Minnesota Supreme Court overturns indecent exposure conviction
KARE 11
[{'start': '0.430', 'end': '1.100', 'text': "Welcome back. So an interesting decision came down from our state Supreme Court today. It overturned an indecent exposure conviction for a woman who had her breasts exposed in a Rochester parking lot back in 2021. In simple terms, here's why the Supreme Court decided as they did. If you just have the fact that a woman's breasts are out in public, is that a lone lewd? And the Supreme Court said no. That term lewd matters here. lewd means crude and offensive in a sexual way. What our state Supreme Court is saying is that this woman's breasts being exposed alone aren't just lewd. That's not a lewd thing because they're just breasts, and having breasts exposed in public is not enough for indecent exposure. Toplessness alone is not enough. If a man is topless and lewd, that's indecent exposure. If a woman is topless and lewd, that's indecent exposure. But if a man or a woman is just topless, that is not. That's what the court said none of the evidence, and that's key here. The evidence in the case suggested the woman's conduct was of a sexual nature, so she couldn't, the court said, have a conviction under the statute of indecent exposure."}]