WE CAN see the executives for Coppertone dancing in their offices.
A father has been indicted and charged for not putting enough sun-screen on his 12-year-old son.
Can a bill outlawing going outside without slathering on a healthy dose of suntan lotion be far behind?
Walter McKelvie, of Vineland, now faces 18-months in prison because, according to the indictment, he failed to "apply enough sunscreen causing severe sunburn to" his son, who is only identified as R.M. in court documents.
McKelvie has been charged with one count of child abuse and neglect.
The boy, who is mentally disabled, was out in the sun for more than seven hours and suffered, according to the Associated Press, "large, bleeding blisters on his back and face."
Says prosecutor Rob Johnson: "If you expose your child to that type of risk, you will be prosecuted."
Philadelphia shore-goers: You have been warned.
Unless the young boy is also suffering from some skin condition that makes him sensitive to the sun, we're having a hard time getting this indictment past our outrage tresh hold.
If sunburn is now an indictable offense, what happens if a parent exposes his kid to the flu?
Or doesn't make the child put on a coat in case the weather gets chilly?
This is a perfect example of prosecutorial over-reach that actually has the opposite effect of what law makers want. It makes child abuse seem like a trivial matter.
Unless they can make a better case, we suggest that New Jersey prosectors throw in the beach towel on this one. *
