Maybe wrote on Oct 19, 2006 7:14 AM:Maybe the boy's parents should be asking themselves why they let their son harass a neighbor instead? The woman was on her property. She wasn't in a public place. If the kid and the parents don't like it, they can move their activities somewhere else. Also, the boy is a teen, it's highly unlikely he's never seen a naked woman before and even more unlikely that he was "offended". Probably got a charge out of the whole scene. Geez DA - focus on the big things and stop worrying about trvial neighborhood disputes like this one. With stupid cases like this, its no wonder a case takes 1-2 years to appeal.

Eww wrote on Oct 19, 2006 10:32 AM:40 year old woman naked? Kid needs some serious therapy.

Gary from Winchester wrote on Oct 19, 2006 12:34 PM:The prosecution is right and the judge is very wrong, Penal code 7 defines word and phases, maybe the judge should do some light reading before ruling on matters of the law.....this seems to be the norm rather than the exception here in Riverside County.

To Maybe wrote on Oct 19, 2006 1:31 PM:ARE YOU KIDDING? Your values are askew. If it was a 40-year-old man involving a 14 year old girl, you would want him "strung" up. You need to step back and look at your own beliefs. They worry me.

From Maybe wrote on Oct 19, 2006 5:47 PM:This wasn't an incident of sexual predator. This was an incident where a woman was being victimized by her neighbor's son, apparently with the parent's consent since they did nothing to stop their son from harassing the woman. Highly doubtful that a 14 year old girl would be harassing neighbor to this extent. You need to get a reality check. My values are not askew, but I do have a sense of humor which is something you apparently lack.

Riverside wrote on Oct 19, 2006 6:35 PM:To Gary, I don't believe the Judge is very wrong. Shouldn't the DA know the law? The DA did not argue Penal code section 7, If so we wouldn't be discussing this today. This case is a pure example of the waste of tax payers money by the DA on another petty case. 314.1 of the Penal Code says it's mandatory to register as a sex offender. Should this woman really be labeled with all other sexual predators???

Maybe and Riverside Nailed It wrote on Oct 19, 2006 9:59 PM:"The victim's father asked me how he was supposed to teach his son about right and wrong after this ..." Does the father really think that by prosecuting this woman as a sex offender he is teaching his obnoxious teenager the meaning of right and wrong? Seems to me that he should have done a better job before this incident happened. The DA should have tossed those people out of his office, or better yet should have threatened to charge the kid as a peeping tom -- she was on *her* sun deck on her own property, after all.

To Maybe wrote on Oct 20, 2006 12:25 AM:A 14 year old is not allowed to play basket ball in front of his own home? The kids on my street have a basketball net next door, and I don't find it disrespectful..nor am I victimized, in fact I think if they are home playing they are not out commiting other crimes.... and no you do no not have a sense of anything....let alone humor..

To Riverside wrote on Oct 20, 2006 12:30 AM:Yes she should be treated as a sex offender....and required to register....as would a man if he did the same thing......it meets the requirement so be it....

Gary from Winchester wrote on Oct 20, 2006 12:43 AM:How dare you "quote" me and not even say what I say....What are the"" marks for?

To Riverside wrote on Oct 20, 2006 12:52 AM:Yes the DA does know the law...that why they charged the person.....the judge is the one who needs to read the penal code book.

jj wrote on Oct 20, 2006 5:10 PM:That must be one scarred boy to witness an attractive 40 year old woman disrobe in front of him. How many dateline episodes show women showing up at houses of there victims as sexual on-line predators? NONE!!! I wonder why? The DA's need to wake up and treat this case as it should be treated...as a simple misdemeaner, nothing more/nothing less. Poor Kid! Did he take any pics for his scrap book? You can't label her a sex offender if she was not out for sexual gradification. I applaud the judge for his actions. Sounds like the DA's need to grow up and move on to more important cases to prosecute.

Maybe NOT wrote on Oct 20, 2006 5:13 PM:Playing basketball is not "harassing" the neighbor. Even if it were, the woman is still wrong. She obviously made an effort to expose herself to a minor, which is a serious offense. If she wanted to handle it correctly, she could have just called the police and filed a complaint about excessive noise. Let's keep making excuses for adults that do very wrong things though. That's what will get our society going in the right direction.

followup comment wrote on Oct 20, 2006 10:22 PM:despite what i said before the fact is that the sex offender registry should be equal, a woman who assualts a male should be treated just as a male who assaults a female.

Wallabee wrote on Oct 21, 2006 8:16 AM:This woman must believe she is very ugly, considering she thought that a view of her naked body would punish a hormone-charged 14-year old boy ! But seriously, even if the kid was real obnoxious, how many people would try to get revenge by removing their clothes? If this was a 40 year old man vs 14 year old girl, he would rightfully be charged with a sex crime. Amazing that in this millenium, there really still is a gendre double-standard with regard to sex crimes.

Ricardo wrote on Oct 21, 2006 1:08 PM:Yes there is a gendre double standard in regard to sex crimes and domestic violence as there should be. It is not the same when a woman hits a man either- Wake up- use your brain

maybe u need a brain wrote on Oct 21, 2006 2:13 PM:My God! This is unbelieveable, "let their son harass a neighbor", "woman was being victimized by her neighbor's son, apparently with the parent's consent since they did nothing to stop their son from harassing the woman", "his obnoxious teenager". HE WAS PLAYING BASKETBALL!! The people who made those quotes Sound like they are nasty, unpleasent, bitter, miserable people. I don't judge people like they do, which is why I emphasized the word sound in "Sound like they". However, to attribute those things to a 14yo playing basketball on his own property, I would be shocked to find out that these nasty people are anything else. That woman exposed herself to a minor in public. She did a crime, she needs to be prosecuted(by a sane judge). FYI to jj, you don't know about labeling or classifying sex offenders, just because it popped into your head doens't make it true. Also, no one said she was attractive, and while there are exceptions, 40yo women boobs are not something 14yo's want to see. And I am guesing this woman was most likely extremly unnatractive, I mean she took off her clothes to try to get rid of the kid..what does that tell you? What scares me more than people like this woman, are people like you all who defend her. You have a brain, try using it.

Paul wrote on Oct 22, 2006 1:01 PM:First of all if the teen was disturbing the year old immoral woman she should have just called the police like the teens parnets did. Secondly since this is such an issue of debate it is obvious that many people have not been taught right, from wrong. Those people must be a product of the public school system. Now as for the judge, The judge is just doing what liberal judges do, which is to legislate from the bench. This so called judge proves that what the BIBLE says is true. Proclaiming themselves to be wise, they made themselves a fool.

opinion wrote on Oct 22, 2006 1:55 PM:everyone in this article handled the situation wrong. the woman asked the kid to quite down and he did not. she should have then talked to the parents, and if they were not available, she should have called the police. Just because the kid was on his parents property, he does not have the right to disturb his neighbors. In that same vain, she has the right to sit naked on her property, as long as it does not interfer with the neighbors enjoyment of their property. Since she specifically stripped to bother her neighbors, she was wrong and should be charged with indecent exposure, which she was. I have to ask however, where are you people coming up with this sex predator stuff? (they did not say she tried to seduce the boy). That is not a change, or even what the DA was prosecuting her for. Try to stick with the case in hand, and stop trying to add irrevelant opinions.

What's wrong with this picture? wrote on Oct 22, 2006 2:19 PM: I feel that this woman could've found another way to deal with the situation. What happened with going over to the parents house and talking to them about their son playing basketball some place else? Or maybe calling the cops if he was causing a disturbance? In my opinion, she should've been charged. There was no excuse for what she did. Anonymous

A homeowner wrote on Oct 22, 2006 2:34 PM:People need to remember that they are not entitled to silence - even in their own homes. Lawnmowers, leafblowers, children playing basketball in their driveways...these are some of the noises we all must reasonably expect to deal with. I don't think the woman was reasonable to ask the boy to stop playing in the first place...she proved how unreasonable she was by her ensuing actions.

Rico wrote on Oct 22, 2006 3:23 PM:Cmon people. If the boy was playing basketball after the noise ordinance goes into effect say 9PM. then the boy is wrong. If the lady is nude on her deck in the backyard,not in front of her house on the entrance as the article seems to imply, and the boy has to look over the fence to see her, he is liable. We all simoly need more facts. She may be ugly fat and offensive to look at.If so it got the boy to stop. Heh she could be a graveyard shift worker who neede to sleep. Was she married? Whats her man have to say?

Rob wrote on Oct 22, 2006 3:48 PM:Ricardo, I find it very disturbing that you support a double standard when it comes to domestic violence. Granted, men are usually stronger than women and hence a single strike could cause more physical damage. That's irrelevant though. The act of one spouse striking the other is assault and offends the person regardless of how much damage is done. I am divorced from a verbally and physically abusive woman (not to mention unfaithful). One of my brothers is as well. And though she was smaller, she was resouceful enough to slap, pull hair, and even use a golf club. Women take advantage of the fact that very few men will strike back. Nor are men likely to report the abuse. ... Hooray for feminism and double standards! ...

Sendhertome wrote on Oct 22, 2006 9:32 PM:Maybe, you wrote the woman was on her own property. Wake up, the teen was on his own property also.

H20wader wrote on Oct 23, 2006 4:59 AM:who cares? there is enough fault to go aroung. i need the history on this case, there is not enough information here to make any kind of decision. a kid playing basketball on his parents porperty is ok. How much npise coul he make? a mature woman naked to stop the kid is over-reacting but i just do not have the full story. the decision of the judge is not writing the law by judicial decree but a plea for the law to clearer. (when the law was written no one even thought that a woman would be exposing herself. I need the history of the case.

Roberto wrote on Oct 23, 2006 7:49 AM:Double standard...yes women are from venus and men are from mars. What part of this doesn't anyone understand?Obviously the DA has nothing better to do. Where's the victim?

Major "King" Kong wrote on Oct 23, 2006 3:43 PM:1. The judge is wrong for not reading the entire code and not being able to comprehend its meaning. 2. The DA is wrong for prosecuting this woman as a sex offender/predator (If that part is so the case.) Garcia's was an act of very poor judgement and nothing more. 3. Garcia is wrong for not chatting up the boy's parents over the issue. 4. The parents of the boy are wrong for not raising him to be respectful of the reasonable requests of others. The boy I am sure is having a grand old time over this whole thing. Are we all so far gone we need to over react to every silly act? We act like a naked body is an act of murder at times. Just chalk one up to a less than bright judge and go do something worthwhile.

Matt Green wrote on Oct 23, 2006 7:32 PM:This is ridiculous. She just needs to keep her clothes on. By the way, seeing nude women causes teenagers to have mental scars? Not likely! ... kid probably looks at more porn than I do. His parents need to grow up and stop living under a rock.

Nj wrote on Oct 24, 2006 3:52 AM:"How many dateline episodes show women showing up at houses of there victims as sexual on-line predators" -> None, because of the double standard in society that lets their editors not even consider trying to find female predators. Personally I think a small fine ($100 or less) would be enough and you people over there are really strange when it comes to nudity anyway.. but given the way a male would be treated in such a situation, this is outrageous.

Eric wrote on Oct 24, 2006 8:19 AM:This is just another example that common sense is dead in this country. I wonder where the judge will be shooting hoops this weekend???

Who cares? wrote on Oct 24, 2006 10:48 AM:Why is this even a legal issue at all? A boy saw a naked woman. Good god man, he'll probably start eating babies! This is a domestic, and stupid, dispute. No legal action should ever have even entered into it.

It's not private wrote on Oct 30, 2006 1:09 AM:She may have been undressed in her front lawn, but I have problem with the person saying it was private property. So are you saying it's ok for her to engage in sexual acts in front of her lawn as well?

Oceaniax wrote on Jul 29, 2007 11:36 AM:I find the opinions of some people here absolutely shocking. The case is not about whether or not the child was being rude. The case is about what the woman thought was an appropriate response to said rudeness. And to Maybe, it's absurd to use the argument "Highly doubtful that a 14 year old girl would be harassing neighbor to this extent". Females can't be rude to this extent? Give me a break. And if one had? If a tomboy was playing basketball outside and disturbing the neighbors, and Mr. Hillbilly decided the best way to curtail the behavior would be to strip nude and sit in plain view of her? That would be alright, and just as harmless as the case in question here today? Your extreme gender bias needs to be seriously self evaluated.

SickBoi wrote on Sep 11, 2007 10:56 AM:I am not shocked to see these comments trying to place the blame on the boy in feminazi controlled California. This is the birthplace of gender bias, I do not know why any other logical thinker here is stunned at all by the lame attempt to paint this female as a victim. To those who say she did not try to seduce the boy so it was not a sexual offensive crime, tell that to the man on the sex offenders registry for grabbing a girls arm when talking to her about she needs to watch out when stepping into the street as he almost hit her. He did nothing sexual to her. But yet his life is ruined as he will always be marked a sex offender. Spread your gender bias somewhere else. Cali has enough to go around.

daveinga wrote on Sep 11, 2007 2:59 PM:what disney law schools are handing out these law degrees? ... judge must have slept thru the classes on equality before the law, if this bunch of half wits still teach it. amazing!

Tom BC wrote on Nov 2, 2007 12:55 PM:Come on, people. It's very simple. The judge looked for a legal excuse to drop the case and found one. Public nudity has never been widely accepted by the American society at large, so the woman has no reason to expect that her actions can be seen as acceptable. In this case, the boy is most certainly allowed to play basketball anywhere he likes, as long as it is not on her property, and being that her nudity was a conscious action directed at the 14 year old boy, it really is a form of sexual aggression toward a minor.

Hilarious wrote on Apr 11, 2008 11:47 AM:Why didnt she just say "He's lying."?

Because to be honest, thats such a stupid response to playing basketball, anyone would believe her over a 14 year old boy.