number of biological fathers during the study time frames.

http://books.google.com/books?id=1iPX-2I_4TMC&lpg=PT18&ots=O_JNi7QGAT&dq=stepfather%20most%20common%20abuser&pg=PT18#v=onepage&q=&f=false (footnotes and paragraphing omitted)

[Malthus]

For what it's worth, I agree with the woman reporting the guy.  He obviously has issues, and probably wouldn't stop at just flashing strangers.  Today he flashes strangers, tomorrow he might flash his wife (and may not even stop at just flashing her).

Don't forget his evident predeliction for stimulants - 5 AM coffee. 

These drug-addicted sex maniacs have to be kept under control.

[Berkut]

Granted, it would be crazy if he was just in his house naked, and there was no reason for him to think a kid would be around.

See this is where you employ your intellectual dishonesty. you are making the argument, effectively, that anyone who goes naked around his house, where there is a chance (no matter how remote) that kids could possibly ever see them, is "flashing the kids".

This is where your idiocy lies.

Wow. That is quite the strawman.

And I can assure you that if one of my neighbors flashes my kids, I will call the cops. I don't think I am all the puritanical, but if some perv is flashing kids, then it is likely that is only the beginning of his sexual issues with children, not the end.

And here is the second part of your perfectly idiotic, moral-panic-style argument.

1. Anyone who walks naked in a place where they could be seen by children (no matter how remote the chance) is "flashing the children".

This is where you go into your normal lying mode. I never said anything of the kind.

2. Anyone who is "flashing the children" is likely having "sexual issues with children".

Adults who flash children most certainly have sexual issues with children.

Flashing, as I think I made rather clear, is an intentional act.

You have some serious issues Marty. Quite the lawyerly mind you have there.

[Valmy]

Seeing how America seems to be in the constant state of moral panic

Your western neighbors seem to love to censor everything when it comes to video games to protect teh childrens so we are hardly alone in that...to the extent that we are.

[Valmy]

Adults who flash children most certainly have sexual issues with children.

Why are we even arguing about this?  I don't think anybody has said flashing children, or anybody for that matter, is a good thing to do.

[Berkut]

Actually, yes. If people routinely walk on your property with your permission (and presumably they would not be doing so without it), then yes, it does seem reasonable to presume that you won't be going out of your way to parade around in the buff, within reason. 

So if one hasn't given permission, on can parade around in the buff beyond reason?

No. I don't think I said that.

I don't think the permission aspect applies at all.  If he gives people permission to corss his property, they do so at the risk of seeing him nude inside his home.

I think the permission aspect applies to the context of his being nude, and whether there is reason to think others might see him. If he knows that people are around the property a lot, then it is more reasonable to expect him to take that into account.

Conversely, if he lives on a mountain with no neighbors within miles, he can probably walk around in the yard buck naked, and if someone happens to go by, it seems reasonable for him to claim that he did not expect that.

It isn't a matter of permission, it is a matter of context. If there are people around outside your house all the time, then it seems hard to believe you can argue that you had no idea they would see you, and more plausible for a DA to argue that not only did you know they would see you, that you in fact set out with the intent for them to see you.

Obviously the case is going to come down to whether there is reason to believe that his being seen naked was his intent, or simply an accident. If it is an accident, the case goes nowhere, I imagine.

I agree.  I just don't think the trespass issue is relevant.

It is indirectly, I think. It speaks to his claim that he never intended to be seen, and the potential prosecutors claim that he did intend to be seen.

I don't think being on your own property gives you 100% freedom to walk around naked and flash the neighbors kids out the doorway.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

Well, isn't that germaine to the discussion? He was naked in either his kitchen or his carport. Both of those places are his private property, so clearly the fact that he was on his own property does not absolve him from any potential indecency charge.

My house faces onto a cul-de-sac where there are almost always a bunch of kids playing. Do I have a right to privacy that includes me parading around in my garage with the door open nude?

I shouldn't think so, but feel free to make your case. 

I'll leave that to Marty.

[Berkut]

Adults who flash children most certainly have sexual issues with children.

Why are we even arguing about this?  I don't think anybody has said flashing children, or anybody for that matter, is a good thing to do.

Because the claim of the woman is that he intentionally exposed himself.

[Berkut]

Anyway, what about nudist families? Are the people who walk naked in nudist families in front of their children (and children walk naked too) pedophiles too?

Nobody has made any such claim, Mr. Lawyer.

I love how people here are equating nakedness with sex. Fucking puritan prudes.

I love how you prove over and over again what a intellectually dishonest slimeball you are.

[Valmy]

Because the claim of the woman is that he intentionally exposed himself.

Yes and the question is whether or not he did that or whether they just stumbled upon him accidentally.  Not whether or not he should be allowed to intentionally expose himself.