Women may no longer be able to let it all hang out on top in North Carolina without fear of legal repercussions if a bill currently in the North Carolina house passes.  The Republican-led North Carolina House of Representatives is debating a bill that would make most public toplessness a misdemeanor punishable by up to 30 days in jail.

If the public nudity was “for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire,” it becomes a felony charge.  North Carolina has not had a statewide law prohibiting public toplessness by women since a 1970 Court of Appeals ruling.  According to the courts, “private parts” as cited in the state's indecent exposure law was not specific enough to include breasts or nipples.

According to state lawmakers, the new law would be fairly easy to get around, allowing women to go topless even if they only covered their nipples in tape.  Several legislators have asked whether the law is really necessary as a legislative priority in the state, which has faced difficult economic times since the recession of 2008.

Lawmakers proposed the new bill because of complaints received about topless rallies being held in the western North Carolina city of Asheville.  Asheville, which is known for being a liberal haven in otherwise conservative western North Carolina, has attracted negative attention from conservative lawmakers for the feminist rallies.

Previously, law enforcement officials had considered arresting women at the topless rallies because they were exposing their breasts in front of children—an offense specifically prohibited when done for a sexual purpose.  However, the women at the rallies maintained that their toplessness was a key element of their political speech, rather than done for sexual gratification.

Most municipalities in the state of North Carolina already have laws on the books prohibiting the exposure of breasts or nipples in public.  Asheville is one of the few cities without such a law on the books.

Several other American cities—among them San Francisco and New York City—do not prohibit women from going topless in public.  In New York City, a court case made it possible for women to go topless after a judge ruled that the existing indecent exposure laws were discriminatory.  It remains to be seen whether women's groups might fight back with such a lawsuit if the bill passes the North Carolina House and is signed into law by the governor.

Source: nc.gov, time.com

According to new research by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, millions of American women may have been victimized by domestic partners sabotaging their contraception.  Typical forms of contraceptive sabotage by men include switching out birth control pills for inactive pills, hiding hormonal contraceptives, or even poking holes in condoms.

While contraceptive sabotage, which is regarded as a form of reproductive coercion, can happen to any age group, the National Institutes of Health say that some groups of girls and women are particularly vulnerable.  One study found that teenagers who were using government assistance (welfare) to survive and who were bring abused by a partner were being subjected to reproductive coercion nearly 70 percent of the time.

The most common forms of contraceptive sabotage reported by these young women and girls included men poking holes in condoms or discarding condoms in the middle of intercourse, without the knowledge or consent of their partner.

In order to help women fight reproductive coercion, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists now recommends that all gynecologists ask about reproductive coercion during the course of routine exams.  Many gynecologists already screen for several forms of abuse during patient visits, and incorporating questions about reproductive coercion and contraception sabotage can help educate patients about these issues.

Reproductive coercion has become an even more important issue in recent years, as new restrictions on abortion providers have made it substantially more difficult for women who are reproductively coerced to obtain a safe and legal abortion.  This makes it even more essential for healthcare providers to discuss reproductive coercion with patients before they become pregnant or have an opportunity for their birth control to be sabotaged.

Healthcare providers have developed several innovative ways to help women who are being subjected to reproductive coercion but who are unable or unwilling to leave an abusive partner.  For example, if a woman wants to control her fertility and her boyfriend or husband is hostile to the idea of birth control, a gynecologist may be willing to insert an IUD (intrauterine device) with the strings cut short enough that they cannot be felt.

According to the NIH and ACOG, obstetricians and gynecologists should help patients understand that reproductive coercion is a form of abuse, as well as giving them information about the forms reproductive coercion and contraceptive sabotage can take.  This information can be given during visits for Pap smears and other routine preventative care.  Because of provisions in the new healthcare laws passed by President Obama, most preventative care, including birth control, is free from co-pays on most insurance plans.

Source: nih.gov

California lawmakers may change a controversial law from the 19^th century after a case made headlines and raised eyebrows nationwide.

It was a nightmare come to life: Jane Doe, a California resident, went home after a night of drinking and woke up to discover a man having sex with her who wasn't her boyfriend.  As soon as she realized what was happening, she pushed him away and tried to get away from her attacker.  She subsequently reported the assault to police.

After her rapist was arrested and convicted, he began serving a three year sentence.  However, a California appeals court overturned the conviction, stating that according to the “rape by deception” statute Jane Doe's rapist was prosecuted under, rape by deception can occur only when a man is impersonating a woman's husband.  A boyfriend, even a co-habiting one, wouldn't qualify—in other words, while a married woman could have obtained a conviction in this case, Jane Doe's unmarried status made it possible for her rapist to walk away free.

California lawmakers, especially women in the legislature, have expressed dismay over the court's ruling.  The appeals court judges stated that while they agreed that the law should apply to boyfriends as well as husbands, their hands were tied by the letter of the law itself.

California rape by deception statutes date to approximately 150 years ago, when cohabiting was forbidden except between spouses.  This means that the law was simply never updated to reflect changing societal norms.  As of 2012, married couples now represent a minority of households in the United States, making the current California law seem even more out of step with the way that Americans live today.

In response to the case, legislators in California have begun working on revisions to the state's rape laws.  In the revised version of the rape by deception law proposed by three California lawmakers, boyfriends and girlfriends could also be impersonated illegally by a rapist.

California's Attorney General, Kamala Harris, says that the case clearly “involved a non-consensual sexual assault that fits within the general understanding of what constitutes rape.”  State officials intend to work together to see how they can best avoid similar situations in the future.  The Office of the Attorney General is also considering the possibility of re-trying the case under a different section of California's rape laws.  However, constitutional prohibitions on double jeopardy may make it impossible to re-try the case regardless of the new charge.

Source: womenscaucus.legislature.ca.gov

A Maryland man was convicted of sex trafficking after involving multiple minor girls he had met over the internet in prostitution.  Dennis Smith, a pimp who also went by the street name of “Domo,” began grooming a sixteen year old girl for sex and prostitution by beginning to message with her on social media websites.

After they had spoken for a few months, the girl agreed to meet with Smith at her home.  He picked her up and drove her and two women to a house where they were prostituted.  This first incident occurred in October of 2011, and the next day, the young girl returned to her home.

However, the girl's involvement with Smith was not over yet.  Smith continued to talk to her online and groom her for continued underage prostitution.  By February of 2012, Smith had convinced the 16 year old girl to bring along a 15 year old friend from her high school in order to engage in prostitution.

Smith's plea agreement paints a terrible picture: a pimp who not only forced young and vulnerable girls into prostitution, but also forced them to have tattoos of his pimp name, Domo, which he inked himself using tattoo equipment he was not licensed to use.  He also photographed the girls, including in sexual acts, and used these photographs to advertise available sexual services from the girls online.

Maryland police became aware of a child being prostituted in a hotel room, and sent an undercover officer to investigate under the guise of looking for sex with underage girls.  Upon finding a 15 and 17 year old girl engaged in prostitution at the hotel room, Maryland police arrested Smith and seized the property used in the commission of the crimes, including his photographic equipment and his tattooing machine.

The girls prostituted by Smith had their sexual services advertised on the controversial website Backpage, which has been known for offering a wide range of prostitution services with little regard for whether the escorts being advertised are of legal age or have been the victims of trafficking or sex slavery.

Smith's 12 year sentence is just two years longer than the mandatory 10 year minimum sentence for sex trafficking of minors.  After being released in 2025, Smith will also be required to serve a full ten years of court-ordered supervision in order to ensure that he does not continue to victimize children upon his release.

Source: justice.gov

On November 28, 2012, Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced that Jeffrey Darlin from Swarthmore, Pennsylvania pleaded guilty to trying to coerce and entice a minor over the internet.  The investigation was led by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).  

Darlin pleaded guilty in the U.S. District Court of Delaware on federal crimes.  

Court documents show that Darlin was the former facilities manager of Swarthmore Presbyterian Church.  Darlin began an online relationship with a person in a Yahoo chat room he believed was a 14-year-old girl on January 21, 2012, but the “girl” was an undercover HSI agent.  

The undercover agent told Darlin that she was a high-school cheerleader and gymnast.  During the first couple of talks, he informed the “girl” how to delete evidence of their online communications from the computer.  Darlin also talked about teaching the “minor” how to engage in certain sex acts.  

Darlin used his computer in the church office to talk with the “girl.”  He also sent pictures of himself engaging in sexual acts and told the “girl” he would engage in the same acts if they met.  Darlin eventually arranged to meet the “girl” at Bellevue State Park and travel to a hotel on Route 202.  

HSI agents arrested Darlin at Bellevue State Park on February 10, 2012.  The Swarthmore Presbyterian Church immediately terminated Darlin and cooperated throughout the entire investigation.  

John P. Kelleghan with HSI Philadelphia stated: “Homeland Security Investigations is committed to stopping predators in their tracks. As shown here today, this defendant will no longer be a threat to our children.  This case is yet another example of the extraordinary collaborative efforts among law enforcement in Delaware, to protect the most vulnerable among us.”  

The investigation and arrest were part of Operation Predator under HSI.  

Source: Immigration and Customs Enforcement

On October 4, 2012, the Department of Justice released a press release that stated Paulo Morales of Miami was sentenced to 33 months in prison and one year of supervised release.  U.S. District Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum sentenced Morales. 

On October 4, 2012, the US Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Florida announced that Kamil Mezalka of Palm Coast pleaded guilty for receiving child pornography over the internet.  He now faces a mandatory minimum sentence of 5 years in prisons and a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, a $250,000 fine, and lifetime supervised release.