Jerry Holbert by Jerry Holbert

Jerry Holbert

Comments (18) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, 5 months ago

    Here’s CNN’s explanation of the law and the court’s ‘narrow interpretation’.


    Arcane, convoluted, counter-intuitive, just what one hopes for in a law.

  2. omQ Release the Desaparecidos

    omQ Release the Desaparecidos said, 5 months ago

    That will spell the end of skirts [since the expectation of privacy, or protections thereof, can be argued away]. Next, down-blouses.

  3. TJDestry

    TJDestry GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    For those who think the courts should decide what’s right instead of interpret what is in the law.

  4. Gresch

    Gresch GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    Free Justina Pelletier

  5. mikefive

    mikefive said, 5 months ago

    No privacy for your privates?

  6. lonecat

    lonecat said, 5 months ago

    @Overtaxed

    So you think it should be legal to photograph up a woman’s skirt?

  7. pirate227

    pirate227 said, 5 months ago

    Hysterical toon!

  8. r2varney

    r2varney said, 5 months ago

    @lonecat

    Might be in bad taste but no more illegal than taking a picture of her ear.

  9. MangeyMoose

    MangeyMoose GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    In the Boston Globe, I read that it was a WOMAN who successfully defended this desperate weirdo!

  10. denis1112

    denis1112 said, 5 months ago

    Liberal Judge no doubt.

  11. Hectoruno

    Hectoruno said, 5 months ago

    @denis1112

    It takes any type of judge to see that a law that is not well written can cause problems. A judge interprets a law by the way it is worded. The pervert may get off this time but the law will be rewritten.

  12. lonecat

    lonecat said, 5 months ago

    @r2varney

    Maybe I’m the weird one, but I think there’s a difference between ears and genitals. If you think they’re the same….

  13. ossiningaling

    ossiningaling said, 5 months ago

    @Hectoruno

    And the legislature took their cues from the judiciary and enacted a new law the next day to address the gap.

  14. Lamberger

    Lamberger said, 5 months ago

    US: Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of US government should not be trying to do each others jobs. It is the perceived lack of new laws by the Legislature that has the other two branches all too often trying to write law. Obama administration (among MANY others) is guilty of this. So are activist judges (9th Circuit Court of Appeals, for example). The founding fathers loaded the system in order to make all three branches as powerless as possible. Seems to be working — sort of.

  15. SKJAM!

    SKJAM! GoComics PRO Member said, 5 months ago

    Judges said “we’re not going to legislate from the bench, hint, hint” and the Massachusetts legislature caught their hint and for once acted quickly to plug the hole in the old law made (IIRC) before cameras were invented. The jerk may have gotten off this time, but he’ll have to move to another state to keep up his hobby.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (3).