Sex charge worries streaker in Boulder Pumpkin Run
By Julie Poppen, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published November 7, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Now that the general election's over, let's get on to more important matters: Justice for the Pumpkin 12.
Recent University of Colorado graduate Eric Rasmussen, 23, is among the 12 runners ticketed Halloween night for indecent exposure after running naked with a wobbly orange squash on their heads along the Pearl Street Mall in Boulder.
If convicted, he and 11 others could be required to register as sex offenders. Like many of the Pumpkin 12, he is finding a lawyer.
Rasmussen said it was his first time streaking. He had a great time - until he saw 12 police awaiting him and 150 other naked people at the courthouse.
The officers gave Rasmussen, who hails from suburban Chicago, time to get dressed before recording his vitals.
"I was thinking a minor fine or community service or something," Rasmussen said Wednesday. "I was not thinking of sex offender."
Now, he's scared. You can hear it in his voice.
"I was under the assumption there would be safety in numbers - it didn't occur to me that it would be OK for the police just to take 12 people and disregard the other couple hundred."
Rasmussen, who wants to pursue a career in public relations, is hopeful the charge won't stick, since he doesn't believe anybody was offended by his nudity - except perhaps, the police, who signed his citation as witnesses.
"The lawyers I've spoken to have tried to convince me it won't go that far," he said. "They don't think a judge would want to have 12 people hurt for the rest of their lives because of this act when nobody was really offended."
He and nine others go to Boulder County Court on Dec. 17; two others will appear Jan. 12.
Those cited include Oleg Abramov, 30; Carly Howett, 29; Erika Barth, 32; Ty Tuff, 28; Natalie Ziemba, 20; Scott Wisdom, 21; David Packert, 23; Robert Mohr, 28; Matthew Bruce, 27; Kevin Maddaford, 28; Sabrina Collins, 44.
In Boulder, the 10th annual Naked Pumpkin Run is a hot issue. The core question: Should these 12 face punishment?
Denver legal analyst and trial lawyer Scott Robinson said people should think twice before disrobing in public. A pumpkin can't save you, although a prosecutor just might.
"(Prosecutors) generally view a streaker as somewhat different than the individual who exposes himself to another for sexual gratification," Robinson said. "But there is good reason not to take off your clothes and put a pumpkin on your head. You may as well wear a sign on your head that says, 'Arrest me.' "
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
November 7, 2008
1:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
nightninja13 writes:
Well I wasn't offended besides we are all humans what are people expecting down there? Paris hilton? they should get fined or have some community service but no sex offender charge that is just dumb.
November 7, 2008
1:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Garip writes:
Give me a break. I can't believe they are wasting the taxpayers' dollars with this. I wonder how many real crimes were committed during the time these silly ba$ tards were running around sans clothing. The cops blew it on this one.
November 7, 2008
6:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
gatengreen writes:
It helps to engage your brain before deciding on how stupid you are going to act. This is assuming you learned anything at CU.
It works like this: Your brain has the ability to decide on the consequences of what you are about to do and then gives you a signal about how smart this action is. Of course, if you have put your brain out of commission with drugs or booze, before taking off your clothes, you should have engaged it before getting tanked.
November 7, 2008
6:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
LazyR writes:
Two assaults occured while the cops were busy with this. I'm sure they were offended, but was anybody harmed?
November 7, 2008
6:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
suffernofools writes:
Whatever is decided, I just wish for parity and consistency in charges that are filed and sentences that are handed down. We see on these pages quite regularly how much sentences vary around the state--to the point of being ridiculous and absurd. E.g., if that priest who was found walking naked last year, in the pre-dawn hours with NO ONE but a police officer to see him is required to register as a sex offender then these people should be, too (that isn't my personal position, though, on this cases). And vice-versa: if these people are not required to register, then the priest should not be so labeled, either. Let's just have consistency.
Also, it seems to damage the respect for the Boulder Police when they only arrest 12 out of the dozens of people in the Pumpkin Run and make a big deal out of it... We can do better than this.
November 7, 2008
6:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
Art writes:
What a waste of money and time. Why in the world do we support these wastes of resources? Sure some of us think these people are idiots for running naked through the streets but they harmed no one. And for the people who ask "what if my children saw them?", the answer is that your children are less offended by nakedness than anyone else. It is incomprehensible why so many are so afraid of the naked human body.
November 7, 2008
7:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Maisry writes:
It's just foolish to do something one knows bears the risk of arrest. However, I'm concerned that establishing being nude as a sex offense is a dangerous move. That might say that nudity is sexual, which it isn't. That might say that an artist's model in a college classroom disrobing, or a toddler sneaking out to play sans suit in the sprinkler is sexual. Smacks of society wide symptomatic denial to me. We can go too far so easily.
November 7, 2008
7:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
singularity99 writes:
Something is very sick with our legislators, state and society if someone could have to register as a sex offender for life for participating in a Halloween prank that had nothing to do with sex. Our sex offender laws have gone completely overboard, and are now created by politicians simply so they can get re-elected by telling their constituents that they "got tough on crime". As a result, the United States has five percent of the world's population, and yet incarcerates about 25 percent of the world's inmates. These laws are reminiscent of the mandatory sentencing for "drug crimes" where people were put it prison for ten years minimum for simple possession, not dealing.
I think we should require all Colorado legislators to register as sex offenders until they clean up these absurd laws that threaten the liberty of all citizens.
November 7, 2008
7:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
When you decide to flash your private parts in public, YOU DESERVE TO BE ARRESTED and register as a sex offender. Perverts!
Next, NAMBLA will be "streaking" because hey! It's just a prank!
November 7, 2008
7:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
The_KIMN_Chicken writes:
The article isn't totally clear, 150 naked people were hanging out at the court house as some sort of pumpkin run and 15 got arrested?
November 7, 2008
8:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
sheepherder writes:
yes KIMN, Boulder P.D. doesnt have the manpower to make a mass arrest of 150 people.
And KIMN...I still have a stuffed KIMN chicken I got when I was about 5 years old! You are dating yourself:)
November 7, 2008
8:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
"I was under the assumption there would be safety in numbers - it didn't occur to me that it would be OK for the police just to take 12 people and disregard the other couple hundred."
I suppose we should release all of the criminals from prison since it's just not fair that they are imprisoned while a lot of other criminals are roaming the streets.
November 7, 2008
8:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mtn__Gator writes:
This is prosecution is just plain nuts. Can we find anyone in our government who can apply logic. These are not sexual offenders. Slap them with some community service and move on to real crime.
November 7, 2008
8:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
almostarmy2003 writes:
It's a little harsh to ruin the rest of there live over a prank, Give them some jail time and send them home. There not hardened criminals jail will scare them enough.
November 7, 2008
8:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
The_Punnisher writes:
The law in Boulder is quite clear:
If you are ERECT, you are sexually aroused and can be cited.
Go look it up.
Streaking is OK, but don't let that ding-a-ling jangle...>8->...
Now this here song it ain't so bad
Prettiest little song that you ever had
And those of you who will not sing
must be playing with your own Ding-a-ling
-Chuck Berry
November 7, 2008
8:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
Punnisher,
What about the women who were arrested?
November 7, 2008
9:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
The_Punnisher writes:
Heidi writes:
Punnisher,
What about the women who were arrested?
You know that certain OTHER parts of a woman's anatony become erect. And NOT just when they get cold....>8-> BTDTGTTS.....
November 7, 2008
9:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Elwood writes:
They knew the law. They broke the law. They should pay for breaking the law.
Don't like it? Vote out your representatives.
November 7, 2008
9:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
dj80long writes:
If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!
November 7, 2008
9:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
The_Punnisher writes:
Boulder: Ten square miles surrounded by REALITY; Their laws and enforcement proves it.
The Keystone Kops live on.....
The Boulder PD Chief can't pour sand out of a boot with the directions printed on the heel....
November 7, 2008
9:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
MattGuyver_007 writes:
Save the charge for real sex offenders.
Once again, 'Give me a break, Boulder!'
November 7, 2008
9:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
"I was under the assumption there would be safety in numbers - it didn't occur to me that it would be OK for the police just to take 12 people and disregard the other couple hundred."
There you go, Dummy - making assumptions again.
Sex offender is perhaps a little much, but make sure it cost each of these fools $10K in legal fees by the time it's done. Hitting these clowns in the wallet is the only thing they understand.
Boulder residents need to take a long, sober look in the mirror and figure out what it is about the mindset of the town that encourages this lawlessness. Gang rapes, Asians terrorized on the streets, public nakedness... this anarchy doesn't help Boulder's image at all.
November 7, 2008
9:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Colorado_Jack writes:
It's not the police that are the problem here, it is the District Attorneys. The DAs regularly prosecute cases that no logical person would believe have merit. The reason they do so is that they are judged by their superiors based on CONVICTIONS - whether they're right or wrong THEY DON'T CARE. They trump up charges far in excess of the original crime, knowing the charges probably would not stick, then negotiating plea bargains and place the person on Probation. You end up taking the deal because the risk is too great to go to trial (in this case: 180 days to 5 years in prison). Once in the probationary system THEY MAKE THESES PEOPLE INTO CRIMINALS. And here is how it happens:
You get convicted of say a any offense and are placed on probation: Your probation officer can order you to take classes (costing hundreds of dollars), you may be required to come to the probation office and "blow" every week or even every day (costing hundreds of dollars over a year), You will be required to "pay" your probation officer $50.00 for every "appointment" (costing hundreds of dollars over a year). You are subject to random UAs or urine analysis (costing hundreds of dollars over a year). Then somewhere along the line during the year you test positive for alcohol. Then they place an ankle bracelet on you costing ($11.00 per day - add that up). Seems reasonable except all you did was cut down some weeds. OH Yea, what if you don't have a job to pay for all this?????????? You then go to Jail (i.e.: you are now a criminal for cutting weeds).
THIS SYSTEM IS ABOUT MAKING MONEY - IT IS INCREDIBLY CORRUPT - ASK ANYONE THAT HAS BEEN IN THE SYSTEM.
And for those of you goof balls - this happened to a friend of mine.
November 7, 2008
9:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
B300 writes:
ONCE AGAIN; A RETARDED SYSTEM!!! Back in the 60's it was just ignored.I think we got a kick out of it. This is good for the cops because they dont have to do their jobs, wait; they cant do their jobs, their too scared of real criminals.
November 7, 2008
9:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Who_Me writes:
And let's not forget Madden's kid who streaked in front of a crowd at a football game. I would love to see her address listed on the sex offender registry. You reap what you sow. "Oh, I didn't mean that these laws would ever apply to anyone I know..."
November 7, 2008
10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
these people are not "sex offenders". It is going to be difficult to know when someone is really a sex offender when you start lumping them into everything naked. I knew a guy who was pissing in an alley downtown and got a ticket for indecent exposure. Nice thing to try and explain
November 7, 2008
10:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
vendari01 writes:
Okay, streaking is dumb, but a sex offence? And, like Spencer, I have seen a guy taking a leak, where he thought he was out of sight. I did not call it in, partly because you can't tell if some prosecutor might want to make a sex offence out of it. And if you're charged of a sex offence, you're guilty. Period. Hang up your future. For heaven's sake, you could define 'indecent exposure' as me in a Speedo (shiver)! This law is truly getting out of hand!
November 7, 2008
10:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
BroncoRick69 writes:
The KIMN chicken? how old ARE you dude?
November 7, 2008
10:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
MARK_POOL7 writes:
It's all about revenue collection for the city, county. & state, as many "laws".
November 7, 2008
10:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Andy writes:
This isn't a sex crime. Who's the victim?
November 7, 2008
10:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
BenchBoss writes:
Andy wrote:
"This isn't a sex crime. Who's the victim?"
Think of the pumpkins! Where are their rights in all this? Heading to the Pearl Street Mall shortly to rally support for the pumpkins. There's no mention of their plight. Imagine - being gutted and worn around by naked sex offenders. Alright, I need more coffee.
November 7, 2008
10:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
boulder1259 writes:
I read the above comments and find it unreal the animosity towards the police. Hold Boulder accountable on this one; the police were only doing what they were told to do.
November 7, 2008
10:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
squeakywheel writes:
Remember not too long ago that Halloween night was for rioting in Boulder.
It appears to me that Boulder is simply trying to put a stop to this idiotic "tradition" before it gets even more out of control.
What's the purpose of doing it if not to shock and offend?
November 7, 2008
10:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
BroncoRick69 writes:
I am always very animose towards police.
November 7, 2008
10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
GunnyBob writes:
Hmmm. Exposing your genitals, in public, to children out and about with their mortified parents.
And these people are upset not with the kids' exposure to the genitals of so-called adults (with pumpkins on their heads), but with their possible sex-offender status.
You pays your money and you takes our chances in this world. And in a society of laws, sometimes you have to pay for a crime you commit; a crime brought on by stupidity and immaturity and poor judgment. And I suspect some drugs and alcohol in some of the streakers' cases.
Time to pay up.
November 7, 2008
10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
yaakovwatkins writes:
There is no difference between the great naked pumpkin race and the priest jogging on a track. Neither one was a sexual act, both were illegal.
November 7, 2008
11 a.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
Post their nude photo's online, I'm sure the embarrassment to future would-be dates would remind them to be civil and not cause an un-necessary ruckus.
I've been to gyms, and shower rooms, where some guys...Just aren't blessed by the lord high above. If they're buddist, maybe its karma (punishment) for a bad life before.
Butt in all seriousiness...They don't deserve a sex offenders record. Sex offender should be reserved for intentially violating another human being in a sexual capacity. This is good old fashion indecency. Hog tie them nude to the post at the center of town for god's sake...Embarrassment for the day but not for life.
I.
November 7, 2008
11:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
whazzamattau writes:
So....is the son of Alice Madden, a Colorado state congresswoman, going to be charged as a sex offender as well for him streaking a football game just a week or so ago? Or is there a different kind of justice for you if your mom is a high ranking democrat lawmaker?
November 7, 2008
11:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
Romanesco writes:
GunnyBob writes: "Exposing your genitals, in public, to children out and about with their mortified parents. And these people are upset not with the kids' exposure to the genitals of so-called adults (with pumpkins on their heads), but with their possible sex-offender status."
There is a difference, however, between streaking en masse as part of a halloween prank, and exposing oneself to satisfy some odd sexual fetish.
November 7, 2008
11:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
B300 writes:
boulder1259, the truth hurts! God bless Jon Benet.
November 7, 2008
11:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
jhawkey writes:
Who cares? They did it because it was funny. If you are offended, then buy a sense of humor. God people are so easily offended anymore. When you were little, was it your dream to grow up and not have a sense of humor anymore? I understand that it was illegal and immoral and they should pay a fine. But it was still funny. Lighten up.
November 7, 2008
11:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
Macita183 writes:
I don't understand how these streakers and drunk people who pee in public are forced to be registered sex offenders. How can we compare someone that does something like this to someone who rapes children? It doesn't add up. Yet somehow we make streakers, who do stuff like this for a prank, register, yet can't keep track of the location of the real offenders who molest children. Way to protect your citizens Boulder.
Just think Boulder, while you were wasting your time on this case 2 sexual assaults have occured in the past week, one at 6 pm. Perhaps catching that sex offender should be your main focus?
November 7, 2008
11:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
LazyR writes:
If the thing-a-ling-alings I saw in the video of the event were erect those boys are in trouble.
November 7, 2008
11:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
ramAZ writes:
Welcome to adulthood Eric. Choose your decisions wisely.
November 7, 2008
12:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
You wouldn't think that a guy who runs around naked with a pumpkin on his head would be such a worrier.
November 7, 2008
12:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Buff4Life writes:
Running naked in public used to get you a night in jail and laughter. Aren't sex offenders persons who sexually assout other persons or who attempt to? Am I missing something here?
Oh, yeah, it's called logic. Gimme a break. Life's more fun with these antics. If you think streakers are sex offenders you should move to Russia. You'll like it there, they have no crime because everyone is killed who breaks the "law" and is caught.
And ramAZ, you're an idiot. Good thing you went to Ft. Fun, you both deserve each other.
November 7, 2008
12:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
roger44 writes:
The law is clearly written, and if it calls for sex offender status, so be it.
November 7, 2008
12:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"The law is clearly written, and if it calls for sex offender status, so be it."
this kind of mandatory inflexible sentencing philosophy is why conservative efforts to fight crime in the 80's were such a disaster.
a little common sense goes a long way.
November 7, 2008
1:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
shdwsclan writes:
Well, for starters, he well be branded a sex offended either by a public records mistake or by lexis nexis getting it incorrectly by a background check....
November 7, 2008
1:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
Why does someone get charged with a sex offense when they weren't having sex or even attempting to have sex?
Like a bear, if I'm out in the woods and squat to pinch a loaf, that has nothing to do with sex. But God help me if some conservative prude happens along to see my buttocks hanging in the breeze. The SWAT helicopter might show up before I'm finished with my paperwork.
Streaking is only about showing off. Yes, they call it the streak because he likes to show off his physique.
So, give us break! At worst they should pay a $20 fine and get a whack on the wrist or where ever.
November 7, 2008
1:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
bluffan writes:
Like the Boulder police and DAs don't have better things to do! (How 'bout stepping up patrols after three attempted rapes on the Hill in a week!)
The very notion that these people should be labeled as 'sex offenders' is ridiculous, and clearly a misintepretation of the spirit, if not the letter, of the law.
Perhaps it's true that the cops were only doing what they were told. But that doesn't excuse their superiors and the DA's office from trying to make an example of these harmless pranksters, who, I should note, were out on the Mall long after our kiddies had gone to bed.
November 7, 2008
2:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
Scott writes:
I'd say slap these idiots with a fine, make them register as a sex offender for six months. If they can stay out of trouble for six months, then remove the sex offender from their records.
BTW, I hope no ones camera was destroyed by shooting photos of the 44 year old broad! ;-)
Scott
November 7, 2008
2:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
HankReardon writes:
I'm surprised Davide's name wasn't on the list. Yeeesh and Eeeew!
November 7, 2008
2:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
Hank: Who?
November 7, 2008
3:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
HankReardon writes:
Davies: Just some guy who I've seen naked on TV (and didn't need to) during one of these kinds of things.
Now this really is a pimple on the behind of society.
But seriously, go get the real sex offenders, perverts, predators, rapists and sick pigs. I think these exhibitionists/nudists are mostly harmless to the rest of us. More dangerous probably to themselves. Just don't look directly at them. Yikes!
November 7, 2008
3:21 p.m.
justjoeindenver writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
November 7, 2008
3:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
Oh. Dang it, I thought 'Davides' was a typo and you meant me. I was all ready to square off and say "En garde!" Oh well.
Really, I'm guessing that the City of Boulder just thought this annual event was getting out of hand. So they bring out the cops, catch a few, scare 'em with "possible" charges for awhile mainly for the publicity, and in the end they'll all get 'disturbing the peace' or something. Funny story though, and I feel a little sorry for the 23-year old; he sounds scared.
November 7, 2008
3:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
justjoeindenver writes:
Was it the "gord orifice" comment that offended?
November 7, 2008
3:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
MrJim writes:
remember when this country had a sense of humor? Good Grief. 20 hours Community Service and have a nice day.
November 7, 2008
6:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Confusedone writes:
Where has our humanity gone?
November 7, 2008
11:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Randomarrow writes:
This is just about the most egregious misuse of the law that I have ever encountered. It shouldn't take much to invoke the "cruel & unusual" defense. Then again this is Chee-ney country!
November 8, 2008
8:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
AngelontheSidelines writes:
Boulder is a Colorado Springs wannabe.
November 8, 2008
7:53 p.m.
Jocko writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
November 10, 2008
9:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
snowood writes:
GunnyBob pull your head outta your Colon, this happen at or after 11 at night. And has been going on for 10 years now. Keep up up if your going to comment. Like any other city in the US, Boulder has a curfew for the youngsters thus ..... 11 PM...
November 10, 2008
10:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
FreedomLover writes:
#1. We're all naked under our clothes.
#2. Adam and Eve must have been perverts---according
to Boulder PD and DA.
#3. God's a prevert according to Boulder PD and DA.
#4. Boulder has been a den of Liberal Loonies for the
past 20+ years. Don't blame Conservatives for the anti-
sex madness in Boulder. Remember Dworkin and other
feminists stating that there was no such thing as consensual
heterosexual sex? That it was all varying degrees of rape?
#5. FDR started the moronic 'War on Drugs' in the 1930s
as a means to keep the 'Alcohol Police' from going on the
bread lines. "Only darkies, musicians and preverts use
Marihuana..."---FDR big wig justification for making MJ
illegal.
#6. Check out 'Jury Nullification!' Check out 'The Trial
of William Penn, et al' Check out 'FIJA.'
#7. Advocate 'Choice in Education' for your K-12 kids.
'Lexus quality education at Low, low Wal-Mart prices."
'There is nothing more dangerous than an educated
fool.' And, Boulder's got a bunch...
Check out human breast milk saving eyesight, saints
eyesight cured by human breast milk---some of the
gorgeous paintings detailing these healings would
get the artists arrested in Boulder except the
artists have been dead for over 300 years---DRAT!
Maybe someone with more computer skill than I
could post them?
And finally, 'Don't accept the Nuremburg Defense from
the Brown Shirted DA and PD.
Nuff sed.
Goldwater Republican since 1966
AKA: Reagan Republican
AKA: 80% pure Libertarian---as defined by 'The world's
Smallest Political Test.'
November 10, 2008
1:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
chill134 writes:
Nothing to see here...move on.
November 10, 2008
4:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Duckster writes:
Always with Boulder you can on a bunch of trust-fund kids and sheltered students coming around after something like this and decrying any enforcement action. Look fools, when something's against the law and you know it and roll the dice anyway, sometimes you lose.
http://lagniappeslair.blogspot.com
November 10, 2008
5:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fancy_chance writes:
I am so glad that the police are making Boulder safer by arresting those "dangerous" streakers. I sure that will entice my criminals to move to Boulder because true criminals there are never caught or charged. I bet if the person that killed Jon Benet had been a streaker he would have been caught.
November 10, 2008
6:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
gs writes:
If you can't catch Jon Benet's killer you might as well get what you can catch; a naked person holding a pumpking on their head and their clothes in a bad over their shoulder. Sad that that is all they can catch and convict. Isn't that called displacement or kick the dog?
The dumpy ones should be sentenced to four laps around the track six days a week for a year. Otherwise 20 hours community service.
November 10, 2008
10:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
glacierdude writes:
Puhlease!!! Fine their pants off....community service up the wazoo....make it hurt and teach these twits something about old fashioned decency, but a sex offender???? This is wrong....very, very wrong.
November 11, 2008
4:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
nmbronco1 writes:
Geez! What an idiotic, prudish society we have become! Back in 1973 and 1974, when I was a college freshman, streaking was the rage at college campuses across the country. As someone who participated in the "phenomenon", streaking was a rush and a lot of fun, and it had nothing to do with sex. The idea was to shock with the very simple fact of nudity. This country has some real twisted moral values - on the one hand, simple nudity is being hailed as a "sex offense" and then on the other the porn business is at an all time high and we almost elected a woman as VP who in order to garner votes wore tight clothing and go-go style boots and high heels (as well as only a towel when top officials came to her hotel room). As for Boulder - I lived there for several years in the late 70's and early 80's, and for a so-called "liberal" city it's police force was decidedly biased and uneven in its law enforcement. My hope is that the judge assigned this case sees the light and gives out petty offense fines. Sex offender status should only come for actual predatory and violent acts. This country needs to really grow up and stop being so sophomoric about nudity. It's like all the laws are written and enforced by a bunch of ugly, self-righteous, frightened people trying to impose a false sense of morality upon all the rest of us.
November 11, 2008
6:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
ashanab writes:
Maybe they just arrested the really ugly people?