Both the Union-Tribune and voiceofsandiego.org have reported that John Hartley—the District 3 City Council candidate who, last Thursday, was placed under citizens arrest for allegedly peeing in a cup and masturbating in his truck on a street in Kensington—was booked into jail on two charges: indecent exposure and soliciting a lewd act.
From Voice: “Hartley was booked on one count of indecent exposure and one count of soliciting a lewd act.” From the U-T: “A jail clerk said Hartley was booked on one count of indecent exposure and one count of soliciting a lewd act.”
That’s not quite accurate. I just talked to Gary Hassen, an SDPD spokesperson, who looked up the charges. Hartley, Hassen confirmed, was booked under California Penal Code (stop snickering) 314.1—the law against indecent exposure. The other charge was 647a, which contains two provisions:
Every person who commits any of the following acts is guilty of disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor:
(a) Who solicits anyone to engage in or who engages in lewd or dissolute conduct in any public place or in any place open to the public or exposed to public view.
So, there are clearly two provisions of the law—one that involves solicitation and one that involves something quite similar to indecent exposure. When someone’s reputation is on the line—innocent until proven guilty, no?—accuracy is of the utmost importance. Not to say that CityBeat’s never gotten things wrong, but it’s pretty easy to look up state PC numbers.
April 2, 2008 - 4:05 pm at 4:05 pm
here’s my question as a criminal defense attorney- the news reports said he was seen urinating into a cup and masturbating. how does that go down, exactly? if he was urinating- that’s not lewd conduct. sounds odd to me.
April 3, 2008 - 4:59 pm at 4:59 pm
Thanks for clearing that up…I saw the word “solicit” in print and really, really wondered what was going on. It made no sense. Now I know why. You get a pay raise for exposing indecent journalism.
April 5, 2008 - 10:58 am at 10:58 am
CD: To answer what I think is your first question: As a guy, you’d know this better than me, no? As to your second question, if the witnesses say he was masturbating, that would be lewd conduct. But, if he was urinating in public, that’s only an indecent exposure charge which, if he’s found guilty, would mean he’ll have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.
Go: If only it were so easy