 However, the Court reversed Osborne's conviction because, after reviewing the record of the trial, it observed that the State did not present evidence that the images were "lewd" within the meaning of the statute.Because lewdness was an essential element of the crime, the State had not satisfied its obligation to prove all the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.The dissenting opinion, written by Justice Brennan and joined by Justices Marshall and Stevens, argued, "When speech is eloquent and the ideas expressed lofty, it is easy to find restrictions on them invalid.