
Sponge Bob No Pants originally uploaded by Jackie
Over a year ago, a Prior Lake resident was arrested originally with a charge of disorderly conduct when he allegedly exposed himself on the shore of the lake to a father and daughter while attempting to gain their attention by waving his arms excitedly. This was apparently later changed to indecent exposure when he was formally charged.
However, according to a recent Savage Pacer article, the man was recently acquitted on charges after several people came forward and noted he was not being indecent in his actions. These witnesses refuted the claims originally made by the father and daughter and the Scott County deputy who saw the naked man, wearing only a baseball cap, who tried to put on shorts and walk away as he approached.
His acquittal wasn’t the strangest part of the proceedings, it was the comment from his lawyer following the trial.
From the article:
“It doesn’t matter if he was clothed or not, he wasn’t being indecent,” Engh said. “He should never have been charged.”
So while six people came forward to testify on his behalf that he was not being indecent, according to the statute it would appear that just by being nude in public that he was in violation of the law.
What do you think about this one? Do you think he was in violation of the law by sitting on the shore of the lake nude regardless if he was trying to being attention to himself or not? What about the six people who came forward to testify on his behalf? Would you testify for someone who was sitting nude on a lakeshore? Do you think that nudity laws should be repealed? Whatever you have to say about this one go ahead and comment on as I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Dakota Inmate Dashboard







September 15th, 2011 at 8:06 am
According to the statute you linked to, the behavior has to be considered “lewd”, and it does not look like just being naked is against the law. I would suggest that because he was also on his own private beach, that helped his case.
September 15th, 2011 at 9:43 am
I certainly understand the appeal of sunbathing nude in one’s own yard though I live on a much too busy street to try it for myself.
As long as someone is on their own property, is not being lewd in their nudity, and most importantly, is attractive, I think the law should not apply.
September 15th, 2011 at 9:44 am
CC, I think you need to click this link and decide for yourself: http://www.shakopeenews.com/view/full_story/13866990/article-Man-allegedly-exposed-himself-to-boaters-on-private-beach
September 15th, 2011 at 9:47 am
Hmmm, I wouldn’t rule him out based on the head shot alone. Anything that shows more of his body though?
September 15th, 2011 at 10:44 am
The whole story is odd. The deputy jumped out of his boot and ran toward the beach? Sounds like he was handling it like a felony stop.
I suspect prior bad blood between the boater and the people who owned that house on the beach and the boater was in the right place at the right time.
September 15th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Nudity is alright. Well, depending on the person who is nude.
September 15th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
I see nothing wrong with public nudity as long as it’s not lewd. I’m glad he was acquitted.
It boggles my mind how some societies have determined that certain portions of the human body are not to be shown in public. What’s the big deal?
September 15th, 2011 at 2:28 pm
I personally don’t mind nudity, I certainly don’t believe it should be illegal but honestly, I don’t want to see some dude’s grey haired, wrinkly dick. You want to wander around nude dude? Don’t do it when there are people on the lake for Father’s Day.
September 15th, 2011 at 2:43 pm
I really don’t have any issue with public nudity, and I don’t particularly care that someone has to be attractive for it to be o.k. I think more kids get screwed up by prudish parental behavior than if we were all just a little less concerned about nudity.
Perhaps someone can explain what it is that is so bad about a young kid, boy or girl, seeing a naked man or woman sunning on the beach?
I don’t know that I consider someone waving to a boat with his wangus flopping around as being lewd. In fact I guess I’d have to call the idiots with the pants hanging down and always grabbing their crotch to be more lewd than a nude guy waving to me.
September 15th, 2011 at 3:42 pm
Well said, Mikeh. When someone uses attractiveness as a litmus test, it tells you something about that person.
September 15th, 2011 at 3:58 pm
Lenny, is your wife ugly? No? What does that say about you? Give me a break.
September 15th, 2011 at 4:29 pm
Lenny.
Post a pic!
Just kidding.
lefty
September 15th, 2011 at 4:40 pm
Bill, my comment wasn’t directed at you, but I can see why you responded as you did. I failed to complete my thought at the time.
Looking back at what I wrote, I should have written “When someone uses attractiveness as a litmus test for whether public nudity is acceptable or not…”. Perhaps that’s more agreeable to you, perhaps not.
If you don’t want to see an old man’s shriveled up dick, I have no problem with that. I don’t want to see it either. If we ever get to the point where the crotch is no less offensive than the face, and a naked old man is in my vicinity, I just won’t look at his unit.
September 15th, 2011 at 9:11 pm
He’s 56. Is that old?
September 16th, 2011 at 7:25 am
Ancient.
September 17th, 2011 at 7:49 pm
ummm, he’s that young??
bb
September 20th, 2011 at 7:53 am
In naked years, 56 is like a million or something.
September 20th, 2011 at 11:57 am
Depends upon how rich you are (how many trainers you can afford to pay).
February 15th, 2012 at 7:01 am
[...] at any age “obscene” especially when Savage is directly adjacent to a town which doesn’t find nudity to be indecent? Do you think that the woman really should have called the police over this? Have you ever been [...]
July 17th, 2012 at 7:02 am
[...] or would you call the police? Do you think the police should have done more or is this similar to the Prior Lake nude beach case? Whatever you have to say about this one go ahead and comment on as I’d love to hear what you [...]