Yeah, this is definitely a BS law. To desecrate something can require that one use a very vague definition of the word desecrate. To violate the sanctity of something. Well, what violates sanctity? If I walk by it and point, laugh, and make fun of it am I violating sanctity? Some would say yes, but surely nobody here would agree that I should be charged with a crime.
I have no problem protecting the property of others, and this statue obviously does not belong to this individual. Based on the one picture in the article, the only thing he did wrong was climb on top of it. It is not his to do so. And that would be the same case as if someone climbed on it and took a pic with a thumbs up or holding a bible.
To me, this law is as stupid as this kid is. If he had just taken a pic of the statue itself, then went home and photoshopped a ----- into the picture to show something vulgar, could he still be charged? After all, that, by the exact definition of desecration, would still be desecrating a venerated object. The only difference would be that he did it with software and not his body.
Shame on the kid for doing something pretty stupid. But, he's a kid. They do that kind of thing sometimes and need to learn. But shame on the law even more. Those are ADULTS that are pushing this (and shame on you posters here defending the law). They should REALLY know better.