California court confirms what men have known for years, female nudity is no crime.

For once a judge factors the will of the people when making a major judicial decision regarding public displays of nudity. Let’s hope this doesn’t get overturned in appeal.

A Riverside County judge dismissed an indecent exposure charge against a woman who allegedly disrobed in front of a 14-year-old boy, saying the law applies only to men.

Superior Court Judge Robert W. Armstrong said this week that the law mentions a person who “exposes his person.”

“Usually when a section proscribes conduct, it’s ‘his or her.’ This one is not,” Armstrong said. “It’s gender specific.”

Riverside County Deputy Dist. Atty. Alison N. Norton argued that the lack of a feminine reference in the penal code was a typo and that solely applying the law to men would violate the state Constitution.

But Armstrong was not convinced.

“I’m just telling you what it says,” he said. “So on that basis, this case is dismissed. And the people can take an appeal from the dismissal.”

There was an odd twist to the case however.

The woman, Alexis Luz Garcia, 40, of Corona, gave her neighbor, a 14-year old boy, a full-frontal view as he played basketball in the yard next door. What did the boy do? Did he stand and stare? Did he applaud or beg her not to stop? Did he run in and phone all his friends, or upload video to YouTube or paste the pictures to his MySpace profile? No, he ran inside and told his parents. This is a kid in serious need of help. In my day if a neighbor wanted you to quiet down they’d threaten you with violence instead of arranging a peep show.

tags: female flasher public nudity

This entry was posted on Saturday, October 21st, 2006 at 7:13 pm by Insider and is filed under California Schemin'. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.