Back 
A man convicted of lewd conduct last year is appealing his conviction, saying the city ordinance is unconstitutional.
Eugene J. Bourdon’s attorney Thomas Collins argued in court last week that the ordinance is “vague and overbroad.”
City and Borough of Juneau ordinance 42.25.010 refers to “any lewd act” but does not define what a lewd act is, Collins said.
“What is a lewd act?” Collins asked Juneau Superior Court Louis Menendez during oral arguments in the case on Thursday. “... Here we don’t have a proper definition.”
Collins asked the judge if he were to relieve himself in an alley on Front Street, and a tourist walking by saw him, would that be considered a lewd act?
“It’s truly not defined, and it’s subject to many different connotations,” Collins said.
Assistant City Attorney August Petropulos fought back by saying lewdness has both a common sense definition — “sexually unchaste or licentious” — and is modified in the city ordinance by two specifying phrases.
The act must take place in public, and the person who observed the act must be “affronted or alarmed,” Petropulos said.
“This is specific enough,” Petropulos added.
The ordinance, as written in the city code, reads, verbatim, “It is unlawful for a person to do any lewd act which that person knows is likely to be observed by others who would be affronted or alarmed.” It’s a class ‘B’ misdemeanor that can be punishable by up to 90 days in jail and/or a $2,000 fine.
Bourdon, 53, was charged with that offense when he was caught with his pants down, masturbating in an aisle of Walmart in July of 2011, prosecutors said. He took pictures of young girls and followed them around in the store unbeknownst to them and the male adult they were with, prosecutors said. A Walmart employee reported the incident to police.
More serious felony charges against Bourdon were dismissed by the state, so the city prosecuted the case on the open lewdness charge.
Bourdon was found guilty after a one-day jury trial in November and was ordered to serve 90 days in jail, the maximum for the charge. Court records show he filed a notice of appeal the next month.
• Contact reporter Emily Russo Miller at 523-2263 or at emily.miller@juneauempire.com.
Comments (23)
Add commentUndefined
"Bourdon, 53, was charged with that offense when he was caught with his pants down, masturbating in an aisle of Walmart in July of 2011, prosecutors said. He took pictures of young girls and followed them around in the store unbeknownst to them and the male adult they were with."
Um, yeah...that's not lewd behavior, even in Walmart. Yup. Uh-huh. The guy was railroaded, no question about it. He should be released back into society immediately.
Define Lewdness
Certainly exceeds the criteria for my understanding of the definition of "open lewdness".
My question is: Why did they
My question is: Why did they drop the felonies? Lock this dirtbag up! Im so tired of the system slapping these guys on the wrist and letting them go. It catch and release. Look at the guy who stole the backpack. His rap sheet should be divided into chapters! Do we have to wait until they seriously hurt, either physically or psychologically, some one?
Really, we are wasting time
Really, we are wasting time on this? I could see if he was peeing in the alley and someone saw him. You can't get much more overtly lewd than this guy.
We need to use some common sense and dismiss this appeal on the grounds it's a joke.
I am sure he is just
I am sure he is just misunderstood.
Imagine
Being the atty that has to defend this guy. He had to come up with something.....didn't he?
Yea...
I'm all for constitutional rights, but common sense has its place. I don't remember seeing anywhere in the Constitution, which I am fairly fluent with, protecting public masturbaters... I don't think Amendment One covers public [filtered word].
Let me check:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Nope, unless the definition of speech has changed I don't think this is covered.
And since it is not, let's refer to Amendment 10:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
So, we the people through our duely elected legislators opted to have this law. The Constitution should not protect him from it.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. The question is, did he believe what he was doing was alright? Did he believe this law doesn't apply to him? Yea, he knew better. Book him Dano!
Scum
This is a lewd act. There is no question about it and he should get nailed for child pornography if he was stalking children and taking pictures of them. If it were my children, I can guarantee he wouldn't be standing in court!
so...
as I started reading this I was assuming the guy had been urinating. When it got to the part about what he had actually done I was affronted AND alarmed. I was not affronted OR alarmed. So maybe we do need additonal clarification: instead of "or" it should be "and/or."
totally flummoxed by this senseless appeal. Masturbating in a store aisle is certainly a lewd act. baffling that the felony charges were dropped.
Belongs in jail!!
No question about that! We'd all be much safer if this man were behind bars for a very long time.
But... I think the argument here is being misunderstood. I don't see where the lawyer is arguing that this isn't a lewd act. He's arguing that the legal statute did not adequately define what exactly a lewd act is. And if the law doesn't do so, then it is unconstitutional. This would void the law, thereby making it inappropropriate to charge anyone for any action under this law. Laws concerning murder, theft, pornography, etc, all clearly define what issue is. This lawyer is claiming that this lewd act law in Juneau is not adequately defined. It matters not what the common understanding of the word is. It matters what the law says the meaning of the word is. And he's arguing that, in this case, the law is silent on the issue.
I may know what lewd act is. You may know what lewd act is. He and everyone else may know what a lewd act is. But if the law doesn't adequately define it, then there's a very good chance the law would be struck down.
That being said... Find another law, and throw this dude under the jail for a very long time. I'm sure there's lots of laws that he could be charged under.
The jury of his peers were not "vague".
***
SIcko
This guy has been convicted of sexual abuse twice. I am pretty sure of it.
He needs to be locked up and throw the key away.
Set me straight, someone, but is there among the canons
of legal representation a requirement that an attorney 'must' use all due diligence to purport his/her client's most outlandish attempts to circumvent a jury verdict?
Even when the argument was not raised at trial?
Perhaps. Then my attention is directed to the adjudicating judge entertaining this motion.
and yet,
the "catch and release" D.A. is still in office. The prosecutors are still letting them go with barely a slap on the wrist.
The guy belongs in prison to have lewd act explained in great detail on a personal level.
But his attorney is only one of many that points out the inconsistencies, the absurdity, etc. regarding these situations.
If the Prosecutors office lead by Catch & Release D.A. wasnt either / both to lazy, incompetant maybe we aouldnt have such problems and maybe the guards at, Lemon Creek the circus,could do more than collect a paycheck.
But then again maybe the D.A. realizes that Lemon Creek couldnt handle a real criminal and so lets them go back to your neighborhood.
disgust
So, the taxpayers are paying for the time of the public defender and this creep's appeal? He should be locked up for stalking children and sexual abuse of everyone who saw his disgusting piece of junk flopping out at Wal-Mart.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GN52vq7xmas
Sounds like the place..
Sounds like if you are feeling the urge to quack your duck then the Juneau Walmart is the place. Dropped the felony charges you say, simply amazing
According to the Bowling Ally...
The add running for the Bowling Ally on the 630 am station states that "its rare to find a place in public where you can still play with your balls in public and get away with it." Then they state "now get your mind out of the gutter" and act like you the listener are some kind of deviant for having "dirty thoughts." But this is the idea they put in the ad before placing it, its what they wanted to put in your head and the heads of your children.
Now in today's society human debris like this are out there trying to display their contempt for any moral code from which we rightly constrain ourselves to adhere. Next month it will be some reference to female genitalia, after all, the guy owning the Bowling Ally got away with his ad ....right?
The fact that we have sexually deviant people pressing for their place in "normal" society has not escaped most anyone who is aware of our society's rapid moral decline. The only thing that can stop it is a deterrent that sends a strong message that anyone caught in such activities will be subject to such harsh, unrealistically punitive treatment that they are STUNNED and SHOCKED at societies response. Anything short of this is simply met with one more idiot who will step up and take the hit knowing full well that they will get a slap on the hands and then released back into society to prey upon their next victims.
Sexual deviancy has an end game, they will not stop until they can freely and without reprisal take anyone they please and satisfy themselves upon that person without consequence. Look at how far it has already come, ask your self, has it slowed down or do you see one breakdown after another in an effort to eliminate any "guilt" associated with their actions? It will stop when the danger to them is absolute and they must crawl back under that rock they slid out from under. Until then, the person most to blame are those who just stood there and let it continue...
@mpshake
@ mpshake: a radio ad is free speech. masturbating in walmart while stalking children is just plain creepy.......
I'm with Shake
Criminal behavior warrants a harsh response. For instance, anyone caught stealing shall have their right hand cut off. Traffic violation? Flogging. Use drugs? Public execution. And speaking out against political or religious figures... Tongue removal.
Yes indeedy. When Shakes and I get done implementing our Sharia law around here, things will be all squared away and people will behave exactly as we think they should.
@Fishy
You can read more about the facts of this case, and Mr. Bourdon's criminal history in this story I wrote last year:
http://juneauempire.com/local/2011-11-20/man-convicted-lewd-conduct-char...
I believe our web editor, Abby, just posted that link within this story today.
Thanks for reading,
— Emily
P IN P
Thought all Alaskans have the inalienable to urinate when & where they need to.
If taking a wizz makes someone a creep, then we all are!
Let those who haven't done the deed outside cast the first stone.
Superior Court Judge Louis Menendez & city prosecutor August Petropulos will you state under oath that you have never ever done such a thing?
LEWDNESS
Yeah flogging the old log pants down while cruising Walmart is lewd, gross, and a felony.
Whizzing in the alley, well, that is comparing apples 2 oranges.
Why the tourist complained, who knows? After all the saw a small slice of the real Alaska.