A volunteer youth worker (adult) asks 13 yo girl to show him her breasts. (He does not ask to touch them or anything else.) I can't think of a criminal offense to have him charged with. Could it be criminal solicitation of a minor? I did a search on lexis, but didn't find anything. HELP.

Attempted indecency? 21.11(a)(2)(B)

Thanks for the suggestion. We looked at that one, but didn't think we could make it because he asked her to expose only her breasts. I couldn't find the definition for genitals, but thought the everyday meaning (penis or vagina) is what they meant by that. Am I wrong?

When I look at the whole statute, I want to read anus and breasts as "any part of the genitals" but it is how you read the "or". "Breasts" probably fall outside "genitals." I have not done any research though.

Take a look at this statute and see if this might work as a criminal attempt.

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Stride:
When I look at the whole statute, I want to read anus and breasts as "any part of the genitals" but it is how you read the "or". "Breasts" probably fall outside "genitals." I have not done any research though.

---

It may not have been regarding this statute, but wasn't there a case sometime ago that said breasts were not genitalia? We're looking to our appellate experts to help solve this one.

That case, I think, revolved around a statement "I want to feel your breasts." Held: did not describe an ultimate sex act; conviction for telephone harrassment reversed. Lefevers v. State, 20 S.W.3d 707 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).

So does that mean sexual performance of a child wouldn't fly?

I'd charge Solicitation of a Minor for Sexual Performance by a Child. 15.031(b) If she actually showed her breast, then you have Sexual Performance by a Child.

These facts raise the question whether the indecency by exposure provision should reach breasts too. Has this idea ever been floated? Shannon? John? Others?

[This message was edited by John Stride on 06-27-06 at .]

Who needs to do research to see of breasts are considered "any part of the genitals." I have a mirror. They're not.

Mirrors aside!
Absent a statutory definition, it is interesting to look at some dictionarys and the like. No doubt, genitals are a part of the reproductive system. What are breasts if they are also not part of the reproductive system? Further, aren't genitals and breasts both considered part of sex organs? Also, many condemn the exposure of breasts as much as the exposure of the anus, penis, or vagina. Is there any reason for exempting breasts from the indecency by exposure? Legislative oversight or policy decision?


One of my colleagues, Jessie Allen, has suggested proceeding under 21.11(a)(1), still as an attempt). In other words, def causes child to engage in sexual contact by having her touch her own breasts for his sexual gratification. Does this help?

[This message was edited by John Stride on 06-27-06 at .]

[This message was edited by John Stride on 06-27-06 at .]

quote:

---

I want to read anus and breasts --
John Stride

---

Yeah, I heard that was a bestseller.

Funny, Jimbeaux! Since that is out of context, you might want to see if the papers need any reporters.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jane starnes:
Who needs to do research to see of breasts are considered "any part of the genitals." I have a mirror. They're not.

---

Nice to finally meet you last week. You're always good for brightening an otherwise less-interesting day.

You weren't using one of those trick mirrors like they have in the circus, were you?

[This message was edited by Greg Gilleland on 06-27-06 at .]

[This message was edited by Greg Gilleland on 06-27-06 at .]

John, my understanding of why breasts are not included in the indecent exposure statute is two-fold: first, men have them too, it is just that no one cares to see them (especially if they are big enough to require a "mansiere"); second, we would have to go after women who breast feed in public - maybe they shouldn't, but who is going to tell them to stop? And while they are part of sexual development, nobody gets pregnant doing anything with breasts. Can you imagine the pregnancy rate if that would work? (Right up there with getting pregnant from French-kissing)

E, I agree with bgrobb, the solicitation statute expressly includes 43.25, and the sexual conduct definition there includes anything exposing the nipple.

Whitney

Thanks Whitney.
I am reminded of a line by Hugh Grant in Notting Hill about Meatloaf having a fine pair! That aside, does anyone seriously think the statutes are concerned with men who have breasts? Further, why is touching breasts by schoolboys always referred to as getting to one of the bases if it doesn't lead to sex?

Thanks for all the comments and advice -- even the tangents. It looks like I wound up with a third degree felony to charge the creep with.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Whitney:
(especially if they are big enough to require a "mansiere
Whitney

---

IT'S THE BRO!!!!! Not Mandiere.