Being naked at home is a John Dillinger-esque crime?
Curtains!
Keep your curtains closed to avoid misdemeanors
Sometimes it’s nice to walk around your house naked. I, for one, don’t particularly like to do it when there are strangers in the house, but I have interviewed people who do.
But what if the strangers are outside your house and look through your windows and see you naked? For an au natural Virginia man, this scenario has resulted in a conviction for indecent exposure.
Findlaw defines indecent exposure as “purposefully display[ing] one’s genitals in public, causing others to be alarmed or offended.” Erick Williamson, 29, was in his private home, but he was viewable from the public streets. A judge decided Friday that this means Williamson is guilty.
Let’s flesh out the problems with this ruling, after the jump.
Erick Williamson was having a cup of coffee in the buff one October morning. A woman drove by and saw him through his front window. Later, a mother and her 7-year-old son walked by on their way to school and saw him. Rather than averting their eyes, they decided to call the police.
If Williamson was a woman, and the passers-by had been male, the charges might have gone the other way. The male passers-by would be viewed as peeping toms. But that’s a gender issue that I won’t get into. Let’s stick with privacy.
The judge’s ruling basically means that if you have windows, your home is not a private space. The Washington Post says that Judge Ian O’Flaherty compared Williamson to notorious criminal John Dillinger:
[O'Flaherty] likened Williamson to bank robber John Dillinger, who also “thought he was doing nothing wrong when he walked into banks and shot them up.”
Dillinger robbed banks and killed police officers. Williamson drank coffee in the buff. This comparison seems, um, problematic.
So the takeaway lesson here: Walking around your house naked is a crime, but peeping into someone’s windows is okay.
Williamson is appealing the conviction. We at the Not-So Private Parts wish him luck.
