VA - Eric Williamson for indecent exposure, Springfield, 2009

[Danaya]

I don't know, maybe my view is slanted because when my husband was a child he lived in an apartment building with a laundromat. A man ran up the window when he was there by himself and exposed himself. It isn't just an innocent, funny thing. This is a sex crime with a victim and I do not know what happened in this particular case with the coffee man. It just depends on if he intentionaly exposed himself or not.

My Mom also was flashed when she was standing at the side of the street, waiting to cross in broad daylight! A man flashed her his penis and took off running. It really scared her.

 

[jjenny]

I don't know, maybe my view is slanted because when my husband was a child he lived in an apartment building with a laundromat. A man ran up the window when he was there by himself and exposed himself. It isn't just an innocent, funny thing. This is a sex crime with a victim and I do not know what happened in this particular case with the coffee man. It just depends on if he intentionaly exposed himself or not.

My Mom also was flashed when she was standing at the side of the street, waiting to cross in broad daylight! A man flashed her his penis and took off running. It really scared her.

Somebody intentionally flashing is not the same as being seen naked in someone's own home. When I was a child there was a flasher in the park, and I remember police asking us children about it.
The guy in the story was in his own home which is not the same at all as people intentionally running up to children and flashing them.

 

[Danaya]

Jjeny, not necessarily. So, is it okay for a man to stand by the window or in front of it with his penis hanging out while children walk to school? After all, this is his home and he just enjoys standing next to the window to enjoy the scenic view and watch the birdies flutter by. It's not his fault if children see his exposed genitals, this is his home.

As I said before, we don't know if this was intentional or if he was really just making coffee. It is all speculation and I'm only trying to give another side and not completely discredit the victim in this story as there could very well be a crime here.

BTW, it is not legal for somebody to use the excuse of "I was in my own home" if they are intentionaly exposing themselves to passerby. We don't know what he was doing - that's what the investigation is for.

 

[stilettos]

Respectfully snipped...

As a mother to 3 boys, I must interject. When my boys were very little, I often took them into public womens restrooms AND dressing rooms with me. I didn't ALWAYS take them into the public restrooms with me...that occurred only after I saw or read a news story about a little boy being murdered in a public male restroom while his mother waited directly outside the door. The killer walked in after her son, and the mother politely waited outside the door for her little boy. He was murdered in a span of less than 2 minutes. She watched the killer walk out (who, by the way, "looked" like an average male) and the killer actually SMILED at her as he walked out the door. Being polite, she smiled back. Less than a minute later, she cracked the door open just enough to call his name. When she got no answer, she walked inside, loudly proclaiming that she was entering in case anyone else was in there. Her little boys body was in a crumpled heap on the floor. His throat was slit so bad that he was almost beheaded.

Immediately upon reading that, I forever changed my views and actions when it came to public restrooms/dressing rooms when my boys were very little. They ALWAYS came in with me, and you know what? I would say that 99.9% of the women were TOTALLY FINE with it....they were mothers as well, most likely. In fact, the one and only time that I got any flack about it came from a woman who not only never had any little boys of her own, but she was childless and as such, did not have the comprehension of feeling the innate "mother lioness protecting her cubs" feeling that mothers do. Mind you, I allowed her to go on her little tirade about how she was soooo uncomfortable (and UPTIGHT about naked bodies...for shame!) but completely dismissed her as someone whose opinion was irrelevant and needed to get over herself.

It is sooo cliche to say this, but it truly DOES take a village....our children are our future. We must protect them. It is no longer safe to allow our very young boys to go into public restrooms by themselves. When I have grandbabies and if they are boys, I will continue the same practice with them. Now that my boys are older and go to public restrooms by themselves, I often see other young Moms bringing their boys into the ladies bathroom and/or dressing room. My immediate reaction is that they are lucky to have such a diligent, caring mother.

Done with the off-topic rant. Carry on, LOL.

Edited to add: It will be a great day when people can finally stop being so ridiculously uptight about nudeness!

Momma bringing her precious little boy into the restroom....so NOT a problem. The lady you referenced is LooLoo...and not to worry...you have protected your young ones and for that I salute you. I would never let my young male children go to a public restroom alone...just as I would noy allow my female children to do so. I am vigilant....my kids were not unsupervised at all until after 17 or 18. It meant no vacations alone with hub...but they made it to adulthood safely.

This man, we must wait to see if it was intentional flashing or a man with a right to privately air himself out in his own home. Either way, it's a mad world out there and it never hurts to be careful. So very glad my children are grown up.

 

[believe09]

I don't know, maybe my view is slanted because when my husband was a child he lived in an apartment building with a laundromat. A man ran up the window when he was there by himself and exposed himself. It isn't just an innocent, funny thing. This is a sex crime with a victim and I do not know what happened in this particular case with the coffee man. It just depends on if he intentionaly exposed himself or not.

My Mom also was flashed when she was standing at the side of the street, waiting to cross in broad daylight! A man flashed her his penis and took off running. It really scared her.

I am not making light of your mother's experience-in her case this is clearly lewdness. In your husband's case, he was a child and this was clearly something more-at LEAST lewdness.

I will be interested in hearing the results of the investigation-did he know the child was there, did the child see anything and why did she (mom) look a few times if that happened?

The last time I was flashed in public, my girlfriends and I turned on the headlights of the car and told the jerk that we couldnt see anything worth discussing. The guy zipped up and promptly walked away-it was perhaps not the reaction he was looking for. Do I recommend that approach? No, but it worked for us. (We flagged down a cruiser nearby and recommended that they look for the guy...)

 

[kgeaux]

It sounds to me like he wasn't fudging the truth, he just didn't know when he had been seen. So far, it seems that he's been pretty honest because he admitted to walking around naked for several hours, when he could have lied and said he'd already dressed when the woman says she saw him. (His roommates had left three hours earlier.)

I have more of a problem with a passerby walking around a house and peering in windows in order to take offense at what the homeowner is doing. And I don't think that seeing a grown man naked (minus lewd behavior) will traumatize a boy. If that were the case then all men's bathrooms, dressing rooms and locker rooms should be off limit to male children. (Actually I do have a problem with women who bring their sons into women's dressing rooms but that's a whole 'nother issue. Maybe I should call the cops on them… but it probably wouldn't do any good since I'm not a cop's wife.)

I also have a problem with sending five officers to arrest one naked man in his own home. Was that really necessary? Add the fact that they are trying to pin more on this guy and it really seems to me to be an effort to defend the eagerly offended cop's wife.

Who decided this woman was "peering in windows?" The police report states that she first saw him in an open doorway after hearing a noise that attracted her attention. As she and her son accessed the sidewalk, the man walked up to his uncurtained windows and stood there, looking out. The motion of his walking up to the window may have caught her eye. There is absolutely NO evidence that this woman walked up to his window and was peeping in at him.

As for the time the man says he was standing in his doorway and unaware that he'd been seen, he puts that time at 5:30. While he may have stood in the open doorway before dawn, he KNOWS he ALSO stood in the open doorway while it was light out: he isn't blind.

BTW, I think if a grown man stands around nude in the men's room, it definitely could be traumatizing for a youngster.

It is also an assumption that they are "trying to pin more on him." IF, they did not investigate his behavior and he IS a flasher and if his behavior escalates, I guarantee you people would be shouting and screaming that LE had failed to investigate a valid report and let this man's behavior continue.

Don't we only have the passerby saying the time as 8:30? I don't know that I believe this unknown person at all.

We have the passerby stating that it occurred between 8:30 and 8:40 AM as she walked her son to the bus stop. It certainly makes more sense that a walk to the bus stop would occur closer to 8:30 than 5:30 AM. We also have Williamson's statement that he did not dress for several hours, not until "that game got old." (I thought that was an odd thing to say!)

I know that women who are married to cops can lie like dogs.....but her statement of time makes perfect sense when factoring the time school starts.

 

[kgeaux]

I am not making light of your mother's experience-in her case this is clearly lewdness. In your husband's case, he was a child and this was clearly something more-at LEAST lewdness.

I will be interested in hearing the results of the investigation-did he know the child was there, did the child see anything and why did she (mom) look a few times if that happened?

The last time I was flashed in public, my girlfriends and I turned on the headlights of the car and told the jerk that we couldnt see anything worth discussing. The guy zipped up and promptly walked away-it was perhaps not the reaction he was looking for. Do I recommend that approach? No, but it worked for us. (We flagged down a cruiser nearby and recommended that they look for the guy...)

I'm glad that you and your friends took being flashed so well. A man followed me around Walmart a few years ago, buying nothing and leaving the store at the same time I did, got into his vehicle and pulled up behind my mini-van while I was loading my groceries into the back. He had his pants pulled down and exposed himself to me.

I felt so violated. Dirty. Like I needed about fifty showers to get my skin clean and get this man's image out of my mind----, not that I've ever been able to erase the memory. I was also terrified, because this was shortly before Derrick Todd Lee was caught, and I was so afraid this man was going to follow me home. I still feel like I need a shower when I remember this!

 

[gxm]

Who decided this woman was "peering in windows?" The police report states that she first saw him in an open doorway after hearing a noise that attracted her attention. As she and her son accessed the sidewalk, the man walked up to his uncurtained windows and stood there, looking out. The motion of his walking up to the window may have caught her eye. There is absolutely NO evidence that this woman walked up to his window and was peeping in at him.

As for the time the man says he was standing in his doorway and unaware that he'd been seen, he puts that time at 5:30. While he may have stood in the open doorway before dawn, he KNOWS he ALSO stood in the open doorway while it was light out: he isn't blind.

BTW, I think if a grown man stands around nude in the men's room, it definitely could be traumatizing for a youngster.

It is also an assumption that they are "trying to pin more on him." IF, they did not investigate his behavior and he IS a flasher and if his behavior escalates, I guarantee you people would be shouting and screaming that LE had failed to investigate a valid report and let this man's behavior continue.



We have the passerby stating that it occurred between 8:30 and 8:40 AM as she walked her son to the bus stop. It certainly makes more sense that a walk to the bus stop would occur closer to 8:30 than 5:30 AM. We also have Williamson's statement that he did not dress for several hours, not until "that game got old." (I thought that was an odd thing to say!)

I know that women who are married to cops can lie like dogs.....but her statement of time makes perfect sense when factoring the time school starts.

If someone sees a nude person through a doorway, IMO, the common reaction if you don't want to see him again is to avoid looking at his house and/or in his window. A photo of the window has been published. It is obscured by shrubbery, so she had to make an effort to see him the second time. I haven't seen a photo of the side door so I have no idea whether or not it is easy to see from the path she was walking on. As far as I know, none of us do. Has anyone seen a photo of the side door?

I'm not saying that the woman is lying. I'm saying the lady doth protest too much. If one is easily offended by nudity, it is best to not take a second look. I'm also saying that the strong armed response of LE is because a cop's wife made the complaint. I really don't think five cops would have showed up if I'd called it in.

As far as restrooms go, I know men use urinals, so any boy who has used an adult men's room has been exposed to at least partial male nudity. Also, in gym and pool changing rooms, and even some dressing rooms, the women walk around naked so I'm presuming the men do as well. Is that "traumatizing" for a young boy? IMO, it should be considered normal. But apparently some believe that adult male anatomy is so powerfully repulsive that it's damaging for young male psyches to be exposed to it. Yet it's okay for boys to see grown women in the same state of undress. I'm really not understanding the double standard here.

 

[LCoastMom]

So where do you stand on this case? Was the boy harmed by, allegedly, seeing a man walking around his own home in the nude?

BTW, I have a son. And when he was little, I took him into restrooms. It's the older and/or undisciplined boys who are allowed to run around peering under doors that I find fault with. I'm usually a nice person and don't complain but having read this whole brouhaha and the comments insinuating it's okay for boys to ogle women but not men, well I think the next time it happens I'm going to pitch a fit. I have every right to expect privacy when I'm in a bathroom or dressing room. Is it my fault if these kids are traumatized by watching me change clothes or go to the bathroom? When IMO, someone who teaches their kids (sons or daughters) that it's okay to intrude on someone's privacy is not doing a very good job of parenting.

How does everyone feel about fathers taking their daughters into men's bathrooms or dressing rooms? It would be interesting to see if there's a double standard.

I agree with you 1000% your right to privacy, but I completely don't understand why a young child would be traumatized by "peeking" at an adult using a toilet or changing clothes??? Most kids have seen their parents doing these at one time or another.

My son was with me in the woman's room until age 5 or 6. WITH ME being the point. Other little children I've seen "peeking" are usually no more than 3 or 4. The one time I had a lil boy peeking in the room who appeared to be 6 or 7, I nicely but firmly told him to look into ladies dressing rooms or potties is unacceptable and nice boys don't do that.

The difference with men taking a little girl into the mens room, not that I think a whole lot of flashing is going on; but by the time most little girls are of potty training age, they are closing in on 3ish which is the age most men no longer feel comfortable being nude around their daughters (co-bathing etc) most pediatricians suggest this is the right age to learn about modesty and most mens restrooms still have urinals on the wall with without privacy.

If that means I live by a double standard, I can deal with that. All that said; in an emergency I don't think a little girl would be "traumatized " by using a mens room.

 

[gxm]

I'm glad that you and your friends took being flashed so well. A man followed me around Walmart a few years ago, buying nothing and leaving the store at the same time I did, got into his vehicle and pulled up behind my mini-van while I was loading my groceries into the back. He had his pants pulled down and exposed himself to me.

I felt so violated. Dirty. Like I needed about fifty showers to get my skin clean and get this man's image out of my mind----, not that I've ever been able to erase the memory. I was also terrified, because this was shortly before Derrick Todd Lee was caught, and I was so afraid this man was going to follow me home. I still feel like I need a shower when I remember this!

That's a terrible story! I hope you called the police.

I don't think I've ever been flashed; the harassment I've mostly experienced is men grabbing or rubbing up against me. I'm on the petite side and, apparently, some guys think I look like a squeeze toy. It's infuriating.

 

[gxm]

I agree with you 1000% your right to privacy, but I completely don't understand why a young child would be traumatized by "peeking" at an adult using a toilet or changing clothes??? Most kids have seen their parents doing these at one time or another.

My son was with me in the woman's room until age 5 or 6. WITH ME being the point. Other little children I've seen "peeking" are usually no more than 3 or 4. The one time I had a lil boy peeking in the room who appeared to be 6 or 7, I nicely but firmly told him to look into ladies dressing rooms or potties is unacceptable and nice boys don't do that.

The difference with men taking a little girl into the mens room, not that I think a whole lot of flashing is going on; but by the time most little girls are of potty training age, they are closing in on 3ish which is the age most men no longer feel comfortable being nude around their daughters (co-bathing etc) most pediatricians suggest this is the right age to learn about modesty and most mens restrooms still have urinals on the wall with without privacy.

If that means I live by a double standard, I can deal with that. All that said; in an emergency I don't think a little girl would be "traumatized " by using a mens room.

I actually agree with you. I don't think a child would be traumatized. I was trying to show the inconsistency of thinking that the boy who saw Mr. Williamson was traumatized by the experience. As long as Mr. Williamson wasn't doing anything lewd then IMO no harm, no foul.

And I agree, toddlers or young boys who aren't interested in the opposite sex are not a problem in ladies rooms. I have had more than one experience with older boys who were way to old to be in a women's dressing room and whose mothers allowed them to harass other customers.

 

[kgeaux]

If someone sees a nude person through a doorway, IMO, the common reaction if you don't want to see him again is to avoid looking at his house and/or in his window. A photo of the window has been published. It is obscured by shrubbery, so she had to make an effort to see him the second time. I haven't seen a photo of the side door so I have no idea whether or not it is easy to see from the path she was walking on. As far as I know, none of us do. Has anyone seen a photo of the side door?

I'm not saying that the woman is lying. I'm saying the lady doth protest too much. If one is easily offended by nudity, it is best to not take a second look. I'm also saying that the strong armed response of LE is because a cop's wife made the complaint. I really don't think five cops would have showed up if I'd called it in.

As far as restrooms go, I know men use urinals, so any boy who has used an adult men's room has been exposed to at least partial male nudity. Also, in gym and pool changing rooms, and even some dressing rooms, the women walk around naked so I'm presuming the men do as well. Is that "traumatizing" for a young boy? IMO, it should be considered normal. But apparently some believe that adult male anatomy is so powerfully repulsive that it's damaging for young male psyches to be exposed to it. Yet it's okay for boys to see grown women in the same state of undress. I'm really not understanding the double standard here.

There are actually TWO windows. We see him standing in one of them, with a bush partially obscuring the lower half of the window---but one would still be able to tell he wasn't dressed. The other window appears to have no shrubbery in front. We don't know which one he was standing in, we just know which one he chose to pose in.

There are many comments made at a news site local to his home. Several have been made by people who live in the neighborhood or used to. Generally speaking, they all seem to agree that the "walking path" is highly traveled--especially by kids going to the bus stop. The car-port door opens directly onto this pathway......that is from comments, not from a photo. The front windows are within a few feet of the sidewalk which passes in front of the home. Someone had even posted a google map of the home, which shows just how close this home is to the path and the tennis courts next door.....and the sidewalk. If I have a chance to look the site up again, I'll be glad to post the link....be warned, however that there are HUNDREDS of comments to wade through!

I'm not saying the lady is lying either, but she theoretically could be. Just because she is a cops wife doesn't mean she is infallible! The point in question by another poster was if the incident happened at 5:30, as Williamson said, or 8:30, as the passer-by stated. I just tried to express my opinion that while she "could" be lying, her story is that she was walking her child to the bus stop, and that seems to fit in perfectly with HER time-line.

I am of two minds about the number of cops who responded. I have two very dear friends who are police officers, and I know that their families DO get extra fast, extra GOOD response from other officers. (This response doesn't seem to have been extra fast, however. It seems they had to get advice from the prosecutor as to whether what the man had done would constitute either intent or obscenity.) So it is possible that the number of cops at the scene is totally because another cop's wife made the complaint. However, it is also possible that the location of the bus stop got the officer's fired up. Plus, if it was reported that he was nude except for a hard-hat, they might have initially thought they were going to detain a crazy man, so THAT could explain the number of officers.

 

[LCoastMom]

I actually agree with you. I don't think a child would be traumatized. I was trying to show the inconsistency of thinking that the boy who saw Mr. Williamson was traumatized by the experience. As long as Mr. Williamson wasn't doing anything lewd then IMO no harm, no foul.

And I agree, toddlers or young boys who aren't interested in the opposite sex are not a problem in ladies rooms. I have had more than one experience with older boys who were way to old to be in a women's dressing room and whose mothers allowed them to harass other customers.

The mothers you mention with children running wild; should be put out of the store while their pants are down; to see if the enjoy being harassed while they shop. :loser: I don't think I have experienced that behavior, I doubt I would be nice to the mothers of those kids.:croc:

The trauma I remember reading young boys suffered from seeing nude males, was from way back when and IMO was probably written by Freudians.:crazy:

It was said that it set them up for a life long inferiority complex. Thinking they would never possess that amount of 'manliness', probably written by the same psychologist-psychiatrist type who believe women all have penis envy. :shakehead:

Had my son at 7, seen a man drinking a cup of coffee in the nude, he would probably commented 'I hope he doesn't spill the coffee and not given a second thought. :coffeecup:

If the child in this mess is aware of the police involvement and talk of jail for this "offensive act", This kid is going to need extensive therapy, so he doesn't grow up with serious issues dealing with his own nude body. :iamashamed0005:

We all seem to be in agreement that the state of undress while drinking coffee in your own home, should not alone be grounds for this criminal investigation. :thumb:


It is mitigating circumstances of whether Mr Williams was aware he had an audience and any other things he may be doing nude that will be his downfall if it can be proved. I hope the former roomies have put curtains up on all the windows since this happened... :cop: :smiliescale:

 

[jjenny]

Jjeny, not necessarily. So, is it okay for a man to stand by the window or in front of it with his penis hanging out while children walk to school? After all, this is his home and he just enjoys standing next to the window to enjoy the scenic view and watch the birdies flutter by. It's not his fault if children see his exposed genitals, this is his home.

As I said before, we don't know if this was intentional or if he was really just making coffee. It is all speculation and I'm only trying to give another side and not completely discredit the victim in this story as there could very well be a crime here.

BTW, it is not legal for somebody to use the excuse of "I was in my own home" if they are intentionaly exposing themselves to passerby. We don't know what he was doing - that's what the investigation is for.

If people could see him from the street, and he didn't realize it, police could have just given him a warning. As for police investigation, again, I only wish they use that kind of vigor to investigate all the crimes. Going around the neighborhood asking people if they saw him naked? Putting up fliers? Now imagine somebody saw you in a less than perfect state of dress from the street and police did all that. How embarrassing would that be?

 

[fivekidz4me]

As the story unfolds...
we have an allegedly drunk, recently fired, naked man walking aound in front of open windows for anyone to see from 5:30 to 8:30am

parents/children arriving at a bus stop across the street

Doesn't sound like a good combo at all.

Just because he was possibly impaired, doesn't mean he didn't intend to be seen...as anyone whose been around a naked drunk can understand how easily they become exhibonists, afterall, the state of being impaired can make people forget how truly outrageous they acted.

Should people be looking into windows? Heck no!
Should people be naked in their front windows with a bus stop across the street? Heck No!

I highly doubt anyone would call the police if they saw him naked making coffee (a brief situation, such as those others have posted)....but I totally believe they would call if the guy was naked and strutting his stuff in front of his window, as children waited for the bus.

 

[STEADFAST]

There are actually TWO windows. We see him standing in one of them, with a bush partially obscuring the lower half of the window---but one would still be able to tell he wasn't dressed. The other window appears to have no shrubbery in front. We don't know which one he was standing in, we just know which one he chose to pose in.
(SNIPPED by STEADFAST)

Actually, that one picture we saw into his front windows must have been taken with the camera on the ground! If you watch this video report which shows the front of his house, you'll see that the shrubs are only about 18" high and the windows go almost to the floor. So if he were standing in one of those front windows, he'd definitely know his man parts could be seen.
(Got to admit, I haven't listened to this video, only watched it. I've got some football game and the dishwasher and the family all making too much noise.)
http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/Virginia_Man_Busted_for_Naked_Coffee_102209

I wonder if people would feel differently if it had been a 7-year-old girl? As far as the law goes, however, the amount of trauma the victim of indecent exposure undergoes is irrelevant. On the other hand, I've read that Virginia's statute says that the "exposer" must do something lewd besides just show his stuff, so not sure Mr. Williamson did anything like that. We sure haven't heard that he did.

 

[gxm]

Actually, that one picture we saw into his front windows must have been taken with the camera on the ground! If you watch this video report which shows the front of his house, you'll see that the shrubs are only about 18" high and the windows go almost to the floor. So if he were standing in one of those front windows, he'd definitely know his man parts could be seen.
(Got to admit, I haven't listened to this video, only watched it. I've got some football game and the dishwasher and the family all making too much noise.)
http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/Virginia_Man_Busted_for_Naked_Coffee_102209

I wonder if people would feel differently if it had been a 7-year-old girl? As far as the law goes, however, the amount of trauma the victim of indecent exposure undergoes is irrelevant. On the other hand, I've read that Virginia's statute says that the "exposer" must do something lewd besides just show his stuff, so not sure Mr. Williamson did anything like that. We sure haven't heard that he did.

Thanks for the link. I had envisioned the path and sidewalk being much closer to the house. There's not even a sidewalk on his side of the street. I'm having a really hard time figuring out how anyone could get a good look at him from that distance. I'm now wondering if the woman and boy weren't trespassing. There doesn't seem to be any other way to get a good look.

Also, if mom and son were presumably standing there waiting for the bus, does she maintain he was seen the entire time? Or is the bus stop not precisely in line of sight to his front windows? Her story sounds even more bogus now that I've seen the video, and just leaves me with more questions.

If the exposure is accidental and does not involve sexual lewdness then I think it should be treated as a life lesson, regardless of the child's gender. IMO, it probably does more damage to the child to make a big deal about it.

 

[jjenny]

Thanks for the link. I had envisioned the path and sidewalk being much closer to the house. There's not even a sidewalk on his side of the street. I'm having a really hard time figuring out how anyone could get a good look at him from that distance. I'm now wondering if the woman and boy weren't trespassing. There doesn't seem to be any other way to get a good look.

Also, if mom and son were presumably standing there waiting for the bus, does she maintain he was seen the entire time? Or is the bus stop not precisely in line of sight to his front windows? Her story sounds even more bogus now that I've seen the video, and just leaves me with more questions.

If the exposure is accidental and does not involve sexual lewdness then I think it should be treated as a life lesson, regardless of the child's gender. IMO, it probably does more damage to the child to make a big deal about it.

The original story was that the mother was cutting through the yard of the house. Although some here posted this was shown to be false, I've yet to see a link in support of that idea.
From watching the TV program about this, I believe the bus stop is across the street. I sincerely doubt anyone would be able to see him from across the street-that's quite a distance from his windows.

 

[STEADFAST]

Thanks for the link. I had envisioned the path and sidewalk being much closer to the house. There's not even a sidewalk on his side of the street. I'm having a really hard time figuring out how anyone could get a good look at him from that distance. I'm now wondering if the woman and boy weren't trespassing. There doesn't seem to be any other way to get a good look.

Also, if mom and son were presumably standing there waiting for the bus, does she maintain he was seen the entire time? Or is the bus stop not precisely in line of sight to his front windows? Her story sounds even more bogus now that I've seen the video, and just leaves me with more questions.

If the exposure is accidental and does not involve sexual lewdness then I think it should be treated as a life lesson, regardless of the child's gender. IMO, it probably does more damage to the child to make a big deal about it.

It doesn't look like it on the video, but there is a sidewalk in front of his house, and the path is adjacent to and connected to the driveway going to his carport -- according to the satellite photo on Google Maps. I can't remember his address now, but it's all somewhere near the beginning of this thread.
Since we haven't heard anything about a lewd act (I guess by that they mean grabbing himself or making suggestive motions), it may be that he will win his case or that it will be dropped. For the law on this, I'm going by the word of an attorney who was interviewed.
The thing that irritates me the most about this whole situation is not his drunkenly exposing himself. It's the way he brought this to the media and painted such a false picture of the circumstances in a way that vilifies the woman and child. No one would have heard of this if he hadn't wanted to publicize that ridiculous story about himself innocently making coffee in the wee hours when a woman trespassed and peeked at him -- in support of his lawsuit against the city, no doubt. I'm amazed at how many people in the world are so careful to give him the benefit of all doubts but at the same time make outlandish accusations about the woman who reported him. Talk about blaming the victim!

EDITED TO ADD -- Just occurred to me you might think I'm directing this at you, gxm. Not at all. I'm talking about bloggers I've read.

 

[jjenny]

It doesn't look like it on the video, but there is a sidewalk in front of his house, and the path is adjacent to and connected to the driveway going to his carport -- according to the satellite photo on Google Maps. I can't remember his address now, but it's all somewhere near the beginning of this thread.
Since we haven't heard anything about a lewd act (I guess by that they mean grabbing himself or making suggestive motions), it may be that he will win his case or that it will be dropped. For the law on this, I'm going by the word of an attorney who was interviewed.
The thing that irritates me the most about this whole situation is not his drunkenly exposing himself. It's the way he brought this to the media and painted such a false picture of the circumstances in a way that vilifies the woman and child. No one would have heard of this if he hadn't wanted to publicize that ridiculous story about himself innocently making coffee in the wee hours when a woman trespassed and peeked at him -- in support of his lawsuit against the city, no doubt. I'm amazed at how many people in the world are so careful to give him the benefit of all doubts but at the same time make outlandish accusations about the woman who reported him. Talk about blaming the victim!

EDITED TO ADD -- Just occurred to me you might think I'm directing this at you, gxm. Not at all. I'm talking about bloggers I've read.

You keep repeating that he painted a false picture. What evidence do you have he wasn't actually making coffee? He got the time wrong? If he didn't know when the woman saw him, then he could have innocently gotten the time wrong. The fact that he was so off on the time, supports the idea he didn't know the woman saw him. The original story was that the woman was cutting through the property to get to the bus stop. You say that is false, she wasn't on the property? It might be that many people cut through the property to get to the bus stop, but that doesn't make the story that the woman cut through the property false. If you have information that in fact she was not on the property, why not post it?