“City man charged with open lewdness” discloses “A 30-year-old man was charged with open lewdness, police said…A witness initially called police when she allegedly saw Johnson around 4:20 p.m. Dec. 3 masturbating inside his vehicle and again on Wednesday afternoon, police said.”
WATCHDOG: The article doesn’t mention whether the fellow is homeless, mentally unbalanced, or retarded. If only accused but not convicted, why give his name and post a picture? Is there a concern that men who masturbate are inherently an imminent danger to the public? (If so, God help us all!)
How does such a trivial and sad matter amount to news for a community of half a million people, let alone a photograph? What does this do to the life of the accused and his loved ones?
We think whoever posted the story is as big a “jerk off”, journalistically speaking, as the accused. And we note that both the witness and the reporter were female.
Growl!
Actually the question that I had after reading the account – “How did she determine that he was masturbating?” Did she walk up to the vehicle?
Not to be too gross but the average (or even a record holder!) penis would not be visible while seated in a car unless the woman was relatively close to the man.
While one could guess or surmise what someone was doing without a closer look – You wouldn’t KNOW.
The editor is so correct in calling the responsible party at the Lancaster Newspaper a “jerk off”.
But what is the motivation of the Lancaster City Police Information officer in releasing a photograph of this man in the first place? Photos often do not accompany releases. This was a conscious decision. Was is right?