I don’t think there was a particular law, I could be wrong & I could google, but I’ll rely on my flawed memory & say that the case that fixed it up had a women walking on a hot day shirtless who was charged with some blanket charge like indecent whatever.
& since it isn’t indecent the court fixed it up.
I wasn’t up here then, but there are regular references to it. A bar I once frequented had a number of patrons who would go topless every now and again, and on an annual date I can’t remember.
Actually no. Their job is to enforce the law, that’s why they are called “law enforcement officers.”
“Peacekeepers” are a different crowd entirely.
Sorry to be pedantic, but the policeman was concerned that the girls display had the potential to disrupt the peace, which he’s duty bound to keep.
Sorry brains pore, keeping the peace is a major part of a policemans job.
If you’re being sarcastic or devil’s advocate - nice intent. But humorous posts like yours need a disclaimer - or what I prefer - a ridiculous after-statement or statements that make your intent at least somewhat clear.
Nevertheless - people have been sexually harassed while wearing full maritime rain gear. All it can take for harassers is to see a pretty face - or a face that fits their fancy. Plus the guy from the get-go came off as a dick - not a misguided Good-Samaritan.
No. None of those things.
And no suggestion of rape either. Merely a disturbance of the peace.
Alistair -
First, please do not apologize for being pedantic. It can be a strength when expressed in moderation 
But going topless is legal there and they were doing it at night with not a lot of people around - plus there were three of them, and being in their twenties, at least one of them was sure to have a cell phone. Also, I believe it was in their neighborhood or at least familiar territory. Just my two-cents.
~cdh
And also, none of that matters. Police can’t arbitrarily decide things aren’t allowed because they imagine it’s “disturbing the peace.” Otherwise police would be free to detain black people if the community was racist. Your rights don’t become non-rights when police think they troublesome.
Okay - I understand your point - but I respectfully disagree.
Cheers!
~cdh
A cop can’t break the law to enforce the peace. He had no legal right to demand those women don shirts. Besides, it’s not like their boobies were causing a riot or anything. Everything WAS peaceful until the cop showed up.
And how/why would their not wearing a shirt affect “the peace”? How are men’s chests any different? If the sexes are legally recognized as having equal rights, then the laws and their enforcement simply cannot be allowed to be sexist.
Using your same logic, police should relieve people of their money and property to protect them from robbery. It is actually both easier - and, more crucially, realistic - to focus law enforcement efforts upon people who are the few actually violating the laws. These systems are purposefully made so that they should not need to impose upon 99.99% of the population simply to ensure that 00.01% doesn’t do something wrong.
Humbabella -
Yes - you are right - none of that matters.
I question that the cop actually believed it was disturbing the peace. He has some other reason - like a closer look. Women should be able to do this in the day with no harassment from anyone.
Guys go around topless all the time. In my city - Eugene, Oregon, topless is legal for everyone. The police don’t even seem to notice. If an officer detained anyone for being topless he or she would be laughed at by superiors and at the least, reprimanded. It would warrant a news story and he would wish he never went there
Look out, we’re dealing with a heavy hitter here.
The story is that the moment they started filming he changed his tone and suddenly it was “do you have lights” when the lights are shining on him. So basically he knew the way he was behaving before they started filming wasn’t okay.
Well if you need the difference explained to you…
The whole ‘disturbance of the peace’ thing is a bullshit idea you came up with when your first reason to find fault with the women floundered.
You are going a long way out of your way to blame the women here, when a basic assessment of the facts shows that the cop was out of line and had no reason to stop them, other than his personal discomfort with the female form.
I’d like to see the body cam footage… to make sure no civil liberties were violated.
And it has been here in Ontario for over 20 years, and, truth be known, it’s not that uncommon. It’s also not a big deal. I sincerely doubt that, in that 20+ years, public toplessness has caused any disruption of the peace, not that this is a legitimate excuse to enforce what isn’t on the books anyway. (Far from. The purpose of laws is to define what is a disruption of the peace.)
(Edit: almost 20 years. The arrest that led to the court case was in '91. The case wrapped up with an Ontario Supreme Court decision in '96. My bad.)
I still maintain that she was self-promoting, and it’s getting harder to get people’s attention for your work these days, so why not go that step further?
It worked for actresses who dared to go that bit further in the sixties, like Helen Mirren for instance, but not so much any longer…and besides, she a little past that these days…
