"1. IF THE MATERIAL HAS THE SLIGHTEST REDEEMING SOCIAL IMPOR= TANCE IT IS NOT OBSCENE BECAUSE IT IS PROTECTED BY THE FIRST AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, AND THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION.

2. IF IT DOES NOT HAVE THE SLIGHTEST REDEEMING SOCIAL IMPORTANCE IT MAY BE OBSCENE.

3. THE TEST OF OBSCENITY IN CALIFORNIA IS THAT THE MATERIAL MUST HAVE A TENDENCY TO DEPRAVE OR CORRUPT READERS BY EXCITING LASC{VIOUS THOUGHTS OR AROUSING LUSTFUL DESIRE TO THE POINT THAT IT PRESENTS A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER OF INCITING TO ANTI-SOCIAL OR IMMORAL ACTION.

4. THE BOOK OR MATERIAL MUST BE JUDGED AS A WHOLE BY ITS EFFECT ON THE AVERAGE ADULT IN THE COMMUNITY.

5. IF THE MATERIAL IS OBJECTIONABLE ONLY BECAUSE OF COARSE AND VULGAR LANGUAGE WHICH IS NOT EROTIC OR APHRODISIAC IN CHARACTER IT IS NOT OBSCENE."

IT WOULD SEEM TO US THAT THE WORD IS THE WORD WHETHER WRITTEN OR SPOKEN AND THAT THE SAME TEST SHOULD APPLY TO BOTH. JUDGE HORN CLEARLY STATED THAT THE MATERIAL SHOULD BE JUDGED "BY ITS EFFECT ON THE AVERAGE ADULT". THIS DEFINITELY TAKES THE CASE OUT OF THE REALM OF THE CHILD OR JUVENILE, AND IT MUST BE TRIED AT THE ADULT LEVEL. REGARDLESS, THE WORD IN THIS CASE WAS USED IN ADULT ENTERTAINMENT, SPOKEN BY AN ADULT BEFORE AN ADULT AUDIENCE.

HOWEVER, IF THE ARRESTING OFFICER 16 TRULY CONCERNED WITH THE "PROTECTION OF OUR YOUTH", AND IF THERE DOES EXIST A PROBLEM OF KEEPING "ADULT" READING AND ENTERTAINMENT OUT OF THE REACH OF THE CHILDREN, THERE MUST BE A WORE DIRECT APPROACH TO SOLVING THE SITUATION. WE SUGGEST THAT A DIFFERENTIATION BE MADE BETWEEN ADULT AND JUVENILE ENTERTAINMENT AND READING AND THAT A CITY ORDINANCE MIGHT BE PASSED REQUIRING THAT CERTAIN MATERIAL BE LABELED "FOR ADULTS ONLY". THE LADDER, FOR INSTANCE, IS CIRCULATED FOR "ADULT" READING AND IS NOT INTENDED AS SUITABLE MATERIAL FOR JUVENILES.

IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS THE WORD – A FOUR-LETTER WORD. IT WAS CALLED "LOVE". IT HAS LOST MUCH OF ITS MEANING AND MOST OF ITS MESSAGE BECAUSE THE PHYSICAL EXPRESSION OF LOVE SEX HAS BE-