It's illegal to be naked in your own house now?

Pages

Appearantly so.

A debate continues in Northern Virginia that is bringing the issue of civil liberties to the national stage. A 29-year-old Springfield man says he was making coffee in the nude was arrested after a neighbor saw him, and on Wednesday police were back out in his neighborhood looking for others who might have seen him.

Eric Williamson, 29, is a commercial diver who grew up in Hawaii and rents home with several co-workers. Williamson told FOX 5's Will Thomas his roommates were not home and he walked into the kitchen to make coffee about 8:30 a.m. Monday.

"Yes, I wasn't wearing any clothes but I was alone, in my own home and just got out of bed. It was dark and I had no idea anyone was outside looking in at me," Williamson said.

But at about 8:30 a.m. on Monday morning, a neighbor walking her son to school says he deliberately exposed himself-- not once, but twice. First, she says it happened as he was standing in the glass doorway in the kitchen, and then again at a front window.

I swear there was a time when people would just walk past...maybe leave a note in your mailbox that about your windows being open. But I suppose we have to think of the children.

One more for the sex offender list!

With the evidence here it could go either way. Dude could be exposing himself, or just walking around on the lighted stage of his house. Hard to tell. Also, we don't know much about the neighbor, their relationship, etc.

I saw this story too -- hilarious. HILARIOUS.

There's got to be a way to have the woman who reported this arrested or at least sued under some sort of peeping tom clause. She's a gd pervert for staring into a man's house like that, and I for one am shocked, shocked, that such a behavior is tolerated around children.

Yeah, I thought that too.

Robear wrote:

With the evidence here it could go either way.

Wow. You and I obviously have radically different notions of what you are entitled to do inside your own home.

I would need exceptional, exceptional evidence that Eric Williamson intended to maliciously expose himself before I even entertained supporting arresting him. As in, he's mounted some kind of Jumbo-tron on his roof and is using it to beam images of his junk to the neighborhood. It's his house. If someone wants to look into his windows, well, that's their problem, not his.

My wife and I have had this discussion a couple of times. The houses in our neighborhood are positioned so that it'd be VERY easy to look into your neighbors windows. She always shuts the curtains before she undresses or changes upstairs. I don't. If someone wants to look into my windows at my fat naked ass then that's their problem.

As long as I'm not pressing my dong against the window I have every right to be buck naked.

Bear wrote:

As long as I'm not pressing my dong against the window I have every right to be buck naked.

We are a society that thinks it's safer and more wholesome for a child to see an evisceration than a nipple. Your body is a weapon, and you don't have the right to go firing off your weapon in your home if you might hit your neighbor.

At least, that's how the logic goes. I find it absurd and wish we, as a society, could agree that everyone has these bits and noticing that will not scar someone for life.

Bear wrote:

My wife and I have had this discussion a couple of times. The houses in our neighborhood are positioned so that it'd be VERY easy to look into your neighbors windows. She always shuts the curtains before she undresses or changes upstairs. I don't. If someone wants to look into my windows at my fat naked ass then that's their problem.

As long as I'm not pressing my dong against the window I have every right to be buck naked.

Yup. There's usually an expectation of privacy criteria around deciding these cases. It should come down to intent but you never know these days.

My assumption is that the woman in question got a girlboner, was embarrassed, and wants to blame the dashing hawaiian diver for giving her "the vapahs."

Next item for the HoA's of america.

thou shalt not expose yourself to the appliances

Throw her in the clink for invading his privacy by looking in his windows. It makes as much sense as putting him in jail.

While I do think the guy has the right to wear -- or not wear -- whatever the heck he feels in his own house, I would like to point out that even with the sun coming up later, at 8:30 AM in October in Virginia, it is no longer "dark" outside, as he claimed. It would have been light enough for someone to easily see inside. And when you live directly across from a school bus stop, as this guy did, you really ought to consider the appropriate application of window shades a little more.

People need to get over nakedness, yes, but at the same time: Close the damn shades, already.

If you don't want to see naked people, don't look in windows.

Or on the internet.

KaterinLHC wrote:

While I do think the guy has the right to wear -- or not wear -- whatever the heck he feels in his own house, I would like to point out that even with the sun coming up later, at 8:30 AM in October in Virginia, it is no longer "dark" outside, as he claimed. It would have been light enough for someone to easily see inside. And when you live directly across from a school bus stop, as this guy did, you really ought to consider the appropriate application of window shades a little more.

People need to get over nakedness, yes, but at the same time: Close the damn shades, already.

Also, the fact that it is dark outside makes things the woman's complaint more understandable in many respects. If it was bright outside and the lights were off in the house, it would be hard to see beyond the first few feet from the window. If it was dark out and the lights were on inside the house, it would have the effect of a lit movie screen in a darkened theater.

it's definitely a lot easier to see into someone's windows when it's dark outside and he's got a light on inside.

And one would think that this is a situation that would more easily be resolved with 30 seconds of pointing and laughing rather than an officer canvassing a neighborhood with what I can only imagine are "HAVE YOU SEEN THIS WEINER?" posters.

KaterinLHC wrote:

People need to get over nakedness, yes, but at the same time: Close the damn shades, already.

It just seems like there might be better routes to 'close the damn shades' than having to cops bust down his door.

Little Raven wrote:
KaterinLHC wrote:

People need to get over nakedness, yes, but at the same time: Close the damn shades, already.

It just seems like there might be better routes to 'close the damn shades' than having to cops bust down his door.

I'm a big fan of post-it notes on doors. Well, except when someone parks in my reserved space. Then I just pee in their air conditioning vent.

KaterinLHC wrote:

While I do think the guy has the right to wear -- or not wear -- whatever the heck he feels in his own house, I would like to point out that even with the sun coming up later, at 8:30 AM in October in Virginia, it is no longer "dark" outside, as he claimed. It would have been light enough for someone to easily see inside. And when you live directly across from a school bus stop, as this guy did, you really ought to consider the appropriate application of window shades a little more.

People need to get over nakedness, yes, but at the same time: Close the damn shades, already.

At the same time, it's important to keep the following in mind: He was making coffee. Therefore, he hadn't had his morning coffee. I know I'm incapable of considering anything beyond base environmental reactions until cup #2.

Irongut wrote:
Little Raven wrote:
KaterinLHC wrote:

People need to get over nakedness, yes, but at the same time: Close the damn shades, already.

It just seems like there might be better routes to 'close the damn shades' than having to cops bust down his door.

Well, the mother might've been concerned that if she walked up to the naked man's door to complain, it might escalate the situation.

I wouldn't be surprised if she had a bone to pick with him about an unrelated affair.

whoops.

Little Raven wrote:
KaterinLHC wrote:

People need to get over nakedness, yes, but at the same time: Close the damn shades, already.

It just seems like there might be better routes to 'close the damn shades' than having to cops bust down his door.

Well, the mother might've been concerned that if she walked up to the naked man's door to complain, the 'problem' might get bigger.

If the guy did stand in front of his glass door and windows, maybe he isn't so innocent after all. Put Judge Judy on the case.

If this guy had just been a gamer, he would know that Hot Coffee'll get you in trouble every time.

Little Raven wrote:
KaterinLHC wrote:

People need to get over nakedness, yes, but at the same time: Close the damn shades, already.

It just seems like there might be better routes to 'close the damn shades' than having to cops bust down his door.

You will find no argument from me. Like I said, guy has a right to wear/not wear whatever the heck he feels like in his own house. He should just have the common courtesy to close the shades, esp. in front of a school bus stop. But it ain't the police's job to go in and do it for him. They (should) have bigger fish to fry than errant ding-dongs.

SpacePPoliceman wrote:

At the same time, it's important to keep the following in mind: He was making coffee. Therefore, he hadn't had his morning coffee. I know I'm incapable of considering anything beyond base environmental reactions until cup #2.

He was also apparently hungover. -5 to Mental Agility.

Wow. You and I obviously have radically different notions of what you are entitled to do inside your own home.

Not at all, I didn't comment on that at all. The fact is that we don't know whether he was walking around, or standing in a glass doorway fondling his erect member and staring at the kid, or anything in between. That's what I commented on, not whether just walking around naked is a problem. Way to spin it, though.

This is not that rare, Wisconsin has similar exposure laws. Stemming from child protection laws.

In Michigan, the Supreme Court upheld nudity in the home and surrounding property when a man was tried for mowing his lawn in the nude. Based on prior rulings for sun bathing.

I wonder if this is going to effect how the GWJ crew records the weekly conference call...

I'm praying for the Hand Towel of Heterosexuality, myself...

Seth wrote:

I wouldn't be surprised if she had a bone to pick with him about an unrelated affair.

IMAGE(http://www.dahmus.org/blogimg/fry-see-what-you-did-there.jpg)

As "common courtesy" becomes more and more of an oxymoron, so, too, seems the ability or urge to politely tell someone that they've failed to be courteous. Even if the original infraction is accidental, the response seems to escalate straight to law enforcement. I guess because it's fun to get the police involved and get some kind of revenge? I don't know.

I'm starting to think that the police should start charging for things like this if they could easily be handled by the parties involved and it isn't a repeating offense.

Story from the woman.

The woman who reported to police that a man in a Springfield home exposed himself to her and her son has a different story than what Eric Williamson has told to local media.

The woman told police it was 8:40 a.m. when she was walking her son to school along a path between houses. She said they first spotted Williamson naked in an open door in the car port of his home.

She also told police that Williamson then walked across the house to a large window, facing the way she was walking.

...

Channel 5 reports the woman and 7-year-old boy who saw him naked apparently had cut through Williamson's front yard from a nearby path.

Now I'm really confused as to why the cops are involved. You're trespassing on someone's property and then calling the cops because you see them naked?

I don't know if they added to the article since the OP, but it sounds like the guys story doesn't jive with the neighbors story. The neighbors are claiming that he intentionally exposed himself, more than once. If that's the case, then this certainly deserves investigation.

Pages