The Godiva Precedent
Is argued before the high court as public nudity is nixed as a First Amendment right in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Supreme Judicial Court overrules an Cambridge judge, and reinstates the lewdness charge on an anti-Xmas commercialization protestor. Boston Herald:
The naked truth has caught up to a free spirit who thought she had shed a 2005 felony charge of open and gross lewdness.
Dancing nude in Harvard Square to protest the commercialization of Christmas is not a constitutionally protected act of self-expression, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled yesterday.
The court reinstated the June 2005 lewdness charge against Ria Ora, saying her behavior was a potentially frightening and intimidating assault on the public’s eyes.
“Every person has a legitimate right to express themselves as long as they do so within the law and in a way that does not infringe on the rights of the public, particularly our children,” said Corey Welford, spokesman for Middlesex District Attorney Gerard Leone Jr.
The case, which had been dismissed by Cambridge District Court Judge Severlin B. Singleton III, will now proceed to trial.
“For her to be subject to a felony for what she did is kind of scary,” said Ora’s defense attorney, Daniel Beck.
The Herald was unable to reach the street-corner stripper, whose MySpace.com profile lists her as 31, of Cambridge, and a member of the Boston Society of Spontaneity, “a group of mostly strangers who get together for organized weirdness in public.”
Beck said the summer Christmas backlash was an annual event. He was not certain who was behind it.
“It obviously got attention,” he said.
Judge Singleton was of the opinion that the state’s law against lascivious behavior - punishable by up to three years in state prison - violates the First Amendment because it is a “blanket prohibition against public nudity.”
But the SJC found such a law is necessary to deter birthday-suit abusers from shocking “unsuspecting or unwilling persons, particularly children.”
Asked what point Ora was trying to make about crass commercialization by taking off her clothes, Beck said, “I don’t know, quite frankly.”
Universal Hub notes that the oral arguments in front of the SJC … no sophomoric oral-arguments-before-the-SJC jokes please … are a must-view as the court discusses how the Godiva precedent relates to this case.
Here’s the Godiva precedent in legend and history at Wikipedia. The Massachusetts high court focuses mainly on the public shock and alarm aspect of the case, and the fact that the townspeople of Coventry were specifically instructed to avert their eyes. Chief Justice Marshall refers to the Godiva case as a political protest, which it was in a sense. But it’s noteworthy that Godiva did not actually ride nude in protest, but to satisfy a specific condition set by her tyrant of a husband to relieve onerous taxation that she previously had protested with her clothes on.
For some reason, Godiva’s legendary act of principle has captured the imagination of artists through the ages, who have depicted it sometimes with sensitivity for the spirit of her act, a sacrifice for her people variously expressed with shame or defiance, and sometimes with apparent revisionism as an exhibitionist or a sensual act. Art follows. The righteous will avert their eyes.
Yeah, I didn’t think you were gonna be righteous.
Here’s one that doesn’t shrink to fit well but mixes and matches a variety of modern issues and ancient myths.
Meanwhile, can someone explain to me why I can’t find any Godiva art from Paris?
Topics: free speech, law & order, nude
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 8:26 am on Friday, April 11, 2008
5 Responses to “The Godiva Precedent”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
April 11th, 2008 at 10:17 am
[...] an unrelated case, Jules Crittenden reported the Lady Godiva precedent has its day before the highest court in Massachu…. Caution: Includes not safe for work [...]
April 11th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
When they dance naked in Harvard Square in the dead of winter, I’ll take their Christmas protest seriously.
(Who knew there was so much Godiva art?)
April 11th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Note to self: Never streak in Boston. Jules might get my picture published.
April 11th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
Who the hell is the one in the Big Bird outfit?
Lady Godiva
April 13th, 2008 at 9:55 am
[...] clique’s schticks….But it’s a New Deal! With a compassionate job plan!…10. The naked truth! A naked masked ball of ideological BS, that should be called “9/11 The Musical” [...]