Judge Finds Free The Nipple Laconia Ladies Guilty; Appeal Vowed

Free the Nipple Hampton 2015

This is a crime? – Hampton Beach “Free the Nipple”, 2015

Today was the day of the latest “Free the Nipple” trial in New Hampshire’s Laconia district court. Though the ladies who protested the nipple ban in 2015 were found not guilty after a hilarious trial that I captured on video, this time around three of the ladies were found guilty for a topless event that happened in Laconia early in 2016. Both seemingly conflicting verdicts were given by the same judge. The ladies and their attorney intend to appeal.

Unfortunately I was not there to record today’s trial due to a car breakdown. I was told it was a very short event, as all the testimony in the case was given by the witnesses in a prior hearing in October on a motion by defense attorney Dan Hynes to dismiss the case. Thankfully, Free Keene blogger and legal expert Melanie Johnson was at the original hearing in October to take notes.

Though the very same judge, James M Carroll found the ladies who were topless in 2015 in Gilford not guilty on a technicality because NH is not a “home rule” state, this time he found the Laconia ladies guilty! Heidi Lilley, Kia Sinclair, and Ginger Pierro were sentenced to a $100 fine suspended given 12 months of good behavior.

Judge James M Carroll of Laconia District Court

Judge James M Carroll of Laconia District Court

In November of 2016 Carroll denied Hynes’ motion to dismiss saying that Laconia prosecutors had found an “enabling statute” that allowed the city to ban toplessness.

Since New Hampshire is not a “home rule” state, cities and towns are only supposed to be allowed to make things illegal that they’ve been enabled to prohibit specifically by the state legislature. According to the Concord Monitor’s Nick Reid, the prosecutors argued that RSA 47:17:XIII grants the town the right to regulate female toplessness. The statute does say that cities and towns can,

“regulate the times and places of bathing and swimming in the canals, rivers and other waters of the city, and the clothing to be worn by bathers and swimmers.”

Attorney Hynes, who is also a state representative, told me he’s disappointed in the court’s decision and intends to file an appeal with the NH supreme court. He’s previously stated the statute is unconstitutional and that he doesn’t believe banning female toplessness was the legislature’s intention. He says he’ll also be supporting legislation in 2018 to repeal the statute in question. Stay tuned here to Free Keene for the latest for this important equal rights case.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


  1. Now now tripjack, poppet sockets, and old wenches, ball wenches, and darling sweetums.

  2. The male judge borders on contempt as he make a unconstitutional decision affecting woman! When will men stop making decisions affecting woman, but not themselves? The judges here, and correctly so, said the 1935 legal granting of the federal government to give men the legal right to be topless but not men is unconstitutional. Our government were given a choice to tell men to cover up or allow woman to be topless. Grow up judge!

  3. Some people are total boobs, trying to churn up an issue like this. If women want to do everything men do to show their equality, let’s require them to play on major league football teams. They haven’t learned their lesson from being in active combat. 

    OH….. they want to pick and choose which activities to be “equal” in!

  4. the picture that seems to be in the FK portfolio, does not portray the ladies in it  very well…..  There has got to be a better  picture..somewhere..  that would better make the case

  5. One other think i think FK messes up sometimes….Being obnoxious sometimes is counter productive the the ends they seek. Where  they may have actually sold their case it imo works against them.   Like with cameras in court… they got more restricted because of being obnoxious,at least in keene,    Um,I understand  the making a splash  to  get attention but i guess it can bite ya too.

  6. DRACdouble saw, d saw abc

  7. It’s rather amusing Ian and the freekeeners seem to be the only one’s who are so worked up about this. How are the freekeeners going to learn about female anatomy?

  8. The judge appears to have followed the law – but the law is dubious at best.  Regulate the clothing?  Does that mean a town that passes a law that says, “All swimmers must wear clothing saying, ‘The major is GREAT!’ ” must conform to that law?  If they passed a law that all swimmers must wear white cotton only?  Or that they may not wear any clothes bigger than 1 square inch, those would pass muster?

  9. FireThemAll I think we should just apply EXACTLY the same standards to the “equal” women.  No more men’s and women’s sports teams – just TEAMS where the best players play.  That would completely wipe out women’s athletics.  Military standards that today require 50 year old men to run two miles FASTER than 19 year old women would be reset to require ALL to meet the same standard.  If this were done in today’s military, less than 2% of women would qualify. Even on the civilian side, where UPS requires workers to be able to move 70-pound boxes, if you take one in for shipping, how often do you think the woman behind the counter will handle it?  No – she does the paperwork, then calls a man to come do the heavy lifting.  Workplace discrimination suits BY MEN that they are required to do all the heavy lifting without receiving higher pay would be suitable corrective action.

    In short, women want their cake – and eat it too.  They want equal rights – but not equal responsibility.

    The next time America drafts soldiers, the test of “equality” will be put to the test.  Can you imagine the reaction if women had been drafted and sent to fight in the front lines in Vietnam?  Women do not want equality.  They want special treatment, equal consideration without being required to meet equal standards.

  10. topless and proud You clearly have no concept of law.

Care to comment?