Boebert Could Face Sex Crime Charges For Violating Colorado Lewdness Laws

Lauren Boebert is having a hard time putting her Beetlejuice antics behind her, and a new report suggests that her actions with her now ex-boyfriend in that theater could result in charges against the pair under Colorado's lewdness laws. It is unclear if authorities actually want to charge her at this point, but the tools are at their disposal if they want to go that route - and the video evidence is clear as day. Farron Cousins explains what could happen if charges are brought.

Don't forget to like, comment, and share! And subscribe to stay connected!

Connect with Farron on Twitter

*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos.

According to a new report from Newsweek, Lauren Bobert may have more than just reputational problems to worry about in Colorado because as Newsweek reports, there is a possibility that Bobert could, in fact be charged under Colorado's public l lewdness laws. And if that happens, there's a chance she might actually end up being labeled a sex offender. Now, the uh, specific law is 18 7 3 0 1 of the Colorado Criminal Code, uh, that stipulates quote, public indecency is a petty offense, sex crime, but does tend to carry lighter penalties, though, such as 10 days in jail and, or up to $300 fines in addition to potential probation, community service, or mandatory counseling. I gotta tell you, mandatory counseling might not be such a bad thing for Lauren Bobert. However, in extreme circumstances, the article does point out that this, depending on the severity of the act committed and where it's committed, who witnesses it and so forth, it can occasionally come with the distinction of someone having to register as a sex offender.

Unfortunately, however, it is unlikely that these laws are going to be used to prosecute Lauren Bobert in any way, because there are a couple of stipulations that people do need to be aware of. Uh, let me read this, this from the Newsweek article, as reported by raw story, in most cases, such crimes don't lead to individuals being classified as sex offenders. The law also differs from a decent exposure, which involves an individually knowing, exposing themselves to satisfy sexual desires. Lawyers have a difficult time proving public indecency. However, due to the broadness of the statute and the relative nature surrounding the act, Matthew Hand, a criminal attorney, says that the law is vague and overreaching. Although a theater is a crowded public setting where a lewd fondling could be prosecuted as public indecency, it is unlikely that brief groping over the clothes while seated in a dark theater would lead to conviction.

The acts need to have been, quote, reasonably expected to be viewed by others, and a jury must be convinced of that beyond a reasonable doubt. So basically, the reason Bobert is unlikely to be prosecuted on these charges, and I know these stories have been blown up the last, you know, 36 hours, which why I'm talking about it, but the reason she's likely not going to be prosecuted is because there's not necessarily intent, right? If you don't have intent, you don't have a crime. So, because their intent was not to be seen by everybody because it was dark in a theater, which is a public setting, I don't know. I mean, kinda seems like doing that in a public place comes with the expectation that people will in fact see it.

And I actually think a good prosecutor, 'cause I know Newsweek talked to a defense lawyer who's like, oh, no, no, it's nothing. Uh, I gotta tell you, I do disagree with that. Again, I don't think they're even gonna bring charges against her. But I do happen to disagree with the defense attorney here because there is no, and this is what's pivotal in this case, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. And that is a legal, legal phrase, by the way, no reasonable expectation of privacy when you are in a public setting. Not to mention the fact that security cameras were in use, therefore, people did in fact see the act taking place. Not to mention that there were likely children under the age of 18 in that audience, which could, you know, come with a little bit stiffer penalty there, uh, no pun intended on the stiffer penalty part, but, uh, yeah, Lauren Bober could be facing some problems.

And again, I think a good prosecutor, hell, even a decent prosecutor, would be able to get around some of these issues that the, uh, criminal defense lawyer that Newsweek spoke to brought up. But it's not all fun and games folks. Lauren Bobert, of course, has announced that she has split with this man who was fondling her just days ago because she just learned that he's a Democrat. \