Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Topics that are nudity related but not nudism

Moderator: Moderators

Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby shrewdnude on Mon Oct 20, 2014 12:52 pm

This is really weird

http://www.hertfordshiremercury.co.uk/J ... story.html

A serial 'flasher' has been told by a judge he can't go out in public without his pants on. Judge John Plumstead said he was making the order that Terry Emberson can't go out without wearing pants under his trousers, as part of his sentence. And the judge told Emberson: "Stay sober and keep it in your trousers. If you fail to do either you will be in breach of this order".

And exactly how do you enforce a court order like that? Will the police be approaching Emberson in the street and demanding he drops his trousers? If he does and is found not to have any underwear on will they not only prosecute him for breaching the court order but also try to do him for a public order offence (nudity in a public place) or a further breach because he's "not keeping it in his trousers"?

I can't think of the last time I saw such a crass and ill-considered pronouncement by a circuit judge.
Last edited by shrewdnude on Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
shrewdnude
Fully clothed
Fully clothed
Posts: 64

Re: Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby old guy on Mon Oct 20, 2014 1:22 pm

I don't know how to enforce this ruling but something needed to be done with this guy, he apparently was searching for young girls to "show" himself to- not relaxing naturally at home or on the beach (or wherever).
User avatar
old guy
Naked
Naked
Posts: 9243
Location: southwest Missouri, USA

Re: Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby nudecamper on Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:33 pm

Firstly to avoid confusion among US posters, in UK pants are I think what you call undershorts, yes? Although full name is underpants which we shorten to pants, so not actually what we in the UK call trousers & you in the US call pants. :mrgreen:

But I digress...It appears this sad individual commits his crimes when drunk so maybe wearing underpants might discourage him slightly? However, if it does not & is arrested again for flashing & found to be not wearing pants then he can be taken straight to jail & banged up for being in breach of a court order rather than going through the court process again therefore saving the taxpayer money. So a clever ruling.
User avatar
nudecamper
Topless
Topless
Posts: 1174
Location: Essex UK

Re: Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby sanua_chap on Mon Oct 20, 2014 8:05 pm

shrewdnude wrote:And exactly how do you enforce a court order like that? Will the police be approaching Emberson in the street and demanding he drops his trousers? If he does and is found not to have any underwear on will they not only prosecute him for breaching the court order but also try to do him for a public order offence (nudity in a public place) or a further breach because he's "not keeping it in his trousers"?


just for the record - nudity in a public place is not a public order offence in England. It is an offence in Scotland, which is why the 'Naked Rambler' had so much difficulty up there, but in England simple nudity is not an offence, thanks to some serious campaigning by BN.
User avatar
sanua_chap
Topless
Topless
Posts: 1260
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby The Tibetan Hat on Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:48 pm

Yeah, I'm going to go out there and say this case pretty much has nothing to do with naturism. When such rulings are made against peaceful naturists who've done nothing wrong, then it's worth our concern.
The Tibetan Hat
Topless
Topless
Posts: 539
Location: Derbyshire

Re: Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby nudewalker on Tue Oct 21, 2014 1:35 pm

No doubt this guy has some issues but some of the public likes to lump us all in one group. But it is a novel approach by the judge.
nudewalker
Topless
Topless
Posts: 1272
Location: West Virginia USA

Re: Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby John P on Tue Oct 21, 2014 9:06 pm

This case isn't anything to do with naturism, but maybe we can get something useful from it. What it shows (shows, ha ha) is what a sexually-motivated exhibitionist is like, what he does and how he gets treated by the law. If it's true that "some of the public likes to lump us all in one group" then it helps make it clear what the differences are.

In the case of Steve Gough, whatever trouble he's causing, he hasn't been accused of anything like this man, and he's never been threatened with being listed as a sexual offender. The worst they've done is arrest him twice for "outraging public decency" and both those charges were dropped without going to trial. Before the Anti-Social Behaviour Order was issued, the usual charge was being "likely to cause alarm or distress" under the Public Order Act. And for naturists less extreme than Steve Gough (that's just about everyone) it seems easy enough to stay out of trouble.

It's interesting that in this case, the defendant Terry Emberson was reported "pleading guilty to four offences of indecent exposure". I think that's a term used in everyday speech, even though it doesn't appear in English law at all. Whereas where I live in Massachusetts, we do have it as part of the law, though there's no description of what "indecent exposure" actually means. In some states, the courts have said that non-sexual nudity isn't "indecent", but that hasn't happened here yet.

Come on and get your kicks, from Section 66:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/66
User avatar
John P
Topless
Topless
Posts: 667
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Re: Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby shrewdnude on Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:20 pm

John P wrote:Come on and get your kicks, from Section 66:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/66
The very relevant bit of section 66 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is subsection 2, which reads:

(2) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liableÔÇö
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years.

Cases at Crown Court (which this one was) are only indictable ones, so why didn't the judge bang him up for two years instead of making a ridiculous and unenforceable order?

A P Herbert wrote "Justice must be seen to be done, but the English legal system has to be seen to be believed", and I don't think he was wrong :(
User avatar
shrewdnude
Fully clothed
Fully clothed
Posts: 64

Re: Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby John P on Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:57 am

Oh well, if you really want to get into it (found by searching on <Sexual offences act section 66>):
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sent ... _exposure/
(CPS = Crown Prosecution Service)

2 years would be the maximum sentence. But the guidelines only seem to recommend that for the most serious cases, and a judge apparently has discretion not to impose a prison sentence at all.

Type/nature of activity: Basic offence as defined in the SOA 2003, assuming no aggravating or mitigating factors, or some offences with aggravating factors

Starting points: Community order
Sentencing ranges: An appropriate non-custodial sentence

'Non-custodial sentence' in this context suggests a community order or a fine. In most instances, an offence will have crossed the threshold for a community order. However, in accordance with normal sentencing practice, a court is not precluded from imposing a financial penalty where that is determined to be the appropriate sentence.
User avatar
John P
Topless
Topless
Posts: 667
Location: Massachusetts, USA

Re: Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby Naturgesetz on Thu Oct 23, 2014 4:44 am

shrewdnude wrote:
John P wrote:
A P Herbert wrote "Justice must be seen to be done, but the English legal system has to be seen to be believed", and I don't think he was wrong :(

My Dad was a lawyer, and he had a copy of A. P. Herbert's Uncommon Law, probably a gift ÔÇö a really funny book.
Naturgesetz
Naked
Naked
Posts: 6411
Location: Eastern Massachusetts

Re: Judge orders flasher to always wear pants

Postby New_Adventurer on Tue Dec 02, 2014 9:35 am

Inspires me to quote David Niven on the occasion when a streaker ran across the stage behind him as he was making an Academy Award presentation: "He is just showing his shortcomings."
New_Adventurer
Fully clothed
Fully clothed
Posts: 30


Return to Nudity and society

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron