In light of our recent posting on the man arrested for making coffee in the nude in his own home, this case out of Grand Forks is interesting. Nicole Altendorf, 37, is accused of watching pornography in her own home but allowing the images and noises to be seen and heard from Lake Agassiz Elementary School.
Altendorf appears a stronger case for prosecution where the police allege that she intentionally broadcasted porn to the kids — an amazingly twisted idea.
When police Cpl. Dylan Schauer arrived at the home, he found pornography on the television and the police report stated “We made contact with the suspect, who was not compliant in any way. She refused to come out and physically resisted. She was finally extracted by force from her entryway.” She is accused of biting Schauer and kicking him. She then allegedly spat in his face. What a perfect person to live near an elementary school: an allegedly violent, psychotic porn addict with a exhibitionist fetish.
And to think that I was always worried about the mean looking old lady with the cat when I was growing up.
The broadcasted porn was so loud that school employees could easily identify it and the source. They could also see porn from the street.
Her attorney, Ted Sandberg, however, assured that court that “this is an isolated incident.” I appreciate a good lawyer doing his best, but the Hindenburg was an isolated incident as well.
For her part, Altendorf told the court at the bail hearing, “I have a cold” and denied touching anyone.
She is charged with simple assault of an officer, contact by bodily fluids and preventing arrest. She is also charged with possession of drug paraphernalia in the form of a pipe for smoking marijuana.
Notably, the display of the pornography is a misdemeanor count of disorderly conduct. Her main problems, it turns out, are related to the arrest and not her traumatizing elementary students.
For the full story, click here
What a perv.
I have a saying. You can tell a liberal by this: a liberal is someone who advocates the pulling down of ones (anyones!) pants in public via film and print media.
Liberal is just another word for pervert.
I confess. I walk around my house in the nude a lot, though never when I had children home. My shades are drawn, however, and anyone who could possibly see me would have to be trying very hard to do so. Although I don’t watch porn on TV, I prefer reading it, I have no trouble with the people who do. This case sounds like some over zealotry, or boredom by the P.O’s involved and some puritan school professionals with an axe to grind. As AY pointed out what if she was having sex (masturbating) and was loud, would this be a grounds for police investigation.
FFLEO and I are old enough to remember when James Joyce, D.H.Lawrence and Henry Miller were banned in the US. Have the fundamentalists begun to push us back into a new age of puritanism and ignorance? To my mind whenever control of sexuality becomes paramount, one should watch their wallets because sexual repression is a cover for the old financial con games.
Seems like JT let the interns work again.
“What a perfect person to live near an elementary school: an allegedly violent, psychotic porn addict with a exhibitionist fetish.”
That logic stinks…, those kids are gonna get in touch with psychopaths no matter what you do.. they call it family, and the kids should learn to deal with them.
Furthermore, anyone can have a bad day, no? I can be a violent, psychotic porn addict with an exhibitionist fetish from time to time, especially when I’m watching porn and get a visit from the police… Oh, no, quickly, lock me up!
“traumatizing elementary students”.. from watching porn, you must be kidding right? No, no, traumatizing is a different animal and porn will not do. Maybe try a divorce when the kid’s young or so… that’s a trauma, and how many of those have we prevented already? Oh, right, none.
These cases of of entering someone’s home without exigent circumstances are troubling to me. The case of the guy making coffee in the buff in his own home is outrageous. I will admit that this woman is not an upstanding community icon. However, the police had the opportunity to gain video and audio evidence to support their case before they entered her home to find drug paraphernalia. I say this even though I am staunchly against any illegal drugs and I do not even allow alcoholic beverages in my home or on my property.
There were other ways of handling this situation and a stern warning—given the facts presented—should have been the first response.
Wiki quote:
“While open fields are not protected by the Fourth Amendment, the curtilage, or outdoor area immediately surrounding the home, may be protected. Courts have treated this area as an extension of the house and as such subject to all the privacy protections afforded a person’s home (unlike a person’s open fields) under the Fourth Amendment.”
Mike Appleton 1, October 22, 2009 at 8:48 pm
AY, I think you meant disturbance of the “peace,” but I understand the confusion.
************************
That dang spell checker. Where is nal? He should have perused this and corrected it. But Mike is that peace with a piece of a piece makes peace. However, I was wondering if she was listing to Momma had a squeeze box…..
FF Leo,
Nor did I read anything about any discharges. Alas.
Well, I did not read anything about a firearm…
AY, I think you meant disturbance of the “peace,” but I understand the confusion.
CCD,
This is just unconscionable. They wanted her for something else rather than the original reason to go to the house.
How close was this to the school?
Altendorf’s house on the 800 block of Stanford Road.
Lake Agassiz School 605 Stanford Rd.
http://maps.google.com/maps?rlz=1C1CHNH_enUS327US328&sourceid=chrome&q=800%20Stanford%20Road,&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wl
Altendorf is charged with three felonies: simple assault of an officer, contact by bodily fluids and preventing arrest. Police Cpl. Dylan Schauer wrote these up with his probable cause pen.
After getting a look at this photo. I shouldn’t comment. Often times pug shots are not the most glamorous.
Well can’t a person be arrested in there own home for watching porn? Come on where is the officers discretion in this case? This is discerning, to say the least.
Query: what if she was having sex and was a screamer, would she have been arrested for disturbance of the piece?
How close was this to the school?