Bostonist: Newbury Street Pastoral

Matt

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:12:15 -0500

Josh, it appears that you're arguing based on knowledge of the law, and others appear to be arguing based on what they perceive t be common sense. Makes for a pretty one-sided discussion!

Josh

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 23:01:33 -0500

Not to beat a dead horse, but the question, still, is: What constitutes a disturbance? If officer opinion were all it took, cops would pretty much have license to arrest anyone they pleased. My understanding is that courts will look at the circumstances and determine whether what happened was enough of a disturbance to pass muster. Usually, this means that the crowd that gathers has to pose some sort of nuisance or risk, or the noise produced has to interrupt other regular activities. None of that stuff happened in this case. The guy was just being a jerk.

annonnnn

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:56:09 -0500

if, by his actions, he caused people (pedestrians or people operating motor vehicles) to stop what they are doing and observe his actions, and if in an officer's opinion he was causing a disturbance, he could have been arrested for disorderly conduct.

Josh

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:52:05 -0500

"Go suck a dick" doesn't appeal to the prurient interest just because it describes a sexual act. Its purpose is not to arouse or titillate, but to show disapproval. It's like saying "fuck you": Technically sexual, but contextually not. As for anyone's mother, well, what does that have to do with anything? He said it to the meter maid directly, not to her mom, and her children, if she has any, weren't there. The basic rule is that mere words aren't enough, even though they're insulting or offensive. There has to be some sort of tumult, or a crowd has to gather, or people have to be kept from sleeping or otherwise going about their business. The fact that crass insults annoy the person at whom they're directed doesn't make them illegal - if that were the case, the first amendment wouldn't be worth much. It's hard to say what the line is, but in this case, if the guy had kept haranguing the meter maid and been so vocal that a crowd gathered and blocked pedestrian traffic, that would do the trick.

disgusted

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:53:06 -0500

what about "go suck a dick" does NOT appeal to prurient interests? as to fighting words, i think you'd feel differently if someone sad that to your mother. no annoyance to citizens?? what about the metermaid?? what WOULD you say the line is?

Katie

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:23:24 -0500

I can't believe this all went down on Newbury Street. I hope the Euro crowd that loiters in front of Scoozi every afternoon wasn't too offended!

Josh

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:17:21 -0500

Well, I can hardly say I approve of cursing out meter maids, but that guy's speech probably was protected. It had clear expressive content (he was disputing the ticket and expressing his displeasure) and didn't really appeal to the prurient interest (that is, it wasn't intended or likely to cause arousal). It also wasn't fighting words, since he wasn't inviting a fight or saying something to which any reasonable person would respond with a fight. It probably wasn't even disturbing the peace (Mass. General Laws chapter 272, s. 53), since there was no great annoyance caused to nearby citizens, no crowd gathered, and no tumult ensued. So the guy was a jerk, but not a criminal.

disgusted

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 15:36:33 -0500

yes, the cop should have arrested him. his speech was obscene (not protected under 1st amendment) and fighting words (also not protected). no one should have to put up with that abuse, especially on the job. disgraceful.