Quote:
Originally Posted by fango44
Any particular reason this is being acted on now, months later? If the WNBR was being run with the cooperation of the police, maybe the case will be thrown out. I don't understand how they can charge one guy, when hundreds (thousands?) of others were riding naked as well. 
edit: You don't make this exactly clear in your post, but was he riding around away from the prescribed WNBR route? That might be what the complaint is about. Can you clear up this point, please?
Thanks
Fango |
First off, Daniel was "charged" two days ago, but not "arrested" as I said in the other post. Arrest generally means you are physically taken into custody, I think.
Most of my info is coming from this source:
http://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=25925
Two complaints were filed the day of the ride, but for some reason not acted upon until now. Police were instructed to only intervene (i.e. tell riders to stop, cover up etc) in the event of a complaint. Apparently they did so when they told riders not to continue onto the beach, and later when they may have asked them to dress.
No one was riding off course or behaving inappropriately. I gather from one of the comments to the article that for a charge of indecent exposure to stick, one has to be doing something lewd or be nude specifically to shock others. This was obviously not the case.
I got a Flickr mail back from Daniel. He says "yeah, this sucks!" (not surprising), then he said he wants to see my pics (for reasons not connected in any way to the charge). Otherwise, he did not elaborate. I'll probably write him back once more and if anyone wants to offer support, advice, or ask a question, I can relay that to him.
Anyway, i did not give out his Flickr name and we should stay off of his photostream for now. He has enough to contend with. But I can relay any of your thoughts, and maybe pm me if you want to continue this off the forums.
KLondike