Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The 'Naked Rambler' jailed for 22 months, following arrest within 60 seconds of his release!

they should just let him go and wait for him to be a proper nuisance. 5 years (accumulative) in jail is a bit rubbish if all you've been doing is being naked.

Exactly. The police and magistrataes obviously have a real bee in their bonnet about him. as soon as he leaves prison he is re-arrested. I'd write to my MSP about it if i was in Scotland
 
He needs to take his case to Europe, Germany is a big fish in that pond and they love mooching about in the buff.
 
Exactly. The police and magistrataes obviously have a real bee in their bonnet about him. as soon as he leaves prison he is re-arrested. I'd write to my MSP about it if i was in Scotland

To be fair he was only re-arrested because he was infact doing exactly the same thing again, not like they were trumped up charges trying desperately to pin anything on him.
 
To be fair he was only re-arrested because he was infact doing exactly the same thing again, not like they were trumped up charges trying desperately to pin anything on him.

You miss the point - how is walking around with no clothes on 'breaching the peace'?
 
It's obviously become a "battle of wills" (or should that be "willies"!) between the Scottish police and this bloke, to judge by the way they are acting. Maybe they are worried that "if we let one person get away with it, next thing you know, they'll all be at it", or something. Given Scottish weather, this doesn't seem that likely!

Giles..
 
You miss the point - how is walking around with no clothes on 'breaching the peace'?

It was determined it was a crime, infact he even went to prison for it, he then decided to do it again immediately upon his release, how would you expect that to go?

You think that having just imprisoned someone for however long, that the people who put him there would decide that it suddenly was ok again with no change in legislation having just released him?
 
Yes, and he should take it away from Jockland and in to Europe and get a load of wobbly bitted Germans on the case. What the Scotch are doing is against the law.
 
Yes, and he should take it away from Jockland and in to Europe and get a load of wobbly bitted Germans on the case. What the Scotch are doing is against the law.

If he had managed to keep his clothes on I am guessing they would have been more than happy to see the back of him, and no doubt surprised that they couldnt see the whole of the back of him.
 
If he had managed to keep his clothes on I am guessing they would have been more than happy to see the back of him, and no doubt surprised that they couldnt see the whole of the back of him.

Being naked isn't a crime. The British, (mainly Scottish), judiciary are making a moral call that the naked form is so outrageous that it is likely to encourage others to commit crime. I think they are wrong and I'd bet the European Court of Human Rights would agree with me.
 
Being naked isn't a crime. The British, (mainly Scottish), judiciary are making a moral call that the naked form is so outrageous that it is likely to encourage others to commit crime. I think they are wrong and I'd bet the European Court of Human Rights would agree with me.

Regardless of your personal opinion, those that locked him up oddly havent changed there mind about it simply because he refuses to give up and they are the ones currently with the power to do this. Simply being stubborn is not a legal argument, as a result the same legality that had him arrested to begin with, did again, being as it has happened, repeatedly, there is surely no surprise that it continues to.
 
Regardless of your personal opinion, those that locked him up oddly havent changed there mind about it simply because he refuses to give up and they are the ones currently with the power to do this. Simply being stubborn is not a legal argument, as a result the same legality that had him arrested to begin with, did again, being as it has happened, repeatedly, there is surely no surprise that it continues to.

Those locking him up are a state that has a population less than that of London.

This is the same state that feels 8 years is enough prison time for murdering 270 people.

Maybe my views are Daily Mail, but I feel that these two cases don't reflect well on the Scottish judicial system.
 
Those locking him up are a state that has a population less than that of London.

This is the same state that feels 8 years is enough prison time for murdering 270 people.

Maybe my views are Daily Mail, but I feel that these two cases don't reflect well on the Scottish judicial system.

Fail to see what the size of the state has to do with whether it feels it should be consistent in applying law it has decided on, case law and precedent are the basis of British law.
Those sentences are inconsistent with each other considering the scale of each offence, yes that sentence was too short for killing a huge number of people, its completely irrelevant regarding whether they should let this man go simply because he is persistent in continuing to behave in the way that has got him locked up repeatedly.
Dont think your views are Daily Mail at all, they would probably want him on a sex offenders register for being naked within 500miles of a school, which again is ridiculous.
 
Saying that perhaps Scotland's (& maybe England/Wales') courts are way out of step with those of the greater legal jurisdiction that they are part of and as such are acting in a petty and illegal manner.
 
To be fair he was only re-arrested because he was infact doing exactly the same thing again, not like they were trumped up charges trying desperately to pin anything on him.
is it fair to keep someone in prison for 5 years for this. If they let him he may try to to go somewhere where they wouldn't be so against it
 
I did see a program about this guy. It is ridiculous that he is having a hard time, he is doing no harm.
 
is it fair to keep someone in prison for 5 years for this. If they let him he may try to to go somewhere where they wouldn't be so against it

And he could have gone wherever the hell he wanted if he hadnt decided to be naked while getting there, which he was well aware of considering the number of times its happened. But he did it anyway, his choice.
 
regardless of the rights and wrongs, you'd think he'd give it up unless he really likes being in jail. he's made his point. it's not the most serious issue to martyr yourself for, the police/courts aren't changing their attitude any time soon, so strikes me as kind of pointless what he is doing.

This is why I asked WTF is wrong with him in the OP.

This has been going on for years and every time he leaves prison naked, it's got to be 4 or 5 times now, he's re-arrested and is straight back in again, you would have thought he would have sussed how pointless it is, the Scottish courts are clearly not about to back down unless they are forced to in some way.

Despite reading about these re-arrests over the years, I can't re-call ever reading of him making any appeals despite his defence that his human rights are being breached, which would be the logical thing to do if he actually wants to make a point and force the Scottish police & courts to back-off.

Or, leave the prison with at least a pair of pants on and return to England where he can wander around bollock naked to his heart's content.
 
... Or, leave the prison with at least a pair of pants on and return to England where he can wander around bollock naked to his heart's content.

tbf I think there is at least a good chance that - the lights are on, but there is no one home, iyswim
 
Perhaps he likes prison?

Hey I am all for his stance. I just think he is misjudging his battle.

As I think I mentioned above in the thread, humans are perhaps the only animal that has learnt to be revolted by its own skin.

And that is a situation which is quite ridiculous.
 
I've done a check on google to see if he has ever appealed against these jail terms and can't see anything, but he has his own page on Wikipedia, which lists his court cases & outcomes, but no mention of any appeals.

Although before heading to Scotland he was arrested twice in England he was released almost immediately on both occasions, which I guess has a lot to do with THIS CASE in 2001...

10 January 2001: Vincent Bethell made legal history[1][2] by being the first defendant to stand trial naked in a UK court. The trial was at Southwark Crown Court London. Vincent was charged with the crime of "Public Nuisance",[3] which carries a maximum sentence of Life imprisonment.[4] Vincent was naked throughout this court case, furthermore he was found unanimously not guilty by the jury.[5][6] Prior to Vincent's historic court case he spent 5 months naked in solitary confinement (Segregation Unit) at Brixton Prison (London).[7] In December 2000, fellow activist Russell Shaw Higgs joined Vincent naked in Brixton prison. Russell had a letter about his imprisonment published[8] shortly before being released when all charges were dropped after Vincent's acquittal.
 
Back
Top Bottom