Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla
I can't imagine that's true. Seeing someone naked doesn't "harm" anyone directly, but I'd suggest one not expose themselves to kids or anyone in public, as the laws don't take kindly to that sort of behavior. It's often the "thought" or motivation behind the act that makes it more serious.
|
What I mean is that there is not likely to be a law that specifically prohibits you from putting your semen into cupcake batter, cooking it, and then giving it to someone. That's why I cited the laws that I think would potentially be applicable. The most likely law is one against adulterating food based upon the rules for statutory interpretation.
As far as public nudity, there are laws against public nudity in most jurisdictions in this country. So you can say "California statute 123.456.789 (or whatever) prohibits the knowing lewd exhibition of the genitals, anus, or female breast of any person in a public place or a place reasonably accessible by members of the public" or whatever statutory language is used by California or some other jurisdiction. That is a quite specific law that focuses upon the conduct you are describing.
I do not know of any specific law that says, "A person commits a criminal violation by adding semen to cupcake batter, preparing the cupcakes, and then distributing them to persons without their knowledge" or whatever. Rather, I would anticipate that she would face charges that relate to adulterating food because that is the closest statutory prohibition that I could think of as related to this act. If Louisiana has laws specifically against baking semen in cupcake, I would expect that this issue has arisen before because this isn't really conduct that legislatures consider when crafting criminal codes out of whole cloth.
The reason I discussed the harm to someone is that would be a factor for the court to consider in sentencing. If I give someone a brownie laced with a laxative and they have diarrhea to the point that they become dehydrated and need hospital treatment, that degree of harm will factor into sentencing. Contrast that with someone who pees in the office coffee. Is it disgusting? Absolutely. But such conduct is not likely to cause physical harm to those who drink the coffee. In such an instance, the person who put the laxative into the food is likely to receive a harsher sentence than the one who peed in the office coffee even though the coffee pee-r conduct is undoubtedly far more disgusting. The discussion was about reasonable sentences for this conduct and I was explaining factors that would drive down a sentence (lack of harm) versus factors that would increase a sentence (abuse of a position of trust).