• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Naked Rambler gaoled again

commandlinegamer

Philosopher
commandlinegamer
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
9,692
Location
Mazes of Menace
Free for only moments, he was arrested outside prison after being released on 20th July.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-14649394

I can't say I'm that close a follower of his case, but if he were really so determined to walk free in the buff, why not attempt to persuade others, rather than embark on a one-man crusade?

From a personal point of view, nudity does not offend me. If people choose to wear clothing, or not, I'm not bothered. Obviously others may be upset; we do still live in a culture with taboos on showing 'naughty bits' in public. But given that he's not murdered anyone, or committed grand larceny, I do wonder at the wisdom of keeping him locked up.
 
He's nuts and is not likely to follow any sort of rules, regardless how rational or not the rules are.
 
I do so love the magistrate's comment about a "decent" state of dress. Is decency defined by statute?
 
DallasDad said:
I do so love the magistrate's comment about a "decent" state of dress. Is decency defined by statute?
Click to expand...

Probably not - but there has probably been enough cases to legally define it.

I feel sorry for the bloke and I think it's quite outrageous how much time he has spent in prison.
 
And the police just wait outside the prison on his release dates to rearrest him? That's appalling! The man has spent years in solitary confinement for a "crime" I think is less serious than a kid pinching sweets.

Contrast Gough's treatment to Andrea Hall's. She ran naked down Tib Street in central Manchester on several Friday lunchtimes. Word got around and she drew crowds, including police and media. She was not ever arrested. Greater Manchester Police said that unless a member of the public made a complaint they would take no action against her.

Do we insist that society has to be protected from Spencer Tunick shoots or the London Naked Bike Ride? Surely at some point we have to recognize that keeping a man in prison for life because he will not bend on a point of principle is not justice. Do the Scottish police have no discretion at all in whether or not - or when - to re-arrest him?

He sees himself as a civil rights campaigner - he has compared his situation with Rosa Parks - and accepts that he may spend the rest of his life in solitary confinement.

In Gough's own words:

"Essentially this is about individual freedom and people's tolerance to other people being different. I understand a lot of people will disagree and have strong feelings about it.

Walking the amount of miles I have, through towns and cities, it is on the whole a very small moral minority who act in an irrational way. I believe I am behaving in a reasonable way.

...People who have brought great change often have to go to prison first. People often have to go to prison for many years before others see the light."
Click to expand...
 
It's completely ridiculous. Nut, meet sledgehammer.

Rolfe.

Ow. There's a triple entendre there which was unappreciated as I cross-posted with Aepervius.
 
Last edited:
Carnivore said:
Contrast Gough's treatment to Andrea Hall's.
Click to expand...

He does not look good. She looks very good. That alone is enough to say why the treatment is different : people confusing decency with beauty. They are both equally indecent or decent, but one makes you happy to see, the other makes you gough (;)) your eye.
 
Darat said:
I feel sorry for the bloke and I think it's quite outrageous how much time he has spent in prison.
Click to expand...
I don't feel at all sorry for him - he puts himself in prison completely deliberately. Nobody's stopping him from stripping off when and where appropriate - he insists that it's his "human right" to go without clothing everywhere.
I'm happy to fling off my clothes when its warm enough, I've belonged to naturist clubs and I can assure you that naturists all think he's a nut.
Agreed, he's not doing any harm - except to himself. He's all self, and just ignores everybody else.
 
Carnivore said:
He sees himself as a civil rights campaigner - he has compared his situation with Rosa Parks
Click to expand...

Sheesh. My way of defining a principle that needs to be upheld at all costs is to ask "Will not upholding this principle lead to actual harm for someone? And will upholding it lead to positive benefits for others?"
If the answer is to both is Yes, then you're Rosa Parks sitting at the front of the bus. if the answers are No, then you're Stephen Gough whinging about his human rights.
 
Carnivore said:
And the police just wait outside the prison on his release dates to rearrest him? That's appalling! The man has spent years in solitary confinement for a "crime" I think is less serious than a kid pinching sweets.

Contrast Gough's treatment to Andrea Hall's. She ran naked down Tib Street in central Manchester on several Friday lunchtimes. Word got around and she drew crowds, including police and media. She was not ever arrested. Greater Manchester Police said that unless a member of the public made a complaint they would take no action against her.

Do we insist that society has to be protected from Spencer Tunick shoots or the London Naked Bike Ride? Surely at some point we have to recognize that keeping a man in prison for life because he will not bend on a point of principle is not justice. Do the Scottish police have no discretion at all in whether or not - or when - to re-arrest him?

He sees himself as a civil rights campaigner - he has compared his situation with Rosa Parks - and accepts that he may spend the rest of his life in solitary confinement.

In Gough's own words:
Click to expand...
Isn't there a difference under English law between how male and female nudity is treated? Not sure if it's been tidied up recently, though.
 
Gough isn't even under English jurisdiction at the moment.

Personally, I think Scotland needs to fire its entire legal profession and start again with a new lot, neither related to nor taught by the old lot.

Rolfe.
 
sophia8 said:
Sheesh. My way of defining a principle that needs to be upheld at all costs is to ask "Will not upholding this principle lead to actual harm for someone? And will upholding it lead to positive benefits for others?"
If the answer is to both is Yes, then you're Rosa Parks sitting at the front of the bus. if the answers are No, then you're Stephen Gough whinging about his human rights.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, that seems like a good rule of thumb definition. Others may disagree however, and may think that something important does not have be popular. A cause that is only relevant to a handful of people isn't automatically unworthy.

And to be fair he is not "Whinging" about his rights. He is sacrificing his freedom.

I don't see him as standing up for a population of oppressed involuntary nudists, but I do respect his commitment to his cause.
 
Rolfe said:
Gough isn't even under English jurisdiction at the moment.
Click to expand...
True, but he has been, and Andrea Hall would have been, and I know next to nothing about Scottish law.

A quick google suggests that what I was thinking of was indecent exposure, which I'm pretty sure only applied to men (IIRC, women (and men) could be charged with behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace). However, that is no longer an offence, and I think public nudity is not illegal itself, but one's behaviour while naked could lead one to be prosecuted under the Public Order Act (1986) or the Sexual Offences Act (2003) (which wouldn't apply to simple nudity).
 
Aaahhgghhh! Gaoled! Get SG-1 here pronto!

Eta: ... Crap, wrong site.:boxedin:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom