Silkroad Online Forums

Columbus, Ohio, in May when he saw a woman sunbathing topless under a tree.

He approached her and they started talking and getting comfortable, the woman smiling and resting her foot on his shoulder at one point.

Eventually, she asked to see Garrison's penis; he unzipped his pants and complied.

Seconds later, undercover police officers pulled up in a van and arrested Garrison; he was later charged with public indecency, a misdemeanor, based on video footage taken by cops who were targeting men having sex or masturbating in the park. While topless sunbathing is legal in the city's parks, exposing more than that is against the law.


http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=4022717&page=1

That's bullshit, she was the one who committed the crime, not him.
That's just like to catch a predator (not really though, because that's still a little gross). But the girl is practically begging for sex, what the hell is the guy supposed to do?
When a girl says "Wanna **** me?" and seems totally sincere, what kind of guy says no?
Seriously, it's bullshit.

WTF?? How is this elligal??? She started cummoing on to hima nd she asked to see it?? it is not againts the law to fuc* a girl the first time.

guys read the rest of the article on the link i gave.

Supposedly its legal to lie topless in the the park but illegal to show anything else. and the chick was working for the cops

redneck wrote:guys read the rest of the article on the link i gave.

Supposedly its legal to lie topless in the the park but illegal to show anything else. and the chick was working for the cops

I did read.
It's bullshit though because he wouldn't have done that if she didn't ask him to. It's Farking retarded. There was NOBODY else there except for the woman who wanted to see his rod. Police need to stop being such retards, instead of filming topless women trick poor fellows, they should be stopping bank robberies. Wtf.

Pretty gay seeing as shes the one who asked him to whip it out

[SD]Rainigul wrote:

redneck wrote:guys read the rest of the article on the link i gave.

Supposedly its legal to lie topless in the the park but illegal to show anything else. and the chick was working for the cops

I did read.
It's bullshit though because he wouldn't have done that if she didn't ask him to. It's Farking retarded. There was NOBODY else there except for the woman who wanted to see his rod. Police need to stop being such retards, instead of filming topless women trick poor fellows, they should be stopping bank robberies. Wtf.

Like that black guy once sang

"Living in America..Eye to Eye Coast to Coast"

entrapment much?

His fault for whipping out his shlong, but then again that's some mega entrapment. Undercover cops going topless to catch perverts? Are their police seriously that bored?

Trice wrote:entrapment much?

Indeed. Sounds like retarded laws they have in that area.

i don't know if i would win, but i would sue because she asked. it's another thing if he did it out of no where, but she lured him into doing it.

X-Lax wrote:i don't know if i would win, but i would sue because she asked. it's another thing if he did it out of no where, but she lured him into doing it.

Cops dressed as prostitutes also "lure" people into asking them for sex for money. This is perfectly legal.

Yeah but that's prostitution, this is just some park where a dude showed this topless chick his wang. Sure none of it is right but it's retarded to bring this dude in and give him a year's probation and a fine for something he was lured into.

Shit like that should be illegal, next we'll hear about dudes getting busted for accepting spare change and having it called stealing.

lol, v&.

Fact is, the idiot went strolling over there with one thing on his mind, and that is exactly what he got v& for. It doesn't matter whether it was a police officer or not, he had the intent to commit the crime, and followed through with it. Asking someone willing to do something to do it isn't the same as entrapment.

Well cops are creating these situations to get people to **** up. If there wasn't any topless undercover cop there he would've gone about his business like any other day. If it was a random chick doing the same thing, then someone else could've had them both busted, which is the way it should be. Cops just shouldn't be doing this shit.

Reise wrote:His fault for whipping out his shlong, but then again that's some mega entrapment. Undercover cops going topless to catch perverts? Are their police seriously that bored?

yeah the cops can be a pain the ass a lot of times. I read that sometimes if the city doesn't have enough money, they tell the cops to hand out more speeding tickets so they can generate more money >_>

Reise wrote:Well cops are creating these situations to get people to **** up. If there wasn't any topless undercover cop there he would've gone about his business like any other day. If it was a random chick doing the same thing, then someone else could've had them both busted, which is the way it should be. Cops just shouldn't be doing this shit.

I agree with you to a certain extent, however you must look at the situation from a wider perspective. Remember that this area previously had "160 citations for public indecency" over the course of a year. It's not like the police were sitting in their station writing ideas of how they can fark over the public on a whiteboard.

They saw a problem, and they came up with an idea to fix it. It's sort of like To Catch A Predator. Although I'm not sure about turning it into America's next form of entertainment, the basic idea behind it is sound. How exactly does one catch a criminal without luring him, until after he has committed the crime? When it comes to something like child molestation, is it right to let a single predator go raping several children before one of them gathers up the courage to report it or he is caught?

Now I will agree with you on one thing, it is a bit silly that they started this operation to stop public indecency. Obviously public indecency isn't exactly harming anything other than our eyes, and I don't really care either way about it. But as it stands, it is an illegal act to whip out your ding-dong in public, and if police really consider it that much of a problem, they are free to use whatever means are within their bounds to put a stop to it.

Really though, I'm actually siding with the police on this one because I'm farking tired of this childish attitude people have that police are "useless pigs" or that they only exist to give you a bad day. Sure, a few bad apples give them this reputation, (especially because the media loves to latch onto cases involving them), but overall they are no worse than your serviceman or your fireman or your mailman.

Jstar1 wrote:yeah the cops can be a pain the ass a lot of times. I read that sometimes if the city doesn't have enough money, they tell the cops to hand out more speeding tickets so they can generate more money >_>

Courts collect fines, not police officers. Around here, after a court collects a fine half of it goes to the state and half of it goes to the city. Police officers are paid for by your taxes, not your tickets. Still, by your logic you should be blaming the city, not the cops anyway. The cops are just doing their jobs.