- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/1/24 at 1:36 pm to Roy Curado
But Bill Clinton and Monica were made famous and didn’t even have sex? Why are gays and minorities protected?
Posted on 2/1/24 at 1:57 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
Link me to what you believe to be the controlling statute in this situation.
District of Columbia Official Code §22-1312: Lewd, Indecent, or Obscene Acts
What's Prohibited?
Under District of Columbia indecent exposure laws, it is considered unlawful for a person to make an obscene or indecent exposure of his or her genitalia or anus, to engage in masturbation, or to engage in a sexual act in public. The statute also makes it unlawful for a person to make an obscene or indecent sexual proposal to a minor.
Penalty
In Washington D.C., an individual who violates any provision of this law will be guilty of a misdemeanor. Upon conviction, a person guilty of this crime may be fined up to $500, imprisoned for up to 90 days, or
Any public building is by definition public.
Whether someone walked in or it was captured on closed circuit security makes no legal difference whatsoever.
They had no legal right to be naked having sex in a public building and no defense attorney would even attempt to claim they did.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 1:59 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
You can have sex wherever you're legally allowed to physically be as long as no one sees you, sure.
You are confusing getting caught with the legalities of the act itself.
The act itself is prohibited by law as I outlined above.
They wouldn't have been caught had they not recorded and shared it at which time, but they did and now it becomes evidence of said crime.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:04 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
Also, it would be nice at some point for any of you to address Corinthian's assertion that this exact situation happened with a Republican staffer a few years ago and the exact same outcome occurred.
quote:
tide06:
What does part politics have to do with this? This deviant was a progressive. If Lyndsay Graham did the same thing in a bathroom with a staffer I want him held accountable too.
That they werent prosecuted doesnt make it not a crime, it makes it evidence of a two tiered judicial system.
A random citizen would've been prosecuted for the same thing which is why tourists dont have sex in the senate chamber when its not in use.
This post was edited on 2/1/24 at 2:06 pm
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:09 pm to Roy Curado
Gay porn and cocaine out of the White House and no arrests. Get a guided tour but you MAGA you get 20 years….
And yet people still csll Trump a dictator….
And yet people still csll Trump a dictator….
This post was edited on 2/1/24 at 2:12 pm
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:12 pm to tide06
quote:
Any public building is by definition public.
After a quick review of the case law, your interpretation is incorrect. In fact, it being a “public building” is irrelevant. There is caselaw, for example, pertaining to the basement of a private home.
The actual standard is that the statute requires exposure “at such a time and place where as a reasonable man knows or should know his act will be open to the observation of others.” In the few cases I’ve skimmed, doors being closed and/or locked are of significant importance as they illustrate an intent for the act to remain private.
Your interpretation isn’t an unreasonable one, but that doesn’t make it any less incorrect.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:14 pm to tide06
quote:
A random citizen would've been prosecuted for the same thing which is why tourists dont have sex in the senate chamber when its not in use.
A random citizen doesn’t have the right to be in the senate chamber when it isn’t in use. That staffer apparently did.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:15 pm to Townedrunkard
quote:
Gay porn and cocaine out of the White House and no arrests
I figure DC like Hollywood runs on gay sex and drugs.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:34 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
That staffer apparently did.
Doesnt mean they can walk around naked or engage in sexual acts or they are in violation of DC law.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:36 pm to tide06
quote:
Doesnt mean they can walk around naked or engage in sexual acts or they are in violation of DC law.
Go back and read my other post. Your interpretation of the law appears to be incorrect, at least after a cursory glance at the jurisprudence. Though I’ll admit it was just cursory.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:38 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
In the few cases I’ve skimmed, doors being closed and/or locked are of significant importance as they illustrate an intent for the act to remain private.
Completely incorrect.
The standard is typically "potentially visible", not visible.
A closed door that can be opened does not meet a threshold of being protected or private.
This post was edited on 2/1/24 at 2:41 pm
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:40 pm to tide06
quote:
Completely incorrect. The standard is "potentially visible", not visible. The statute I outlined is clear on that point. A closed door that can be opened does not meet a threshold of being protected or private.
Where are you getting this? It’s neither in the statute nor in the jurisprudence I’ve seen.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:47 pm to Roy Curado
Couldn't get their phone locations to cooperate?
Posted on 2/1/24 at 2:47 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
Where are you getting this? It’s neither in the statute nor in the jurisprudence I’ve seen.
I don't have DC case law access, if you have evidence showing there is a provision allowing you to have sex in a public place if you close a door I'd be happy to take a look.
Don't have any more time to research DC law and you didn't produce anything to backup your assertion that a closed door in a public space conveys protection from the statute above.
This post was edited on 2/2/24 at 8:14 am
Posted on 2/1/24 at 3:04 pm to tide06
It should be pretty self-explanatory, it's indecent EXPOSURE
If it was illegal to be naked in any publicly owned building even if you can't be seen, they would just call it public nudity or something.
The whole crime is about exposing yourself to people who don't wanna see you.
The hearing room was closed, it wasn't functioning as a public area and noone was exposed to the nudity.
If it was illegal to be naked in any publicly owned building even if you can't be seen, they would just call it public nudity or something.
The whole crime is about exposing yourself to people who don't wanna see you.
The hearing room was closed, it wasn't functioning as a public area and noone was exposed to the nudity.
This post was edited on 2/1/24 at 3:20 pm
Posted on 2/1/24 at 3:04 pm to tide06
quote:
I don't have DC case law access, if you have evidence showing there is a provision allowing you to have sex in a public place if you close a door I'd be happy to take a look. Don't have any more time to research DC law and you didn't produce anything to backup your assertion that a closed door in a public space conveys protection from the statue above.
So it was simply your understanding and interpretation. I understand
The case I was quoting from is Parnigoni v. District of Columbia, 933 A.2nd 823. After spending a few more minutes with it, Parnigoni was decided when the statute didn’t have an express “in public” element, which was why it covered a private residence. However, it is still cited to in later cases for the rest of its analysis, simply with a parenthetical that part of the analysis pertained to an element of the statute that didn’t previously exist. e.g. Bolz v. District of Columbia, 149 A.3d 1130.
Posted on 2/1/24 at 3:10 pm to Shexter
quote:about 90 percent of govt activities are grandstanding wastes of time
The whole ordeal was a huge pain in the arse.....
Posted on 2/1/24 at 3:21 pm to Roy Curado
The liberals celebrate gay arse fricking and all manner of sexually deviant behavior whenever possible. Did anyone honestly expect this turd burglar to be charged with a crime?
Posted on 2/1/24 at 3:31 pm to Corinthians420
Lefties can conjure up a moral code when Trump is involved. Imagine if this was 2 MAGAs that snuck into Nancy pelosi’s office and filmed a porno on her desk. It’s all you would hear about anytime you turned on the TV and the Dems would be livid. And they would be in jail right now.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News