Colorado Priest Charged for Jogging Naked

Colorado Priest Charged for Jogging Naked

The Associated Press
Article Last Updated: 08/08/2007 02:54:57 PM MDT


FREDERICK, Colo.—A Catholic priest faces an indecent exposure charge after police said he went jogging in the nude about an hour before sunrise.

The Rev. Robert Whipkey told officers he had been running naked at a high school track and didn't think anyone would be around at that time of day, a police report said.

He told officers he sweats profusely if he wears clothing while jogging. "I know what I did was wrong," he said in the report.

Whipkey did not return phone messages. His attorney, Doug Tisdale, told the Longmont Times-Call that Whipkey had no comment.

Whipkey, 53, was arrested June 22 in this small town about 20 miles north of Denver. An officer said he saw a naked man walking down the street at 4:35 a.m. The U.S. Naval Observatory Web site said sunrise that day in Frederick was 5:31 a.m.

The officer said when he shined his flashlight at the man, he covered himself with a piece of clothing he was carrying.

The Archdiocese of Denver said it takes the incident seriously but is awaiting the outcome of the case. Whipkey, who also officiates at parishes in the nearby towns of Mead and Erie, remains an active priest.

If convicted of indecent exposure, a misdemeanor, he would have to register as a sex offender, prosecutors said.

Sex offender?
Why please?
What sex?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Charge the cop with the flashlight for creating an indecent exposure. It makes about as much sense.

[wolf]

Dude needs a treadmill.

(if he didn't want to be seen, he shoulda been running through the woods or something like that. You WILL encounter other joggers on a high school track, often ones of high school age. When arrested, he was not jogging, he was walking, on a public street. Public nudity is public nudity, folks, and the indecent exposure charge is valid.)

[smurfalicious]

What a weenie.

It's kinda suspect that he's jogging on high school (read: underage school children) grounds. Common sense should prevail - jogging in the dark, nekkid, on school grounds... he gets my creepy vote.

Too often there must be a victim for there to be a crime, even though clues precursed the crime. I'm all for preventative measures rather than seeing yet another victim.

Originally Posted by wolf

Dude needs a treadmill.

(if he didn't want to be seen, he shoulda been running through the woods or something like that. You WILL encounter other joggers on a high school track, often ones of high school age. When arrested, he was not jogging, he was walking, on a public street. Public nudity is public nudity, folks, and the indecent exposure charge is valid.)

I agree with the charge, but not with reg. as a sex criminal... no sex, no sex crime.
Nude does not = sex.

[wolf]

Weenie wagging is a sex crime in most jurisdictions.

I can see it if he did it at someone... but alone... moronic.

[wolf]

If I walk down an empty street in a white neighborhood, with a loaded pistol in my hand shouting that I'm going to shoot any non-white people I see, even if there aren't any around, if the cops see me doing this, it's a crime.

Did he say he was looking to flash someone?
I missed that?
In fact, he clearly stated he did not think he would be seen.
Sad day when we charge people for what could have happened... oh, I forgot, this is BushCo's. America.

[wolf]

Okay, so I'm not shouting. I'm just walking around the neighborhood with a loaded pistol in my hand. Still a crime, even in a jurisdiction that allows open carry.

Walking around with a gun is illegal, sure, but you are not charged with shooting anyone.

[wolf]

He's not being charged with having sex, but in committing a sexually based offense.

Nude does not equal sex.
Based on that, he is not the sick one, they are.