A Frightening Myth about Sex Offenders

[Secular Sanity]

Arrest

On September 23, 2017 Rose Picklo was arrested and kicked out of TCF Stadium topless by police and charged with exposing herself in front of a 7-year-old boy and others in the stands during a Minnesota United game.  

Rose M. Picklo, of Minneapolis, was charged Monday in Hennepin County District Court with indecent exposure and indecent exposure in front of a child, a gross misdemeanor. Picklo, 23, was jailed Saturday night and released two days later on $1,000 bond.  

If convicted of the gross misdemeanor charge, Picklo faces a maximum penalty of 1 year behind bars and/or a $3,000.

Her first court appearance is slated for Oct. 9.

If she’s found guilty, and it happens again, it’s a felony.  She’ll be required to register as a sex offender.

The boy’s mother stated that it was a hot night and a couple of men in that part of the stands also were bare-chested.

[Syne]

We should be able to look to our highest court and expect decisions to be based on reason and science rather than fear.

Did the Supreme Court mandate minimum sentences for these offenses? No?
Is that what you're advocating...since you've mentioned the "highest court" so much?

The cases that the Supreme Court will be reviewing, which are presented in the OP will determine whether or not there’s been a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. It’s important because it is too easy to overlook constitutional violations when they are perpetrated against those the public despises.  

So you're just jumping at boogeymen at this point.

Maybe it's an issue of local judicial latitude and state policy. You'd have to go state by state to change that.

The Supreme Court’s decision will set a precedent in which all inferior courts are bound to obey.

They've already heard cases that do that.

"Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court unanimously struck down a North Carolina law that bars the use of commercial social networking sites, including Facebook, by registered sex offenders.
A lower court upheld the law, but lawyers for Lester Gerard Packingham -- who is a registered sex offender -- say it is too broad and swept in their client even though his Facebook posting concerned the fact that his parking ticket was dismissed.
...
At oral arguments, David T. Goldberg said that the law reaches "vast swaths of core First Amendment activity that is totally unrelated to the government's preventative purpose." Goldberg noted that his client was not accused of communicating with or viewing the profile of a minor, but "speaking to his friends and family" about his experience in traffic court."

[Secular Sanity]

Err!  Different law, different issue.

[Syne]

Shows the willingness to challenge laws that are truly unjust.

[confused2]

If she’s found guilty, and it happens again, it’s a felony. She’ll be required to register as a sex offender.

Interesting precedent if a judge rules that the girl is responsible for what she does while intoxicated.

[Syne]

Missed this post earlier.

Arrest

On September 23, 2017 Rose Picklo was arrested and kicked out of TCF Stadium topless by police and charged with exposing herself in front of a 7-year-old boy and others in the stands during a Minnesota United game.  

Rose M. Picklo, of Minneapolis, was charged Monday in Hennepin County District Court with indecent exposure and indecent exposure in front of a child, a gross misdemeanor. Picklo, 23, was jailed Saturday night and released two days later on $1,000 bond.  

If convicted of the gross misdemeanor charge, Picklo faces a maximum penalty of 1 year behind bars and/or a $3,000.

Her first court appearance is slated for Oct. 9.

If she’s found guilty, and it happens again, it’s a felony.  She’ll be required to register as a sex offender.

The boy’s mother stated that it was a hot night and a couple of men in that part of the stands also were bare-chested.

Wouldn't her being found guilty AGAIN be the exact same sort of recidivism that warrants harsher punishment?
And are you trying to justify it with "free the nipple"?

---

If she’s found guilty, and it happens again, it’s a felony. She’ll be required to register as a sex offender.

Interesting precedent if a judge rules that the girl is responsible for what she does while intoxicated.

Good point.

[Secular Sanity]

Interesting precedent if a judge rules that the girl is responsible for what she does while intoxicated.

From what I understand, voluntary intoxication is never a defense for a general intent crime. General intent means only that you need to intend your actions, not any particular result.

---

And are you trying to justify it with "free the nipple"?

Your nipples are free. Why shouldn't mine be?

[Syne]

And are you trying to justify it with "free the nipple"?

Your nipples are free. Why shouldn't mine be?

Ummm...oh yeah...law.