The Virginian-Pilot
                            THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT  
              Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: Thursday, June 20, 1996               TAG: 9606200010
SECTION: FRONT                   PAGE: A12  EDITION: FINAL  
TYPE: Editorial  
                                            LENGTH:   55 lines

CORRECTION/CLARIFICATION: ***************************************************************** Suffolk Republican Del. Robert E. Nelms was misplaced into the 77th House District in our Thursday editorial commenting on the state lawmaker's plea of guilty to a charge of indecent exposure in a Richmond park. Del. Lionell Spruill Sr., a Democrat, telephoned to say that he represents the 77th District, which covers portions of Chesapeake and Suffolk. The 76th covers portions of Suffolk, Isle of Wight County and Chesapeake. The last sentence of the editorial should have read: ``The voters of the 76th House District should decide whether Nelms has already trespassed too far on their sensibilities.'' Correction published in The Virginian-Pilot, Friday, June 21, 1996, page A14. ***************************************************************** SUFFOLK DELEGATE GUILTY OF INDECENT EXPOSURE NEXT, THE VOTERS' VERDICT

Suffolk Del. Robert Nelms had a lot to say after he was arrested last winter on a charge of indecent exposure in a Richmond park notorious for gay cruising.

He was a victim of police harassment, Nelms said.

The media had subjected him to a ``statewide lynching,'' he added.

``The worst convicted murderer has not received more attention than I have over this ridiculous situation,'' he fumed.

In court on Tuesday, Nelms had something else to say.

``Guilty.''

Closed mouthed for once, the three-term GOP delegate refused to comment on his conviction and $50 fine. His attorney said Nelms and his wife had concluded the plea was the best way to put the episode behind them.

It was also the best way to ensure that the undercover vice officer in plain clothes who arrested Nelms would never testify.

Nelms said the indecent-exposure charge resulted from his decision to answer the call of nature while walking near the river. Police have been mum, except to say that if Nelms had merely been urinating in public, that would have been the charge.

One ramification of the incident is likely to be an attempt during the 1997 General Assembly to clarify when state lawmakers may claim ``legislative immunity'' from arrest. Nelms argued that his detention by a police officer was illegal because the legislature was in session when it occurred.

That defense temporarily saved Nelms from conviction, until a grand jury indicted him.

A condition of Nelms' conviction is that he can no longer set foot in any Richmond park without being guilty of trespassing.

The voters of the 77th House District should decide whether Nelms has already trespassed too far on their sensibilities. by CNB