[Pantyholic]

A 51-year-old man wearing women's clothing was arrested for allegedly undressing in front of children at Walmart.
Police say Norwood Smith Burnes, 51, of Rome, has a long record of indecent exposure and was on probation for public indecency when the latest incident occurred in the women's bathroom at Walmart in Calhoun, the Rome News-Tribune reported.

Burnes was in "stages of undress while on the store floor and would do this in the presence of several young children," witnesses told police. When police arrived, they found Burnes wearing a short skirt and jacket, black leather coat, high heels, red nail polish, green eye shadow and jewelry.

A witness told police Burnes had been in the women's section of Walmart with his skirt "kicked up showing his white girdle and dark thong underwear," according to the newspaper.

Burnes was charged with public indecency, disorderly conduct and criminal trespass. He has been released on bond pending a hearing in Gordon County Superior Court.

http://www.ajc.com/

[mic091221]

Wow, i swear that some people out there are just freakin BOZO's..... its one thing to have a fetish, but damn, have a little common sense,, plus this wasn't like the "first time," he was already on probation for indecent exposure,,, WTF..... I hope he is not a member on this site,, LOL

Think People... !!!!!!!!!!!!!

dammit now i have to change into different panties,, VENT VENT VENT<<<,,,,,,,

[Pantyholic]

I know there are sexual connotations with what he was doing especially in the presence of children(allegedly), but there again it was a store so there were bound to be children in there.
You know he could be walking up and down the beach in a ....

With children every where and he would be well within the law. The fact they said "in the presence of children" is said because of what exactly. Were they in danger because he was wearing womens clothes, he wasn't exposing himself or making obscene gestures. I'm not sticking up for the guy because if you play with fire your bound to get burnt, but I think what he was charged with was over the top somewhat.
What exactly is criminal trespass in a superstore, surely he could of put up a defense that he was shopping or was it because again he was wearing female clothing.
Is any guy out and about in drag automatically on the brink of arrest if he is seen to be acting suspiciously in the eyes of others. A guy in drag attracts attention anyway and looking at his picture he hasn't gone to too much trouble to look convincing.

[PantyLoverBC]

Pantyholic, on 06 April 2010 - 04:19 PM, said:

I know there are sexual connotations with what he was doing especially in the presence of children(allegedly), but there again it was a store so there were bound to be children in there.
You know he could be walking up and down the beach in a ....

I've worked in a water slide park... I've seen "this" but in bright freakin' yellow... All the girls that worked there had a huge laugh at him and us guys? Well, we kinda felt sorry for him.. He was tryin' to put his thing down for the girls, but, they all thought he was hilarious, as did the patrons...

Pantyholic, on 06 April 2010 - 04:19 PM, said:

With children every where and he would be well within the law. The fact they said "in the presence of children" is said because of what exactly. Were they in danger because he was wearing womens clothes, he wasn't exposing himself or making obscene gestures. I'm not sticking up for the guy because if you play with fire your bound to get burnt, but I think what he was charged with was over the top somewhat.
What exactly is criminal trespass in a superstore, surely he could of put up a defense that he was shopping or was it because again he was wearing female clothing.
Is any guy out and about in drag automatically on the brink of arrest if he is seen to be acting suspiciously in the eyes of others. A guy in drag attracts attention anyway and looking at his picture he hasn't gone to too much trouble to look convincing.

It seems that down south, they LOVE to toss charges and accusations for anything and everything these days... I love watching COPS or Most Dangerous and the lame charges they tack onto the chase... ADW, attempted murder, ramming police cars.... Some cop runs between his car and the car being chased, nearly get pinned and the "bad guy" gets tagged with ADW, attempted murder of a peace officer and several other charges 'cos some dumb ass cop thought he'd be Rambo and take the guy out himself while he's drivin' away... Ya know? Just ITCHIN' to use stop sticks and/or the PIT which is ANYTHING but "precise"...

I digress... But I agree, PH... Not defending thim, but, I have a feeling a lot of it will be hype and a lot of smearing in the media, pretty much ending up with this fellow being labelled as a pedophile and perverted sex offender... He may be, he may not be.. I don't know, but, this is gonna ruin him for life with all the flak this is going to generate... And with those labels, he'll have to register, meaning, his life is much over in North America now...

Incidentally, I watch Road Warriors occasionally... It's a cop show based mainly in the UK and I rather enjoy watching the differences from there to here... We're not as bad as them down south, yet, but, we're heading that way... I like watching unarmed police officers do a FAR better job than those with M-16's and .45's in the cars... And a fair better job about it civilly, as well... They act more human than law enforcing overlord/law breaking slimeball relationship...

[Pantied Suzi]

The lesson here is not to shop at Wal-Mart.

[hotpanties]

what an idiot!