Wow, some fiesty chickies in here! I guess I should have remained a lurker instead of a poster!
Actually, I'm an attorney and went to a top-10 law school. Does that establish my credentials sufficiently for you? Or would you like my LSAT score and law school transcript? So I think I know a little about the law...
Let's see, I don't have time to respond to every attack individually, but here a few rebuttals: A-jock explicitly agreed with Hotspur that the woman's daughter should not have gone over to the house alone (though Leslie subsequently gave us some more info on that). If anyone here cannot see A-jock agreed with Hotspur, then it is beyond my ability to communicate that fact. "Res ipsa loquitur" "the thing speaks for itself" (to borrow a phrase from tort law).
Secondly, my essential point was and is that what the boy did in his own home does not constitute "indecedent exposure." Somebody above said it did in Missouri or somewhere. All right, then I repeat: please cite for me that provision of your state's criminal code that defines the elements of indecent exposure as, inter alia, exposing oneself in one's own home. Heck, it's possible, but the burden of proof is on you (even though this is a criminal provision, you don't have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt).
Thirdly, I don't know where that unwarranted, hostile remark about me having children came from. I'm not sure what relevance that fact bears on the discussion and what my comments have to do with it. Maybe I should say I hope you're not an attorney--you have to be a little more careful about how you read things.
I'm outa here for tonight. Have a good weekend, ladies!