I must admit that the police appear to be stuffed either way.

The arguments above appear to have become over-involved in minutiae.

There are 2 basic options, as I see it.

1) She was breaking the law, and was correctly arrested. If so, it should be incumbent upon the officer to encourage her to cover up for the sake of decency. The fact that when she offered to do so, she wasn't permitted, means that the police were effectively perpetuating, and even aiding and abetting, the breakage of the law.

Sgath, while I appreciate your argument I would say that once outside the context of the activity for which her nakedness was desirable - the bike ride - she would have every right to feel uncomfortable continuing to be naked.

2) She WASN'T breaking the law. In which case, she was wrongfully arrested in the first place, and would not warrant the treatment she received.

Minnie, you killed my topic... ><

You're right though.

Sorry, hun... I didn't mean it...

But, thanks for thinking I'm right - I have to wonder whether my arguments are flawed, though...

All these debates about whether or not she was in violation of the law, whether she was "legally" topless, etc., just make my poor head (and heart) hurt.

The woman was forced to beg for her shirt. The policeman could have given her the shirt the first time she asked for it. He certainly didn't have to throw it at her, hitting her in the face with it.

A non-violent person under arrest should still be treated with a certain amount of professional courtesy and human decency by the police, whose main function should be to protect and serve.

-- Nephele

Not to mention being yanked off the bike and dragged to the squad car, despite the fact she wasn't resisting arrest...