Man arrestred after making coffee in his kitchen naked

[Davin]

A Springfield, Virginia man is facing an indecent exposure charge after a passerby spotted the man naked in his kitchen and reported it to police.

Eric Williamson, 29, says his roommates were not home and he walked into the kitchen to make coffee about 5:30 a.m. Monday.

Yes, I wasn't wearing any clothes but I was alone, in my own home and just got out of bed. It was dark and I had no idea anyone was outside looking in at me," Williamson said.

The complaint came from an unidentified woman who was walking with a 7-year-old boy. A Fairfax County Police spokesman said officers arrested Williamson for indecent exposure because they believe he wanted to be seen naked by the public.

Officer Bud Walker said officers also consulted the Commonwealth's Attorney's Office and they were given the green light to proceed with the charge.

Update: Another station is reporting that he tried to get the attention of three people who were outside the home.

P.S. I live in VA, south of Franconia-Springfield and too have a bus stop near my house

**********
This is ridicolous, since when is it a crime to be naked in the privacy of our own home? He was not exhibiting his body. What do you think?

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/101909_man_caught_making_coffee_naked_faces_charge s

[DenitaLC]

Davin, I agree......totally nuts! The only thing they could charge this guy with is forgetting to draw the blinds......and that isn't a crime!

I'd call it an invation of pricacy by the woman......peeping Jane!

[MeBNude]

Denita,

I, too, am far more concerned with the woman's behavior. There's the whole peeping that hard inato a kitchen to figure out there is a person, nude in their own home, but what in the world was she doing walking the streets at 5:30 a.m. with a 7 year old in tow?

[NudeAl]

This is wrong on so many different levels. The woman was cutting between houses so she wasn't on public property she may even have been on his property and then she files charges?? WTF? I would have charged her with being a peeping Tom. That the cops even went along with her charge says something about how they veiw things I hope this guy gets a good attourney and fights it.

[nudeM]

It basically goes back to just be careful. Sure, you are nude in your own home, but with the blinds/curtains open, you are opening yourself to getting cited. You are legally within your rights to be nude, but when you are displaying yourself to the general public, all it takes is a complaint, as in this case. By the way the story seems to me, the house is very close to the sidewalk, with large windows, or the woman knew of his nudity and went out of her way to issue a complaint. Anyway, in my opinion, he should have used better judgement by drawing the blinds/curtains.:smoking:

[FoUTASportscaster]

Yes, he should have drawn the blinds and hid his shameful act.

[Christian]

My god, how disturbing. I live in Virginia and often make coffee naked although the two windows in my kitchen are at chest level but, I mean, really, you could easily figure out I was nude if you look in. Hm. She should be charged with peeping. :confused:

[Kouak]

Denita,

I, too, am far more concerned with the woman's behavior. There's the whole peeping that hard inato a kitchen to figure out there is a person, nude in their own home, but what in the world was she doing walking the streets at 5:30 a.m. with a 7 year old in tow?

I know of many people who run early in the morning before going to work. And sometimes they take their kid in one of those "running" strollers. They cannot leave their kid at home by themself. The kid can sleep in the stroller.


This is wrong on so many different levels. The woman was cutting between houses so she wasn't on public property she may even have been on his property and then she files charges?? WTF? I would have charged her with being a peeping Tom. That the cops even went along with her charge says something about how they veiw things I hope this guy gets a good attourney and fights it.

Did the article say she was "cutting between houses?" I did not see any reference to that. I did see a comment posted by a potty mouthed individual who advocated arresting her for tresspassing.

I do agree that she should be charged with being a "peeping Jane." After all, if she were running or exercising at that hour, then why was she looking in people's houses? Isn't that voyeurism?

[Naturist Mark]

Did the article say she was "cutting between houses?" I did not see any reference to that. I did see a comment posted by a potty mouthed individual who advocated arresting her for tresspassing.

The news report video said they left a public path and cut through his yard, which means they were trespassing.

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/101909_man_caught_making_coffee_naked_faces_charge s

[TANZ]

Oh my God !! He was making coffee?? That stuff will kill ya.

[maliakei]

How ridiculous is that?! Only 29, making coffee at 5:30 am, and some woman happens to be right there with a 7 yr-old? That doesn't add up. The man better hire a good lawyer and get that offence removed from his record, then press charges on her for attempting to ruin his good name. The only thing which can go against him is not shutting the drapes/blinds, but he was in the privacy of his own home. Sounds like the woman could have been a terrible neighbor in spite out to make trouble.

[bareassed54]

This is beyond belief to me. I do the same thing every morning 7/365 and not only would it never cross my mind to put on a stitch of clothes - I never would. You have every right to be NAKED in your home anytime/anywhere 24/7.

This pathetic woman walking a kid at 0530 took it upon herself to peer into his window? Unless the FRONT window is a sliding glass patio door w/out drapes then she was peeping. Otherwise she never would be able to tell that he was naked, certainly not strolling down the sidewalk in the front of the house.

I can't understand the cops going along with this, it doesn't make any sense. I just hope this poor guy doesn't end up spending all his hard earned money fighting this or clearing his name. It will never end up in court.

[roaddog]

This is typically ridiculous, for me the most ridiculous part of he whole affair is that the woman and child are completely unidentified, the law hides their identity, despite the fact that they broke the law by invading this mans privacy.


Stupidity running wild again.

The cops now have the task of proving "intent", they got no chance, but we still get to pay them for all the time this will take, perhaps they should find something better to do with our money.

Cheers
Mick

[bill2me]

You know anyone could walk around at that hour of the day and see someone naked in their own home. I can't believe the police wasted tax dollars on this type of complaint. Where has common sense gone?

[Smiley]

Okay. .she "left the public path and cut across his yard", then filed a complaint? Criminal trespass comes to mind right off, then "a reasonable expectation of privacy in one's own home" is next. Let's see, Criminal Trespass, Invasion of Privacy, Filing a False Report are the first three that come to mind. SHE should be charged, not the guy making coffee.

This thing would be akin to someone peeping through a keyhole, seeing someone nude and filing a complaint.

[Kari P]

Is using someone's property without consent always criminal trespassing in the U.S.? In Finland it isn't.

However, I can't believe that a claim of indecent exposure would be taken here seriously if seeing someone naked is the result of coming to a private place. And, being naked as such isn't indecent.

[Nu]

Update: Another station is reporting that he tried to get the attention of three people who were outside the home.




An interesting update on the story from Davin, in his initial post.

[pelagius]

I am just worried that, had it been the other way round - a naked woman making coffee and the man looked in ... well, I think we know who'd (still) be on the end of the action.

[blackrebel]

Let's be careful of defending the naked as a knee jerk reaction for the sake of defending nakedness.

1) He WAS naked from plain view and we all know that they is usually illegal.

2) On his property or not, if she could see him from the lawn chances are she could see him from the street. That is illegal in most cases.

3) Arrest of this man, MAY be within the law, but not really smart. A simple knock on the door by the police and warn him, or advise him would have been sufficient and let it go.

[nudiarist]

The Naturist Action committee has Virginia's law detailed here: http://naturistaction.org/StatesFrames/State_Laws_Frames/Virginia_Laws/body_virginia_laws.html

The exposure must be "obscene" by Virginia's standards, which states that the nudity "has as its dominant theme or purpose an appeal to the prurient interest in sex, that is, a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, excretory functions or products thereof or sadomasochistic abuse", and the person must "intentionally makes an obscene display or exposure of his person."

In this case, the police are claiming that the man knew that someone would see him, even though it was 5:30 in the morning.

Unless the man was erect, masturbating, or shaking his genitals by the window, it would seem that merely being nude while brewing some coffee cannot be defined as "obscene." If the man did it intentionally, fully well knowing that anyone could look into the window and see him, even that does not seem to meet the Virginia obscenity standard as written.

In fact, it seems that the argument can be made that the Virginia law does not prohibit non-sexual public nudity at all since it requires that the exposure of genitals be "obscene". Sometimes the word "obscene" is left up to interpretation, but the Virginia statute seems to be pretty clear in its definition.

It also refers only to "private parts", so topfree equality also seems to be available to women in Virginia. The law does not refer specifically to female breasts.

My guess is that the charges will be dropped because this case will be nearly impossible to prosecute without some other evidence or witness yet to be revealed. And watch - someone is going to propose a rewriting of the law because of this incident.

[nimrod]

I have made some comment about this before, if it was a man seeing a woman naked in her home he would be popped for peeping, well if he were caught doing it because I do not think most men would call the cops for seeing a naked woman, and if he did call the cops he would have been told to stop looking in his nieghbors windows and nothing more would have been done except maybe a warning to the woman who was seen that she was seen.

This situation is definately discrimatory. Men are precieved to be the aggressor in cases of nudity. If he is nude he is causing or going to cause problems, if she is nude there must be something wrong with her.

Just to back up my case I would file a counter suit against the women for voyerism, tresspassing, and slander.

[DenitaLC]

I would guess that about 98% of the comments were in the guys favor....which they should be. Hopefully the prosecutors will do their research and drop the charges.

He should then sue for defamation of character!

[Kouak]

The news report video said they left a public path and cut through his yard, which means they were trespassing.

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/101909_man_caught_making_coffee_naked_faces_charge s

Thanks for clarifying. I did not watch the video but read the article which did not indicate tresspassing was involved.

[bareacres]

[QUOTE=Kouak;243951]I know of many people who run early in the morning before going to work. And sometimes they take their kid in one of those "running" strollers. They cannot leave their kid at home by themself. The kid can sleep in the stroller.



It also appears that you haven't noticed that most 7 year olds won't fit well into a stroller either.

[Kouak]

It also appears that you haven't noticed that most 7 year olds won't fit well into a stroller either.

I responded to the comment about why anyone would be out at 5:30AM with their kid. I was not trying to comment about this particular woman, just in general.

[MeBNude]

[QUOTE=Kouak;243951]I know of many people who run early in the morning before going to work. And sometimes they take their kid in one of those "running" strollers. They cannot leave their kid at home by themself. The kid can sleep in the stroller.

It also appears that you haven't noticed that most 7 year olds won't fit well into a stroller either.

I think it was me who first questioned the advisability of having a 7 year old out at 5:30 a.m. in the morning and I still stand by my question of that woman's qualities as a parent, even if she was just "jogging." Why would you uproot your child from his/her bed at that hour?? The responsible parent would jog at an hour that was less disruptive to the child in my mind.

But also, after watching the original coverage and follow up... and this tags onto another thread discussing if you've ever been caught nude... if you have a reasonable expectation of privacy, then it should not be illegal to be in your own home nude. And people trespassing is not something one should reasonably expect. Nor should it be the basis of an arrest. I don't care if three or a thousand people saw this man naked in his kitchen. If they had to be in his yard to see it... well, it is not actionable in a court of law.

That certainly is not to say someone couldn't sue you. But you ultimately shouldn't be liable, criminally or civily. What hogwash. No wonder lawyers get such a bad name. Shame on the state/local attorneys general.

[vanesa1017]

Agreed. The fact this is even a case or a story is just absurd.

[nudiarist]

Reason magazine http://reason.com/blog/2009/10/21/naked-coffee-guy-update is reporting that the woman who allegedly saw Eric Williamsnon naked disputes the 5:30 AM time of the incident, saying that it occurred at 8:40 AM instead, which actually makes more sense given the woman had a 7 year-old with her. Reason also reports that Williamson was first seen in a doorway, then in a window, but nobody disputes that the woman and child were on his property. Also, apparently a half-dozen cops burst into the man's home to arrest him, as if he were an armed and dangerous criminal.

The man's roommate is reported to have said Williamson was acting "oddly" and was "walking around all morning wearing nothing but a construction hat." Not sure exactly what the roommate considered odd, the nudity or the hat, maybe the combination of both.

The Washington Examiner is reporting http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/crime/Was-he-making-coffee-naked-or-exposing-himself-to-a-child_-8418601-65192472.html that police are distributing flyers throughout the man's neighborhood in an attempt to find anyone else who might have seen him nude. Your tax dollars at work!

Carlyn Hawkins of AANR is reported as saying, "We don't want to offend anybody," she said. "We want to be accepted and we don't want any nudist to create any problems."

Who said this man was a nudist? Yes, he was nude in his own home, but up to this point the media has not labeled him a nudist. When are the national organizations going to get it through their heads that throwing the terms "nudist" and "naturist" around in association with alleged crimes is not a good idea? AANR not only tagged Williamson with the term, which is simply terrible PR, they threw him under the bus at the same time.

So remember AANR members - your national organization wants you to close your drapes and hide your nudity because it's offensive and illegal, even in your own home.

[Naturist Mark]

As noted above, the police have changed the story (http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/102109_naked_man_arrested_after_making_coffee_upda te) and now say the event happened at 8:30am and not 5:30 as they originally charged. (the new time is inconsistent with the original reports that it was still dark outside when the incident happened). Police are canvassing the neighborhood in order to find additional unreported accounts of outraged neighbors so traumatized that they forgot to report anything. Even passing out flyers! What police work! (To bad this police dept. didn't put as much effort into solving the murder (http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=91820&provider=top) of a local lawyer.)

Oh ... and it turns out that the peeping tom ... er ... 'victim', is a "well respected local citizen", who just happens to be married to a police officer ...

[blackrebel]

nudiarist brings up some very good points. One thing that I see people here doing is making excuses for this man.

Arresting him for being naked in plain view IS the issue. If seen at ANY time from the street, he is outside of the law. Not if the woman sees him from his front lawn. At the same time if he had high hedges around the yard and the woman came into his area and saw him naked, that is is different point.

Was the arrest wrong? PROBABLY. A knock and an explaination was in order if he was just making coffee and seen from the street.

[Naturist Mark]

Was the arrest wrong? PROBABLY. A knock and an explaination was in order if he was just making coffee and seen from the street.

I guess when the peeping tom ... Er ... Victim, is married to a police officer, you get a raid by a half dozen cops instead of polite knock on the door and a talk about being careful ...

Of course, now that is known how eggregiously they have overreacted, they are determined to escalate it into a major crime spree of predatory sexual deviance. Note the absurd comment about how close he lives to a school bus stop ... Duh! EVERYBODY lives near a school bus stop (in those areas where school kids are bussed).

[DenitaLC]

Questions and comments (opinions) I have:


It was reported in the first story that his room mates were not at home.......True or False? (Just for a matter of clarity.)

What time did the woman really see him? This should be assertainalbe by the call to the police which would be recorded/documented.

Did the woman call the police (911 or such) OR did she call her husband who then forwarded her complaint? (This would seem very wrong proceedurally, to me.)

Also, I agree with Mark. This is now a big production and witch hunt because that is MUCH easier than saying "sorry, we goofed!"

Edited to add: After reading the revised story, it looks like the guy is the one changing the time from 5:30 to 8:30......or am I reading that wrong? Anyhow......I think this will take more time to shake out. It will be interesting to watch, especially now that it has gone National.

[Lord Drakkus]

Note the absurd comment about how close he lives to a school bus stop ... Duh! EVERYBODY lives near a school bus stop (in those areas where school kids are bussed).

Yup! I live in one of those areas. There are actually 3 stops within 100 yards of my front door. One of which is kindergartners, and that bus stops at around 12:00 noon every day in front of the house next door. Being close to a bus stop is almost a given in urban neighborhoods.

[chuckie30]

This has even reached the news here in new zealand. If the woman was on his property as it would seem she was, then I dont see the issue. Even if she wasnt, so long as he was not intending to be seen, then its not his problem. Peeping tom/jane I think.

[Croydon]

This appears to be a bigger story than I thought. I first came across this story on CFF but yesterday it was in all 3 of my morning DC papers. From what I gather, it seems people are more sympathetic towards the gentleman being charged. Regardless of anyone's feelings about nudity, a lot of people seem to be bothered that the man is being prosecuted for being nude IN HIS OWN HOME, esp. since the woman cut through HIS PROPERTY.

I am still confused as to what happened as I have read few conflicting reports. One article stated that the man was exposing himself and he has had a similar case like this before.

I think the police has lost their mind. If this was a problem, I think a simple warning would have been appropriate. I think Mark is on to something in his assertion that if the offended woman was not married to a police officer, this would not have been taken so seriously.

[LA Naturist]

She must have had a good reason to be looking into someones window at that time of the morning. maybe a stint in jail will clue her that tresspassing and peeping into window is illegal and then add contributing to the delinquency of a minor will make her think better next time.
Does the NAC look into this sort of thing?

[Mike4Freedom]

I think that we all agree that the first words out of his mouth when the police arrived should have been demanding to know who the peeping Tom was and press charges.

People, these days think that they can invoke the guns of government whenever their sensibilities are offended. They need to learn to mind their own business and should pay for interfering in other's life-particularly when calling out the police.

[toadfish327]

I kind of wonder if there is more to the story, a conflict between him and the woman, spousal spat, etc. I still think I would try to charge her for window peeping. Aren't there laws against that? How about tresspassing if she was on his property?

[nudiarist]

I kind of wonder if there is more to the story, a conflict between him and the woman, spousal spat, etc. I still think I would try to charge her for window peeping. Aren't there laws against that? How about tresspassing if she was on his property?

Again, the key to this story is that the complainant is married to a local cop, and she had a 7 year-old child with her. The police didn't even investigate - they barged into the man's home without a warrant and with guns drawn, simply on the word of one witness. Had this witness merely been a neighbor, or a passer-by, the police would likely have just send out a squad car to investigate. 99 out of 100 times I'm sure they would have simply asked the man to keep his drapes drawn.

Once you involve a relative of a cop, complaints take on a different dynamic.

This is only speculation, but my guess is that the woman saw the nude man, called her husband first, who then called his buddies to go and take out the nude guy. Don't they generally release recordings of 911 calls? Where is this one?

The overreaction of the police is why they are so vigorously pursuing this case, distributing flyers and even sending letters home with schoolchildren. They have to hang this guy in order to justify their own bungling.

[GJetson]

The laws must be different in each state, I am in Iowa and saw a similar situation, Me and My wife drove by an apartment, saw a man standing in his apartment balcony door nude. I saw a sheriff mentioned it to him, and He told me its like seeing something on tv, If I don't want to see it, don't look. He said the man was ok unless, He were to leave his apartment and enter the hallway of the building, then it would've been a different situation.

[Croydon]

I kind of wonder if there is more to the story, a conflict between him and the woman, spousal spat, etc. I still think I would try to charge her for window peeping. Aren't there laws against that? How about tresspassing if she was on his property?

I think we need to remember that HER HUSBAND is a police officer. The likelihood that charges will be brought against her is slim. This story would never have gone this far if the woman's husband was not an officer. It is clear that the woman trespassed but b/c of her husband, that is beside the point rather than the point.

I am sure that her husband and his officer buddies are working over time to gather witnesses and evidence to make their arrest valid. The media and readers, I am sure, believe the case is ridiculous as you can not push aside the fact that SHE WAS ON HIS PROPERTY and that there is nothing wrong with a man being nude IN HIS OWN HOME.

I further believe that the police officers and the woman are embellishing what occurred to portray the man as an exhibitionist and/or sexual predator. That is the story they are using and will use it in court.

I think the case will be dropped but I do hope the gentleman sue the woman for false allegations, defamation of character, and for all the legal fees he obtained.

[Croydon]

Once you involve a relative of a cop, complaints take on a different dynamic.

This is only speculation, but my guess is that the woman saw the nude man, called her husband first, who then called his buddies to go and take out the nude guy. Don't they generally release recordings of 911 calls? Where is this one?

The overreaction of the police is why they are so vigorously pursuing this case, distributing flyers and even sending letters home with schoolchildren. They have to hang this guy in order to justify their own bungling.

The above says it all. I believe the woman called her husband and told her that she saw a man naked in full view. She was probably shocked and upset that he was naked and her son either witnessed it or just the fact that she had her kid w/her was enough to upset her. She called husband and told him what she and THEIR kid experienced and that the man is a predator. Acting on THEIR ANGER, he got his buddies together and they went over there to arrest.

Now that the media is on the story, they have to work OT to make the story stick and show that they rightfully arrested him. To save the force and themselves from embarrassment they are canvassing the neighborhood for any witnesses.

If the man really wants to embarrass them, he will sue the lady and the city for wrongful arrest and defamation of character.

[Fitz1980]

Generally there are two sets of enforcements by the police. If you are the general public you get one standard; if you are a cops family you get a different standard.

[NudeAl]

Generally there are two sets of enforcements by the police. If you are the general public you get one standard; if you are a cops family you get a different standard.

I agree but this is no surprise really this is the way things have been going on since the dawn of civilization. Those with either money, power, or high social station will get preffered treatment. Those with all three will run the country. Such is the way of the world.

[blackrebel]

I am amazed at the number of people who are still not addressing the fact that the man could be seen from the street. The woman walking across his lawn, or the police officer being married to the woman is not relavant, nor is the time of the (alleged) offense.

If you can be seen without the (so-called) offended going our of their way to see you, you are in violation of most laws.

Was the action taken TOO far? It appears to be that way.

We should not be making excuses for the man because he was undressed and we understand that lifestyle.

[Kouak]

I am amazed at the number of people who are still not addressing the fact that the man could be seen from the street. The woman walking across his lawn, or the police officer being married to the woman is not relavant, nor is the time of the (alleged) offense.

If you can be seen without the (so-called) offended going our of their way to see you, you are in violation of most laws.

Was the action taken TOO far? It appears to be that way.

We should not be making excuses for the man because he was undressed and we understand that lifestyle.

You are absolutely right in the fact that if it is illegal to be seen naked in your house from the street AND he was in violation of this law THEN he would be guilty.

However what you are not considering is he was arrested for being seen from HIS PROPERTY by a trespasser. Just because he could have been seen from the street at that time, that is NOT what he was arrested for. Police and prosecutors cannot charge someone for what COULD have happened but rather for what DOES happen.

This is akin to police making an illegal search, finding pot, and arresting you for having drugs. This charge WILL be thrown out in a heartbeat because of the illegal search. But that won't stop the police from hunting you trying to find drugs on you because they (illegally) know that you have had drugs. Now when they legally find them on you, you can be prosecuted.

I say this because the naked breakfast coffee guy will be observed repeatedly from the street so they can legally bust him. Everyone will become peeping Toms and Tomasinas to aid the police. I would not be surprised if police make drive bys early in the morning...to keep the neighborhood safe.

[Boreas]

I am amazed at the number of people who are still not addressing the fact that the man could be seen from the street. The woman walking across his lawn, or the police officer being married to the woman is not relavant, nor is the time of the (alleged) offense.

If you can be seen without the (so-called) offended going our of their way to see you, you are in violation of most laws.

Was the action taken TOO far? It appears to be that way.

We should not be making excuses for the man because he was undressed and we understand that lifestyle.

I agree. If he were naked in my house, he could be seen from the street. Why did he not have the curtains closed? Why had he not taken some precautions? Etc.

Of course, they do seem to have gone overboard in their response. That is based on the fact that we have limited information. Who knows the whole story?

I am a cop's kid. I think had I gotten into trouble with the law, it would have gone either way. There was a real possibility that they would have been harsher on me because I "ought to know better".

[Naturist Mark]

I am amazed at the number of people who are still not addressing the fact that the man could be seen from the street. .

That has not been established as a fact.

[Naturist Mark]

However what you are not considering is he was arrested for being seen from HIS PROPERTY by a trespasser. Just because he could have been seen from the street at that time, that is NOT what he was arrested for. Police and prosecutors cannot charge someone for what COULD have happened but rather for what DOES happen..

Here is a story of a woman being charged for what she COULD have done. (http://www.clothesfreeforum.com/showpost.php?p=243182&postcount=2519)

[naked in NH]

Now why can't I be fortunate enough to look in on a young naked man? Some people, and the wrong people, have all the luck.

[Davin]

In today's Washigton Post:
Man disputes Indecent Exposure Charge

As officers tell it, the 45-year-old woman, the wife of a Fairfax police officer, was walking her son to school about 8:40 a.m. along a well-traveled path between public tennis courts and the house where Williamson had been living for three months when a noise drew her attention to a side door.

That's when she first noticed Williamson standing nude in the doorway, she said. When she and her son got to the sidewalk in front of the house on Arley Drive, they saw him again -- this time, through a large window that appeared to have no drapes.

He is a commercial diver and had lost his job a few days earlier, and he was planning to move to his mother's house near Virginia Beach.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/25/AR2009102502468.html

[DenitaLC]

The plot thickens................

[Arnabas]

That's insane.

Soon we'll be arrested for showering naked.

[Amoure's_challenge]

I have watched videos on this. I am not sure what are facts & hear say. The TV cameras on the street viewing the house made it look like you would have to try hard to see anything as the house had a fair size front yard.

[NekkidNic]

Seems to me to be a lot of hub-bub about not a lot. Haven't read everything about this, BUT, if the coffee pot isn't located in the front of the house and it is above street level, tell the woman and her kid to stay out of the guy's yard. Really, what surprises me most about this whole thing is that our highest elected public official hasn't come out and said the police acted stupidly :rolleyes:.

[baregreg]

I'm "Not" defending this women who complained, however what was this guy thinking having his curtains/blinds open, at that time in the morning?

[NudeAl]

There are ususally three sides to every story yours the other guys and the truth which is usually somewhere in between. I am pulling for the guy, I just hope he wasn't trying to flash them through the window. I am always nude around the house backyard and garage. I know when to push it and when not to. But then I have been surprised by the neighbors on a few occaisions though I was still in my house or fenced in backyard.

[Naturist Mark]

I'm "Not" defending this women who complained, however what was this guy thinking having his curtains/blinds open, at that time in the morning?

The kitchen door opened to his backyard. It was only visible to trespassers. There are conflicting reports about the "front" window, some suggesting there were no curtains because he was packing stuff up. Others that they were still there at the time of the incident. The front window only shows a bit of the kitchen through an inside passageway through another room - i.e. this is looking into a front window all the way through the house to see the back door - whether your curtains are fully drawn in the front room is not something that would automatically come to your mind when wandering into your kitchen at the rear of your house.

The peeping tom ... er ... complainant ... claims that Mr. Williamson followed them inside the house and entered the other rooms. Williamson denies this, not even knowing they were outside spying on him. Which means it is all a he said/she said situation, pretty hard to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt", thus the police canvassing the neighbors to try to establish a pattern of behavior.

No one has yet explained how it is that 5 policemen without a warrant arrived inside Williamson's bedroom while he was napping to awake and arrest him.

[Daveinct]

At 8:30 in the morning, it is light outside. Even on a cloudy day, it's probably brighter outside than inside the house. This should make it very difficult to see in the windows from anything other than very close proximity to the windows, shouldn't it? Isn't this property of glass the reason mirrors work and the reason we close our blinds at night, when the amount of light on each side of the glass is reversed (more inside than out)?


Dave

[Amoure's_challenge]

IMHO
From what I understand the women is a busybody & probably wanna be PO. So she jumped at a chance not to be the wife of a PO, but to grab the power herself & jump into the lime light! Amoure

[baregreg]

At 8:30 in the morning, it is light outside. Even on a cloudy day, it's probably brighter outside than inside the house. This should make it very difficult to see in the windows from anything other than very close proximity to the windows, shouldn't it? Isn't this property of glass the reason mirrors work and the reason we close our blinds at night, when the amount of light on each side of the glass is reversed (more inside than out)?


Dave
The original time stated was 5:30am. Then it got switched to 8:30am.
I'm :confused:

[Lord Drakkus]

The original time stated was 5:30am. Then it got switched to 8:30am.
I'm :confused:

Actually, it now seems that there were 2 seperate incidents. One at 5:30 and one at 8:30.

<object height="340" width="560">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nWSVL8Fmx3Q&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="340" width="560"></object>

[Naturist Mark]

Actually, it now seems that there were 2 seperate incidents. One at 5:30 and one at 8:30.

Of course, but it is "not confirmed" yet ... sure sounds like the police are trying to tidy up their changing story. Anyone else reminded of the balloon boy?

It is still a he said/she said case, with the "she said" side (via the police statements) rapidly evolving. Hopefully the police can gin up enough "forgotten" complaints to backup their new story.

By the way, any word yet on whether they have managed to produce a warrant that allowed 5 police officers with drawn weapons to enter the house to surprise Williamson and arrest him?

[Naturist Mark]

<blockquote><h1>The naked truth about American sexual prudery</h1></div><div class="mainStoryImage"><img src="http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/assets/library/426-swatcops--125680304947233400.jpg" alt="SWAT team" height="312" width="426"></div><div class="mainStoryStand"><h2>Alexander Cockburn: A man walks naked into his kitchen, and all hell breaks loose</h2></div><div class="byAuthor"><a href="http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/author,73,alexander-cockburn">By Alexander Cockburn</a></div><div class="firstPosted"><span class="dateCap">F</span>IRST <span class="dateCap">P</span>OSTED <span class="dateCap">O</span>CTOBER 29, 2009</div>
<div class="textCol"><p class="first"><span class="dropcap">J</span>ust how funny was that story of the man in Fairfax County, Virginia, who got up early on Monday morning, October 19, and walked naked into his own kitchen to make himself a cup of coffee? The next significant thing that happened to 29-year-old Eric Williamson was the local cops arriving to charge him with indecent exposure.</p><p> It turns out that while he was brewing the coffee, a mother who was taking her seven-year-old son along a path beside Williamson's house espied the naked householder and called the local precinct, or more likely her husband, who turns out to be a cop.</p><p> "Yes, I wasn't wearing any clothes," Williamson said later, "but I was alone, in my own home and I just got out of bed. It was dark and I had no idea anyone was outside looking in at me."</p><p>The story ended up on TV, and in the opening rounds the newscasters and network blogs had merciless sport with the Fairfax police for their absurd behaviour. Hasn’t a man the right to walk around his own home (or in this case rented accommodation) dressed according to his fancy? Answer, obvious to anyone familiar with relevant case law: absolutely not.</p><p><span class="longPagePullquote">Williamson will be lucky if they don’t throw a cobbled-up indictment at him</span></p><p>Peeved by public ridicule, the Fairfax cops turned up the heat. The cop's wife started to maintain that first she saw Williamson by a glass kitchen door, then through the kitchen window. Mary Ann Jennings, a Fairfax County Police spokesperson, stirred the pot of innuendo: "We've heard there may have been other people who had a similar incident."</p><p>The cops are asking anyone who may have seen an unclothed Williamson through his windows to come forward, even if it was at a different time. They've also been papering the neighbourhood with fliers, asking for reports on any other questionable activities by anyone resembling Williamson - a white guy who's a commercial diver, and who has a five-year-old daughter, not living with him.</p><p> I'd say that if the cops keep it up, and some prosecutor scents opportunity, Williamson will be pretty lucky if they don't throw some cobbled-up indictment at him. Toss in a jailhouse snitch keen to make his own plea deal, a faked police line-up, maybe an artist's impression of the Fairfax Flasher, and Eric could end up losing his visitation rights and, if worst comes to worst, getting ten years in jail and being posted for life on some sex offender site.</p>
Read the rest. (http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/55336,news-comment,news-politics,virginia-witch-hunt-the-naked-truth-about-american-sexual-prudery)
</blockquote>

[Naturist Mark]

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/assets/library/426-swatcops--125680304947233400.jpg
Authorities respond to report of Jr. High student leaving rest room with an open fly ...

[NudeAl]

LOL! Yeah that about sums it up. Has anyone in the community taken the mans side and said enough of this ridiculous farce?

[Naturist Mark]

LOL! Yeah that about sums it up. Has anyone in the community taken the mans side and said enough of this ridiculous farce?

Umm, yeah ... almost everybody. That is why the police are ratcheting this up so much in order to save face. They are pissed off that public opinion has been so strongly against them.

[brainyguy9999]

If he's in the clear (who knows at this point?), maybe he should seek a lawyer and consider a lawsuit against the police and the woman who filed the false police report and then gave false testimony. He might find the income handy since he lost hist job. Perhaps he could tag her with something along the lines of peeping Tom laws that will land her on the sex offender registry... ;)

I'm just sayin'.....

Stay nude!

bg

[baregreg]

Actually, it now seems that there were 2 seperate incidents. One at 5:30 and one at 8:30.

<object height="340" width="560">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nWSVL8Fmx3Q&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="340" width="560"></object>
Thanks Lord

I still think there's more to this story. Why would his friends boot him out of the house? I have a feeling this guy sounds like trouble. I guess we will wait and see.

[making]

I hope she dont walk by here about 0400 in hte morning.

[Croydon]

Thanks Lord

I still think there's more to this story. Why would his friends boot him out of the house? I have a feeling this guy sounds like trouble. I guess we will wait and see.

He was not booted. At the time of the event, he was actually moving out and moving to VA Beach to live with his mother.

[baregreg]

I just think you all are coming to the defence with this guy before we all know the facts.

[Naturist Mark]

He was not booted. At the time of the event, he was actually moving out and moving to VA Beach to live with his mother.

That's right, he had been laid off his trucking job - which is why he was home alone while his house-mates were all off at work. He had in fact been using that day to pack up his belongings for the move.

[Naturist Mark]

I just think you all are coming to the defence with this guy before we all know the facts.

Yeah, people usually jump to the conclusion that the accused person is a guilty guilty pervert. Rather a nice change to see it going the other way for a change.

Hey, anyone heard about whether those police had a warrant yet? Every report I've read says they didn't.

[baregreg]

Yeah, people usually jump to the conclusion that the accused person is a guilty guilty pervert. Rather a nice change to see it going the other way for a change.

Hey, anyone heard about whether those police had a warrant yet? Every report I've read says they didn't.
Hell Mark anything I say your going to disagree with.
I honestly don't give a damn.

This story changes every day. :rolleyes:

[Naturist Mark]

Hell Mark anything I say your going to disagree with.
I honestly don't give a damn.

This story changes every day. :rolleyes:
...

Does NOT!

...

[Naturist Mark]

Hell Mark anything I say your going to disagree with.
I honestly don't give a damn.

This story changes every day. :rolleyes:


...

Does NOT!

...

Actually it does change every day, that is, the story given by Williamson's accusers - which is the red flag.

[Fitz1980]

Actually it does change every day, that is, the story given by Williamson's accusers - which is the red flag.

I've got to go with Mark on this one. First it's 5:30AM, than suddenly it becomes 8:30AM when kids were catching the bus and the cops claim, but can't substantiate, that they had another call from someone else. Sounds like the famous "Thin Blue Line" to me.

[Croydon]

Yeah, people usually jump to the conclusion that the accused person is a guilty guilty pervert. Rather a nice change to see it going the other way for a change.

Hey, anyone heard about whether those police had a warrant yet? Every report I've read says they didn't.

I really can not wait to see the outcome of this case. I hope the judge drops the charges. I sincerely believe the man should then sue the city and the peeping Jane for wrongful arrest and slander.

It really doesn't take genius to figure out why the city department is working OT to gather "evidence" and "witnesses". As someone pointed out, the department was caught off guard by the national attention it has received. Not only did this story get national attention, they dept was ridiculed. In order to not fall on their faces, they are working OT.

If the city knows what's good for them, they will drop the charges and settle a lawsuit.

One thing I have learned is that majority of people believe one thing: a man should be nude in his own home. It doesn't mater what anyone's feelings regarding nudity is (yay or nay) but a person should be free to go nude in his home.

[Home Nudist]

I've been following these posts and haven't commented because I've been dumbfounded by the stupidity of the issue.

Go through the trouble to peer into my ( or most of our ) kitchen windows any dark morning and you'll be treated to the same sight.

Of course, when it's dark out, my curtains are drawn. But, once it's light out, the curtains are opened, and I count on the fact that it's darker inside than outside, so I won't be seen. (Unless one comes up and presses his nose against the glass!) Also, windows where I have the most "exposure" (no pun intended) are waist high.

And, so what if Williamson stood in his doorway naked? (Assuming it was facing the back of the house and not the street.)

I'll admit, I'm not as careful around my own back door at 5:30 AM. It's a private back yard with no one directly behind me.. The neighbors on each side aren't out and about. And, I don't expect anyone to be out there.

If someone is trespassing on my property and gets an eyeful, I wouldn't be embarrassed or feel at fault. They have no business being there. But, I suppose the law says differently.

This entire thing sounds like a witch hunt, with the police trying to justify their idiocy. Even if the guy was careless, if it was casual nudity, a warning would have been sufficient.

I'm a astounded that they sent 5 policemen without a warrant to arrest him hours later -- as if he had just shot Kennedy or something.

This is insane. A gross overreaction.

[nimrod]

I just think you all are coming to the defence with this guy before we all know the facts.

No we do not know all the facts, mainly because the accusers story has changed which confuses the original facts. The only facts are that he was naked and seen, how, when and why are not really known because of the differences in the accusers story.

I tend to believe the man, not because I am a nudist, but because of the consistancy of his story. It was not embelished just a short and simple answer has to what happened that morning. The fact that swayed me was that she admitted to being on the property, I do believe that she did see him naked, but to no fault of the mans actions.

[Agde]

I know this is all very serious, but perhaps an alternate reaction -- and a way to leverage all the publicity -- would be for AANR Virginia to organize a "Make Morning Coffee in the Buff" Day? :wiseguy:

[NudeAl]

I know this is all very serious, but perhaps an alternate reaction -- and a way to leverage all the publicity -- would be for AANR Virginia to organize a "Make Morning Coffee in the Buff" Day? :wiseguy:

Excellent idea, maybe they could get a local radio station to promote it as well. That would be a big PR boost.

[Naturist Mark]

Man disputes charge of indecent exposure (http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationworld/story/930867.html)
<blockquote>Williamson, reached by phone, said that his roommates had left for work by 5:30 that morning and that he was happy to have the house to himself. He made coffee and eggs and started packing his belongings. A commercial diver, he had lost his job a few days earlier and was planning to move to his mother’s house near Virginia Beach.

By 9 a.m. he had dressed and by 10 a.m. was napping in his room, he said. Police arrived about an hour later.

“All of a sudden, I get woken up by police officers, and this guy has a Taser gun in my face,” he said.

One of the five officers who went into his house called him a pervert, he said, and others looked through his belongings. They left but soon returned to take him to the magistrate.

“A home is a sacred place,” said Williamson, who has a 5-year-old daughter who doesn’t live with him. “When that just gets shattered and destroyed over an accusation, that’s something I don’t believe can be tolerated.”

Jennings, the police spokeswoman, would not comment on Williamson’s claim that officers entered his room without a warrant; she said details would come out in court.

Williamson said he has a court date Nov. 6.</blockquote>

So far, there is no report that the police had a warrant. The quote from the police spokeswoman makes it sound as if they are going to use some sort of probable cause or imminent peril claim to sidestep the lack of warrant. A very unlikely stretch.

[Ken Palmer]

I heard about this story while I was on my vacation in Las Vegas last week while watching the news in my hotel room. I couldn't believe it! First of all, he was in his own home from what I understand. According to the on-the-phone interview the TV station had with him, he was not making any attempt to deliberately expose himself to anyone outside. Also from the accounts, he claimed that the mother and son had to have been trespassing on his property for them to have been able to see him in his kitchen. If that was the case, why not arrrest the mother for trespassing and invasion of privacy? As I say, I am obviously going by what I have heard from the man himself. This is why I always keep the shades and blinds drawn in my home so as not to offend anyone or end up in the back of a police car!

Here is another point. Had that have been a woman, I wander if the mother would have been as hasty to press charges against her as she did with this man. Just a bit of curiosity.

Ken Palmer




A Springfield, Virginia man is facing an indecent exposure charge after a passerby spotted the man naked in his kitchen and reported it to police.

Eric Williamson, 29, says his roommates were not home and he walked into the kitchen to make coffee about 5:30 a.m. Monday.

Yes, I wasn't wearing any clothes but I was alone, in my own home and just got out of bed. It was dark and I had no idea anyone was outside looking in at me," Williamson said.

The complaint came from an unidentified woman who was walking with a 7-year-old boy. A Fairfax County Police spokesman said officers arrested Williamson for indecent exposure because they believe he wanted to be seen naked by the public.

Officer Bud Walker said officers also consulted the Commonwealth's Attorney's Office and they were given the green light to proceed with the charge.

Update: Another station is reporting that he tried to get the attention of three people who were outside the home.

P.S. I live in VA, south of Franconia-Springfield and too have a bus stop near my house

**********
This is ridicolous, since when is it a crime to be naked in the privacy of our own home? He was not exhibiting his body. What do you think?

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/101909_man_caught_making_coffee_naked_faces_charge s

[jeffers]

I just can't understand how being naked in your own house can be considered a crime ( even if someone sees you). I am sure if proper investigations are done the story will be uncovered and he will be cleared

[Lakota]

I am sure if proper investigations are done the story will be uncovered and he will be cleared


Your counting on people to deal with reality..... who don't. He's in the government vortex. Only thing I see from past performance on our governments courts is stupidity. He'll plea bargin it down to something minor, counseling and have to register as a sexual offender.

I hope I am wrong, but this seems to be how the courts work.

[1Ace]

This sucks! Hope they don't watch me making coffee ...

[nuovonudo]

two or three things stand out in my mind.

first, the fact that attitudes toward nudity among "average" americans are messed up. our mass media culture have so oversexualized the naked body that the majority of people under the age of 25 have never showered (naked) with their peers. that's just sick, folks---a sad exaggeration of puritanical dualism ("body bad, soul good").

second, the fact that government intrusiveness has reached this level. this is what happens when a nation loses sight of the limits placed on government authority by its constitution; you have bloated governments at all levels (federal, state, county, municipal) spending like drunken sailors and expanding their own power. whatever happened to liberty, people? or do we only care about liberty when it comes to being naked whenever/wherever we please, but not when it comes to, say, confiscatory tax rates that rob people of the fruit of their individual labor?

third, we still don't know all the facts in this case; let us hope that they come out at trial and that the court reach a just verdict. i agree with several of the previous post-ers that if the woman who lodged the complaint was trespassing, it is she, not the naked man, who should face charges.

--nuovonudo

[northnude]

I have made coffee and breakfast in the nude many times. I just ensure that the curtains are closed if it is dard outside. During the day time you would have to walk up to the window on the deck and look in. If you cannot be naked in your house, where can you be naked. I believe in being cautious and try to not offend people who are not naturists.

You can go to Hanlan's beach in Toronto and be completely clothes free. This is a public beach. We should be able to enjoy our own homes.

[Home Nudist]

This sucks! Hope they don't watch me making coffee ...

I have made coffee and breakfast in the nude many times.
I frequently spend entire mornings, cooking in my kitchen -- naked! And, I take reasonable precautions against being seen.

But, if someone trespasses on my property, where I don't expect anyone to be, and catches a glimpse, I guess that qualifies me for the electric chair !
:wall:

[rassilon]

Goodness! That's the last time I get out of bed to go to the bathroom at three in the morning!

[Jose R]

Well...a case of the eternal floating perspective of gender inequality: when a woman is at home making coffee and man sees her from the outside, he's a Peeping Tom; when it's the man making the coffee and the woman outside, now he's an exhibitionist.

Someday, when we reach perfection, we'll look back at our ridiculous principles, ideas and behaviors and smile...

[Croydon]

Man disputes charge of indecent exposure (http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationworld/story/930867.html)
<blockquote>Williamson, reached by phone, said that his roommates had left for work by 5:30 that morning and that he was happy to have the house to himself. He made coffee and eggs and started packing his belongings. A commercial diver, he had lost his job a few days earlier and was planning to move to his mother’s house near Virginia Beach.

By 9 a.m. he had dressed and by 10 a.m. was napping in his room, he said. Police arrived about an hour later.

“All of a sudden, I get woken up by police officers, and this guy has a Taser gun in my face,” he said.

One of the five officers who went into his house called him a pervert, he said, and others looked through his belongings. They left but soon returned to take him to the magistrate.

“A home is a sacred place,” said Williamson, who has a 5-year-old daughter who doesn’t live with him. “When that just gets shattered and destroyed over an accusation, that’s something I don’t believe can be tolerated.”

Jennings, the police spokeswoman, would not comment on Williamson’s claim that officers entered his room without a warrant; she said details would come out in court.

Williamson said he has a court date Nov. 6.</blockquote>

So far, there is no report that the police had a warrant. The quote from the police spokeswoman makes it sound as if they are going to use some sort of probable cause or imminent peril claim to sidestep the lack of warrant. A very unlikely stretch.

I was wondering if anyone has an update?

[Naturist Mark]

I was wondering if anyone has an update?

I've been searching for an update for the last two weeks. Obviously the press has lost interest. I suspect the case was either quietly dropped, settled, or delayed. Dropped being most likely since there is obvious evidence of police entering without a warrant.

[Naturist Mark]

OK, here's what I've found out.

Eric Williamson was scheduled for an adjudicatory hearing on Friday Nov. 6. An adjudicatory hearing is where a judge decides whether there is sufficient evidence to proceed with a case.

There was no hearing, it was continued until December 18. The scant records available don't indicate which party asked for the continuance, but the delay served to take the case out of the news ... don't be surprised if there is another continuance next month - if charges aren't quietly dropped in the meantime.

The case is Fairfax Country General District Court Case Number GC09262388-00
Virginia Courts Case Information (http://epwsgdp1.courts.state.va.us/gdcourts/captchaVerification.do?landing=landing)

[GORDON2BARE]

Did'nt he have any curtains/drapes on his windows. I close up mine only at night since you can see inside when the lights are on.

[middleman]

Shouldn't he have the person arrested for being a peeping Tom?

[Naturist Mark]

Shouldn't he have the person arrested for being a peeping Tom?

Nope, she can't be charged - she is married to a cop.

[nudistjeff]

I just wonder how many people have seen me naked because they were looking in through my window.

[salem]

He's in his own private place, how dare?!?!