999tigger Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 (edited) He has far too much common sense - didn't you know:) Lol 20:53b 20:55 what did I say.... ---------- Post added 27-12-2015 at 21:07 ---------- The laws says being naked in a public place is indecent exposure . You are comparing apples with oranges again because adults can choose if they want to view pornography or watch sex or violent scenes on television while a passerby has no choice if he or she wants to see the private parts of the naked rambler . ---------- Post added 27-12-2015 at 20:57 ---------- Common sense tells me if you walk down your local high street naked tomorrow you have a good chance of being arrested for indecent exposure . No I'm illustrating the fact of how public attitudes change so what was once considered obscene is no longer and is not prosecuted. Actually the law doesnt say that and if you refer to my earlier post I bothered to put down what it does say. Nakedness of itself is not illegal. Edited December 27, 2015 by 999tigger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamston Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 No it doesn't. The law changed in 2003. What would he be charged with then ? He is still likely to get arrested for outraging public decency . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solution Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 He won't be everyone's cup of tea, but as long as he doesn't get into an excited state, I'm sure he is harmless. He hasn't attacked anyone during his nudeness, so its unlikely he has alterier motives to his hobby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamston Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 Lol 20:53b 20:55 what did I say.... ---------- Post added 27-12-2015 at 21:07 ---------- No I'm illustrating the fact of how public attitudes change so what was once considered obscene is no longer and is not prosecuted. Actually the law doesnt say that and if you refer to my earlier post I bothered to put down what it does say. Nakedness of itself is not illegal. You were moving the goalposts . Public attitude has not changed regarding men exposing themselves in public places which is what the naked rambler has done . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfox Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 Surely not? Isnt that a comparison of apples with oranges? Heres a case of the artist David Bethell who had the same issue of bring naked. Convicted by magistrates, but when he went to trial before a jury he was cleared because they were unwilling to convict him. the jury cnat ahve been worried he was being indecent or threatened family values. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1110330.stm Whoever decided to prosecute for public nuisance wants sacking - completely the wrong offence. ---------- Post added 27-12-2015 at 21:14 ---------- What would he be charged with then ? He is still likely to get arrested for outraging public decency . You and your common sense Try s66 SOA 2003 - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quik Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 What would he be charged with then ? He is still likely to get arrested for outraging public decency . He wouldn't. What he keeps getting locked up for is contempt of court for getting naked in the dock, which is a different issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solution Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 He wouldn't. What he keeps getting locked up for is contempt of court for getting naked in the dock, which is a different issue. I wonder why it's deemed as rude in a court environment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 You were moving the goalposts . Public attitude has not changed regarding men exposing themselves in public places which is what the naked rambler has done . And ive just linked you a case which shows juries are unwilling to convict on this point i.e his peers. I have not moved the goalposts at all, the whole thing people are trying repeatedly to get across to you is that attitudes change and what was once considered unacceptable can be considered harmless. As far as I can see everyone else on this thread whos expressed a preference view his behaviour as harmless and imprisoning pointless, except you and Ghost. Why is being naked indecent and why does it harm family values? I'd have thought it was a bit silly, bit cold, but as long as he wasnt annoying me and going about his business I wouldnt care. I dont have to wnat to do it myself to support his right to if he so wishes and object to him being imprisoned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfox Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 He wouldn't. What he keeps getting locked up for is contempt of court for getting naked in the dock, which is a different issue. Not quite - he's been the subject of an ASBO - thats what he's getting the time for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 What would he be charged with then ? He is still likely to get arrested for outraging public decency . There isnt an offence of outraging public decency. So hard to get arrested for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now