If you have not heard the name Charles Leo Warren III, get ready because he may soon become a household name. And, like Leon Phelps, it’s all the fault of the wang.
Warren was convicted of “Distribution of Material Depicting Nudity or Sexual Conduct” when he sent a photo text of his wang to Shari Watson who is a married mother of young children. Neither party knew each other, and Mrs. Watson had no idea of how Mr. Warren obtained her cell phone number. Mr. Warren was likely showing off his tattoo on his wang which reads, “STRONG E nuf 4 A MAN BUT Made 4 A WOMAN.” The guy either found a tattoo artist capable of microprinting, or dude is hung like a horse. I don’t want to know either way though as the thought of getting a tat on the Johnson is painful enough on its own.
a) A person commits the offense of distributing material depicting nudity or sexual conduct when he sends unsolicited through the mail or otherwise unsolicited causes to be delivered material depicting nudity or sexual conduct to any person or residence or office unless there is imprinted upon the envelope or container of such material in not less than eight-point boldface type the following notice:
“Notice — The material contained herein depicts nudity or sexual conduct. If the viewing of such material could be offensive to the addressee, this container should not be opened but returned to the sender.”
Anyway, The Georgia Supreme Court is charged with determining whether Mr. Warren’s free speech is being impeded by the law which requires labeling of nudity or sexual content on the outside of the container of delivery. In this particular case, there is no way to label the text message with the notice as there is no envelope or container used to send a text message.
Judging on the responses from some of the justices, the ruling may end up being one worth following. From Online Athens.com:
In the packed courtroom Monday, Justice Keith Blackwell wondered aloud if the law makes it a crime for a newspaper to include a Coppertone sunscreen advertisement featuring a photo of a dog pulling down a girl’s bathing suit. Or would Reinhart College’s drama club break the law it if went to a park to act out the restaurant scene from “When Harry Met Sally” in which one character demonstrates the sounds of a fake orgasm because that’s a verbal depiction of nudity.
Justice David Nahmias noted that many parents at his 10-year-old son’s football games photograph the celebratory butt slapping after plays. Are they breaking the law to email them, he asked.
Given the age of the law and the technical advances since, I don’t see how it will be able to apply in the case where no container is present for the label. As noted in the Online Athens article, even the Cherokee County ADA thinks it may have to go back to the legislature. In about 4 – 6 months, we may soon find out if penises have a protected right of free speech. If we can extend personhood to a corporation, which is a non-living entity, why would a penis not have the protected right of free speech? We all know of a few d**ks who can’t shut their mouths, so it’s not like this will be some new precedent set.
- Court hears request to toss law against mailing nudity (onlineathens.com)
- Sexting strangers? Attach the warning label (ledger-enquirer.com)
- Georgia Supremes To Rule If Charles Warren’s Text Of Tattooed Genitals Protected By 1st Amendment (opposingviews.com)
- Warren v The State – S13A1904 (gasupreme.us) *pdf