Main > Everything Else

Sunbathing topless legal in Ohio?

<< < (3/4) > >>

AtomSmasher:

--- Quote from: pinballjim on December 31, 2007, 01:39:09 pm ---What was he doing in a park "day after day" trolling for women?

Anyway, from what I've read of it, it sounds like entrapment.  Particularly with the touching.  But there's a context from this case that's missing in order to drum up controversy.

--- End quote ---
I'm not saying this guy is not a pervert, he very well could be, but when a hot topless woman, who is touching him, asks him to take it out and he gets busted for doing what she asked...   

There just has to be something the article isn't saying because that sounds like the very definition of entrapment.  If she did not ask him to take it out, then I would agree with the conviction, but (according to the article) it was her idea for him to break the law.

entrapment: "the luring by a law-enforcement agent of a person into committing a crime." - dictionary.com

*edit*  I just thought I'd add that since they have no evidence of him being a repeat offender, they can not use the fact that some people use that park to masturbate and have sex to convict him.  It could just be he likes to pick up women at that park and was a perfect law-biding citizen before he was asked to do something illegal.  It's very possible thats not the case, but there no evidence that its not (at from what that article says).

AtomSmasher:

--- Quote from: pinballjim on December 31, 2007, 02:03:19 pm ---That varies dramatically by state.  Some states allow information like that.

I doubt she explicitly told him, "take out your penis".  I watched the video but didn't check to see if it had audio.

Guy, honestly, should have gotten up and walked off as soon as that car rolled up.  It was the three fattest cops I've ever seen!  :-D

He'll get off on appeal.


--- End quote ---
I find it hard to believe that in some states they can legally say, with zero evidence to prove it, that a guy is a repeat offender simply because of the location of the crime.  It seems like any decent lawyer would be able to easily argue against such flimsy circumstantial evidence.

I didn't even know there was a video, I'm just going by what the article says, "she asked to see Garrison's penis; he unzipped his pants and complied."  It definately seems like the article is leaving something out....or the guy had an absolutely horrible lawyer.

ChadTower:
When did it start that taking out your package at the request of a topless woman makes you a pervert?   :dizzy:

Seriously, I'm a major pervert, I guess.

In theory.   :banghead:

"She asked to see Garrison's penis... his lawyer claims it is not only an act of entrapment, but that he only showed her Mr Hat's penis anyway."

Jdurg:

--- Quote from: ChadTower on December 31, 2007, 08:30:05 pm ---When did it start that taking out your package at the request of a topless woman makes you a pervert?   :dizzy:

Seriously, I'm a major pervert, I guess.

In theory.   :banghead:

"She asked to see Garrison's penis... his lawyer claims it is not only an act of entrapment, but that he only showed her Mr Hat's penis anyway."

--- End quote ---

Hell, just hearing about a topless woman in a park made me take out my penis.  Then again, I'm here in my own house with nobody around.............  ummm............ maybe I shouldn't have said that?   ;) ;D

tommy:
Definitely should not have said that.  :laugh2:

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version