Bill toughens law on visual sexual aggression against children in Maine

[pegleg]

I'm not quite sure what to make of this bill. Where do we draw the line?

http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080406/NEWS/804060343

[BattyDem]

1. What does this mean?

I read the article, but I'm not exactly sure what they will be prosecuting. Public restrooms were mentioned, but I assume that there's already a law against "peeping" on a person of any age.

How do you identify "visual sexual aggression"? Does that mean someone looks at a child just a little too long or does a person have to have a "questionable" look in their eyes? What if they're wearing sunglasses and you can't see their eyes? :shrug: I'm not trying to be a smartass ... I'm honestly confused.

[eShirl]

2. this appears to be the bill they are referring to

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/billtexts/LD207901.asp

LD 2079
LD 2079 reference page
Document created 1/25/2008 16:22. - Get Text: MS-Word, RTF | PDF
LR 2848
Item 1

An Act To Strengthen the Crime of Visual Sexual Aggression against a Child
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:

Sec. 1. 17-A MRSA §256, sub-§1, ¶A, as amended by PL 2005, c. 655, §1, is further amended to read:
A. For the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire or for the purpose of causing affront or alarm, the actor, having in fact attained 18 years of age , in a public or private place, exposes the actor's genitals to another person or causes the other person to expose that person's genitals to the actor and the other person, not the actor's spouse, has not in fact attained 14 years of age. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime;

Sec. 2. 17-A MRSA §256, sub-§1, ¶B, as amended by PL 2005, c. 655, §1, is further amended to read:
B. For the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, the actor, having in fact attained 18 years of age , in a public or private place, exposes the actor's genitals to another person or causes the other person to expose that person's genitals to the actor and the other person, not the actor's spouse, has not in fact attained 12 years of age. Violation of this paragraph is a Class C crime;

summary

This bill amends the crime of visual sexual aggression against a child to clarify that the crime applies when the exposure occurs in either a public or private place.

[BattyDem]

4. Thanks for the info.

:hi:

The article was confusing to me, but the bill is very clear.

[cynatnite]

3. The text of the bill is very clear and involves exposure...

Sec. 1. 17-A MRSA §256, sub-§1, ¶A, as amended by PL 2005, c. 655, §1, is further amended to read:

A. For the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire or for the purpose of causing affront or alarm, the actor, having in fact attained 18 years of age, in a public or private place, exposes the actor’s genitals to another person or causes the other person to expose that person’s genitals to the actor and the other person, not the actor’s spouse, has not in fact attained 14 years of age. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime;
Sec. 2. 17-A MRSA §256, sub-§1, ¶B, as amended by PL 2005, c. 655, §1, is further amended to read:

B. For the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire, the actor, having in fact attained 18 years of age, in a public or private place, exposes the actor’s genitals to another person or causes the other person to expose that person’s genitals to the actor and the other person, not the actor’s spouse, has not in fact attained 12 years of age. Violation of this paragraph is a Class C crime;

SUMMARY
This bill amends the crime of visual sexual aggression against a child to clarify that the crime applies when the exposure occurs in either a public or private place.

http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/externalsiteframe.asp?ID=280027586&LD=2079&Type=4&SessionID=7

[mainegreen]

5. Sounds like a reasonable bill. n/t

[Lance_Boyle]

6. I tend to agree, and it was

these 6 words up front that sold me - "for the purpose of sexual gratification." This means that, if the law is applied as written, nobody is going to jail for mooning their classmates, and nobody's going to be labeled a sex offender if caught pissing in an alleyway where an underage person might see. I'd like to see more of this sort of clarity in more of this nation's "sex-crime" statutes.