The Manhattan DA’s Office yesterday dropped its case against a woman who frolicked nude for an unauthorized film shoot at the Metropolitan Museum of Art — and her lawyer says it’s because prosecutors feared that moving forward would expose a legal loophole that essentially allows most public nudity.
“My argument is, you can go stark, raving, completely nude in Times Square, or Rockefeller Center or the Metropolitan Museum of Art,” said lawyer Tom Hillgardner.
Kathleen Neill, 26, was busted in August after stripping and rolling around on the floor for photographer Zach Hyman, whose shtick is nude shoots in public places.
She was hit with the exposure statute, which is a mere violation, along with charges of public lewdness and endangering the welfare of the crowd of schoolkids who witnessed the shoot.
Hillgardner argued that case law protects mere nude physical activity — like calisthenics and ball-playing — from lewdness charges. He also contended that the so-called “endangered” children had just viewed the museum’s nude statues.
“Perchance they looked at a boob!” the lawyer said in mock horror.
As for exposure, Hillgardner said a 1992 Court of Appeals decision and a 1995 legislative amendment to the statute have the combined effect of specifically barring only topless sunbathing and topless waitresses handing out promotional material.