Brattleboro Police warn first nudist of the season

[NakedGary]

http://www.reformer.com/ci_8968968?source=most_emailed

Brattleboro Police warn first nudist of the season

<!--subtitle--><!--byline-->Reformer.com

<SCRIPT language=JavaScript> var requestedWidth = 0; </SCRIPT>
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript> if(requestedWidth > 0){ document.getElementById('articleViewerGroup').styl e.width = requestedWidth + "px"; document.getElementById('articleViewerGroup').styl e.margin = "0px 0px 10px 10px"; } </SCRIPT>
Friday, April 18
BRATTLEBORO -- A registered sex offender from Massachussetts was the first person warned about being nude in Brattleboro since the Selectboard passed an anti-nudity ordinance earlier this year.
According to the Brattleboro Police Department, Craig Luchon, 48, of Webster, was spotted standing naked next to the information booth at the Brattleboro Common on Putney Road.
When police arrived, Luchon was wearing a pair of shorts, but did admit he had been sunbathing au naturel.
He was not aware of the new ordinance, said Officer Bob Perkins, who responded to the call.
The new ordinance requires police to ask violators to dress themselves.
If they refuse to do so, police can write a civil ticket with a fine of $100.
Perkins contacted court officials to learn if Luchon has any conditions attached to his sex offender status, but had not heard back yet.
If there are conditions, such as not being within a certain distance of a school or day care facility, further charges could be lodged against him.
This wasn't the first time Luchon was in Brattleboro, said Perkins. Last year, police were called to Main Street and talked with Luchon, who was walking around naked. Because there was no nudity ordinance on the town's books then, he was breaking no laws and no background check was run on him.

[Yasehtor]

This is the type of person who gives "nudists" a bad name. :(

[Naturist Mark]

This is the type of person who gives "nudists" a bad name. :(

We don't know anything about the event, so if we condemn him we are jumping to conclusions just as much as the people who always assume the worst of nudism.

The man was described as a "registered sex offender" without any indication of what infraction was involved. Far too many "registered sex offenders" are nothing of the kind, they might be skinny dippers who were spied on, a 19 year old who neglected to break up with his or her paramour of several years because of an age difference straddling an arbitrary number, someone unable to find a public restroom who thought a bush or tree trunk was better hidden than it was ... etc. As long as people can get on the "registered sex offender" list for anything other than a dangerous predatory sex offense that label means nothing.

I'm still trying to figure out the whole 'nudists being nude where it isn't illegal to be nude is bad for nudism' meme. Reminds of the Moravia 4 who were criticized for being topfree where it is legal to be topfree because it could result in the loss of the freedom to be topfree in places where it is legal to be topfree, so if you don't want to lose your freedom to be topfree in places where it is legal to be topfree you had better not be topfree in places where it is legal to be topfree... e i e i o

-Mark

[Bob S.]

I tried to find Craig Luchon on the Mass. Sex offender's registry and the National sex offender's registry (which mainly shows level three offenders) and got no hits. I tried just looking up his name on Google and got only a real estate seller in Mass. It seems as if his crime was a low level one.

On a not-so-serious note, I guess this is the first sign of spring. The first nude in Vermont.

Bob S.

[nudeM]

So what is exactly the new laws? Is nudity outlawed outright or is it simply restricted in certain areas of the city? I thought it was the latter. Refresh please, for us 'Enquiring' minds want to know. lol

[Michjoe]

Here's the story:
Board bans nudity
By BOB AUDETTE, Reformer Staff

Wednesday, December 5
BRATTLEBORO -- By a vote of 4-1, the Brattleboro Selectboard passed an ordinance prohibiting nudity in public areas of the town.

The ordinance has been under debate since the summer, when a handful of nudists decided it was OK to strut their stuff around town because there was no law preventing it.

Brattleboro is now the eighth town in Vermont to pass such a restriction.

The vote was preceded by nearly an hour of public comments by those both for and against the ordinance.

"People can't understand why this issue is about freedom," said Laura Austan, who said she opposed any type of ordinance prohibiting nudity. "This is a slap in the face of the progress we have made toward tolerance and the preservation of personal freedom."

Austan said the state's laws covering lewd and lascivious behavior and indecency were sufficient.

"I am sick of new laws," she said, which she called a "slow erosion of liberty and tradition. Part of the joy of Vermont is the tradition of a live and let live social conscience."

The ordinance was OK while it only dealt with nudity downtown, said Spoon Agave, but expanding it to include all of Brattleboro "entered the sphere of being ludicrous."

"I cherish the freedom you have here," said one woman, a visitor from New York state. "I would be very disappointed if Vermont become more restrictive than New York."

It's not all about personal freedom, said one Brattleboro resident.

"It is intolerant to force somebody against their will to be exposed to this," said Gary Gale.

One concern for many in attendance was what effect the new ordinance would have on the many skinny-dipping swimming holes in the area.

One Massachusetts woman, Virginia Shay, who said she represented an advocacy group for skinny dippers, said the board "may want to reconsider an ordinance that truly erodes the freedom and rights of Brattleboro residents.

She called the ordinance an "overzealous law" that may infringe on people's traditions.

"If that location is likely to be observed by members of the public," said Bob Fisher, attorney for the town, "then it could be an area where this could be enforced."

But, he said, if this is a place with a history of skinny dipping, "chances are you are not going to have a problem."

Enforcement of the regulation will be up to the discretion of the police officer responding to a complaint, he added.

Others in the audience were concerned the town could be leaving itself wide open for a lawsuit because the ordinance prohibits women from baring their breasts but doesn't prohibit men from doing the same.

But Fisher has maintained during several board meetings that the courts have upheld similar ordinances around the country.

"There is no constitutional right of nudity," he said.

How would the law affect children running around naked on a summer day, asked Tim Wessel.

"With many things in this ordinance, the discretion of the officers is going to be utilized depending on the circumstances," said Fisher. If you have a 3-year-old running naked through a sprinkler, he said, he doubted the officer would write a ticket.

One local businessman said it was time for the Selectboard to pass the ordinance.

"This has been going on for quite a few months," said Bob Woodworth, owner of Burrows Specialized Sports on Main Street. "I believe we need to get this behind us and move on to other things."

He said the ordinance was a good one, allowing people to go naked on the river or in their backyards, but not in the public view.

"I was never in favor of an ordinance to begin with," said Dora Bouboulis, the only Selectboard member to vote against the ordinance. "We already have laws in place to cover the lewd and lascivious behavior of people who are doing things that are inappropriate."

Passing the ordinance could endanger the eccentricity that has come to define Brattleboro, she said, and could affect the town's reputation as an arts town.

Those found naked within public view could be subject to a $100 fine.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------