Another day, another celebrity indecency charge being filed! This time, it’s Katy Perry‘s turn up at bat. In April the pop princess was playfully fooling around on stage with Australian cricketer Doug Bollinger in India, but her little stunt may cost her big bucks. She has not been officially charged yet with indecency, but the papers have been filed and the case is in the hands of Indian courts. Deets and possible, obscene sexual innuendo inside.
U.K. tabloid paper The Sun has the story:
The playful onstage antics of the pop star and the sportsman, at the opening of the Indian Premier League in April, offended some members of the Indian public.
The indecency case, which relates to the moment Doug put his arms around Katy to demonstrate a cricket bat move at the Chennai event, will go before an Indian court later this month.
The pair have not been formally charged and will not have to appear in court.
The complaint is believed to have been filed by a lawyer who claims to be acting on the public’s behalf and alleges the opening of the show was “obscene and lascivious” and “distracted students who were writing exams at the time”.
A similar action was filed against Bollywood legend Amitabh Bachchan, while local press reported Bollywood actress Priyanka Chopra and IPL chairman Rajiv Shukla were also cited in the complaint.
The case will be heard on July 31.
You can also see the photo of the “obscene and lascivious” moment in question here.
Something tells me that after all is said and done, Katy Perry will be fine. Unfortunately, those students who were distracted from their exams will probably never recover. Please keep them and their hypothetical faltering grades in your thoughts. Wink.
Ok, but seriously. Although this may sound ridiculous from one perspective, does anyone see this as a real cultural issue? We’ve seen and heard of other artists (Madonna, Rihanna, Lady Gaga) performing or shooting videos overseas (and sometimes, right at home) and behaving in a manner that is deemed by the members of that specific community as offensive. Is that what’s happening here? Or is this another way for a good attorney to make some good money, “on the public’s behalf”?