Woman, but not man, arrested in her home for going topless

[MillCreek]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tilli-buchanan-utah-woman-could-be-forced-to-register-as-sex-offender-after-kids-see-her-topless-at-home/

https://news.yahoo.com/utah-woman-fights-charge-kids-214937288.html

So I am thinking that the biological mother called Child Services at least in part to get back at the ex-husband. I wonder if Ms. Buchanan is younger and prettier than the mother.  Could be, given that she is 27 years old, and the oldest stepchild is 13.

[Hawkmoon]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tilli-buchanan-utah-woman-could-be-forced-to-register-as-sex-offender-after-kids-see-her-topless-at-home/

https://news.yahoo.com/utah-woman-fights-charge-kids-214937288.html

So I am thinking that the biological mother called Child Services at least in part to get back at the ex-husband. I wonder if Ms. Buchanan is younger and prettier than the mother.  Could be, given that she is 27 years old, and the oldest stepchild is 13.

Seems to me that the state is taking in loco parentis too far. Within the home, out of public view, issues such as partial nudity should be decided by he parents. It's none of the state's business.

I once dated an Englishwoman who thought it was perfectly normal to walk around the house starkers in front of her two sons.

[MikeB]

While I don’t think she should have to register as a sex offender or be convicted of a crime. This I find very strange and what sounds like she didn’t want to tell the truth about why she was topless.

“ Buchanan said she and her husband had taken off their shirts to keep their clothes from getting dusty while they worked in their garage in late 2017 or early 2018.”

[Boomhauer]

Hanging drywall? Yeah right...

For some reason I think she/they were doing weird *expletive deleted*it to cause the charges to be filed.

[Ben]

Yeah, the reason for being topless seems ... contrived. When I don't want to get dusty or dirty, I either put on other work clothes or coveralls. I've never once thought while painting a house, "I might get paint on my clothes - I'd better strip down to my chonies."

Other than the weird reason, it's hard for me to connect "sex offender" and "topless woman". I remember during one of the big droughts in Santa Barbara, the local liberal paper was encouraging families to shower together to save water. Also, in an age where teenage boys can call themselves "female" and use the girls locker room - enforced by the school district - maybe lets look at what's out of bounds and what isn't.

[brimic]

When her husband’s three children, ages 9 through 13, walked in, she “explained she considers herself a feminist and wanted to make a point that everybody should be fine with walking around their house or elsewhere with skin showing,” her lawyers said in court documents.

While I'm pretty sure that this is a case of a vindictive ex-spouse (a situation that I'm very familiar with), she isn't helping her case with that statement.

[zxcvbob]

While I'm pretty sure that this is a case of a vindictive ex-spouse (a situation that I'm very familiar with), she isn't helping her case with that statement.

Except for the "familiar with" part, that is *exactly* what I thought.

[BobR]

Vindictive ex is a good guess.

Why is it the .govs business what I do in the confines of my own house as long as I an not doing something so abhorrent it would violate the sense s of 99% of the people in the world?

bob

[brimic]

Vindictive ex is a good guess.

Why is it the .govs business what I do in the confines of my own house as long as I an not doing something so abhorrent it would violate the sense s of 99% of the people in the world?

bob

Why does local .gov issue a TRO against my current wife for telling my ex-wife to GTFO our property? (was thrown out in court).

[K Frame]

"Why does local .gov issue a TRO against my current wife for telling my ex-wife to GTFO our property?"

Wait... what?

[MillCreek]

Why does local .gov issue a TRO against my current wife for telling my ex-wife to GTFO our property? (was thrown out in court).

Probably because TRO are pretty much issued at the drop of a hat based on the complaining party and the other party is not present or heard from.  Making the TRO permanent requires a court hearing in which both parties are able to attend and be heard from.  It is at this subsequent hearing that the judges get a sense if the TRO was false or issued to harass someone, and if so, they will decline to make the TRO permanent.

[brimic]

"Why does local .gov issue a TRO against my current wife for telling my ex-wife to GTFO our property?"

Wait... what?

Yes, happened about 2 years ago. Ex came to my house to pick up some of daughter's things- her bookbag and a swimsuit. She kept sending my daughter into my house to take other things out of my house. I told my daughter to stop, to get back in her mom's car, it was time to leave. Ex screams at my daughter to go back into my house to take tings, I tell ex to leave, Wife comes out and tells Ex that if she doesn't leave right now, she is tresspassing. Ex leaves with daughter, goes to sheriff's department and files for restraining order.

Better- the ex came over the day AFTER the restraining order was issued and opened the door (wasn't locked)  and walked into my garage- while my wife was home.

She is bat-expletive crazy.

 

[Hawkmoon]

Yeah, the reason for being topless seems ... contrived. When I don't want to get dusty or dirty, I either put on other work clothes or coveralls. I've never once thought while painting a house, "I might get paint on my clothes - I'd better strip down to my chonies."

Other than the weird reason, it's hard for me to connect "sex offender" and "topless woman". I remember during one of the big droughts in Santa Barbara, the local liberal paper was encouraging families to shower together to save water. Also, in an age where teenage boys can call themselves "female" and use the girls locker room - enforced by the school district - maybe lets look at what's out of bounds and what isn't.

I read an earlier article that seemed to tell the story slightly differently. IIRC, it was more like the husband and wife had been working in the garage, got their clothes pretty messed up, so they disrobed in the garage so as not to be wearing clothes that would shed dirt while they walked through the house. That made perfect sense to me.

[BlueStarLizzard]

I read an earlier article that seemed to tell the story slightly differently. IIRC, it was more like the husband and wife had been working in the garage, got their clothes pretty messed up, so they disrobed in the garage so as not to be wearing clothes that would shed dirt while they walked through the house. That made perfect sense to me.

Okay, THAT makes more sense, because in addition to what Ben said, no woman who isn't COMPLETELY flat chested is going to try to do any labor intensive activity with the girls flying loose (unless it's an activity that specifically requires the girls to be loose)

[zxcvbob]

The Salt Lake City paper says they were installing insulation and stripped afterwards https://www.sltrib.com/news/2019/09/30/this-utah-woman-was/ and yes that does make sense.  Not sure why she didn't have a bra on, but maybe she doesn't wear them and that's none of my business.  And it's none of the state's damn business either!

This seems more like a right to privacy issue than equal rights, but the 10th Circuit's Fort Collins case does seem to apply.

[Ben]

The Salt Lake City paper says they were installing insulation and stripped afterwards https://www.sltrib.com/news/2019/09/30/this-utah-woman-was/ and yes that does make sense. 

Yes, that makes much more sense. When I do insulation, I either wear coveralls or I strip off my shirt and pants before I go in the house.  I hate that stuff and will rinse the clothes in a bucket before I put them in the washing machine.

[230RN]

MillCreek offered:

Probably because TRO are pretty much issued at the drop of a hat based on the complaining party and the other party is not present or heard from.  Making the TRO permanent requires a court hearing in which both parties are able to attend and be heard from.  It is at this subsequent hearing that the judges get a sense if the TRO was false or issued to harass someone, and if so, they will decline to make the TRO permanent.

Yes, but in the meantime, the restrainee has to hire a lawyer and take time off fom work, and worry about it to boot.

I reckon that's reason enough for some types of folks to request a TRO.  Sort of like a swatting, at least in concept.

Does the requestor get punished in any way for filing one that seems to be for harassment?

[Hawkmoon]

This case stinks worse and worse. Apparently the topless incident happened in late 2017 or early 2018 (unless it was 2016), but the "alarmed" birth mother didn't report it until February of 2019.

https://www.wkrn.com/news/utah-woman-fights-charge-after-kids-see-her-topless-at-home/

I hope the judge throws the case out.

[brimic]

MillCreek offered:

Yes, but in the meantime, the restrainee has to hire a lawyer and take time off fom work, and worry about it to boot.

I reckon that's reason enough for some types of folks to request a TRO.  Sort of like a swatting, at least in concept.

Does the requestor get punished in any way for filing one that seems to be for harassment?

Yes, it cost us $1000 in legal expenses to fight the TRO. We also had a lot at stake because a TRO would preclude my wife to being at any kid's event where the ex might show up.