A 62-year-old Gloucestershire naturist with a penchant for pruning in the buff was cuffed for indecent exposure and now faces three charges of outraging public decency. Donald Sprigg was hauled before Cheltenham Magistrates Court accused of causing his Cirencester neighbours 'harassment, alarm or distress', the Daily Mail …
OK I'll say it ....
IT angle? Honestly, you're getting more like 'The Sun' every day ......
It's more a privacy issue, which el reg is quite big on, being allowed to practice your lifestyle in your own property without being harassed would fall into that category.
Ironic that you're offended by this piece
when you had to deliberately click on the headline in order to be upset by it, and again to express your upset
Yet you still read it.
Were you expecting perhaps an insight into Apple's summer release schedule, or HP's latest purchases? Am I missing some rule, whereby I am contractually obliged to read every article, regardless of it's headline?
They used a digital camera...??
Well, you see...
The IT angle of the dangle is directly proportional to the heat of the meat.
Since when has bootnotes ever been about IT stories?
Course, the reg has a red top, it has to have a quota of silly stories. It's the law.
@ac:ironic 10:30 - ironic then
that you then had to deliberately click reply to express your upset at mine .... and again to type out your reply and post it (and wtf did you get offended from exactly?)
@ac:Hmmmm 10:30 - of course I read it
otherwise I would never know would I? Or am I missing some rule whereby I am obliged to guess the contents of an article before commenting on it, rather than reading it first ;)
Guess the contents
Guess the contents of a story entitled "Nude gardener's arse hauled into court". Not that difficult, surely?
"Or am I missing some rule whereby I am obliged to guess the contents of an article before commenting on it"
Guess? That's what headlines are for. The headline gives you a pretty big clue as to what the story is about so you don't have to guess.
Just out of interest what did you think the story was going to be about.
exactly what it was
which is why I said it.
why do you people insist on going around in circles? AC's AC's everywhere ... it's coming to something when you haven't even got the cahoonies to put a pseudonym against your comments 'ooooh mummy, I don't want to do that in case I get downvoted and it spoils my total' aaaaaaaah ha ha ha ha ha ... dear oh dear
Have a biscuit.
You are a pillar of the community in choosing to post under a different pseudonym to other people.
Note - non AC
The situation might have been getting a tad too hairy.
Sounds like the neighbours in question could see enough to realise that he might be in the buff, and got their long-distance optics out to confirm it. Why do that if the resultant view is likely to offend?
As a naturist myself (haven't ventured outside yet) I must say he has my sympathies. I certainly wouldn't be offended.
Don't they teach *anything* at schools nowadays ?
ASSUMING PRESSURE REMAINS CONSTANT.
He won't STFU.
Stop feeding the troll, folks.
Re: OK I'll say it ....
Who are you? And why are you wasting our time with your IT angle protest nonsense? Go away, read the El Reg archive for the last ten years, then push off somewhere else which satisfies your content criteria.
...that's why it's in Odds and Sods
Oh man i was rolling on the floor for like 5 mins after reading your post. Thank you for injecting some comedy into what was an otherwise crappy day.
If it starts to rain, will he have a water butt?
I should make a joke...
... but instead I am going to rail against daily mail reading, curtain twitching, busy body, nosy fecking neighbours! All too easy to believe that the charges included indecent exposure whilst walking around his bedroom.
"All too easy..."
It's happened over here. A few years back a couple were prosecuted AND convicted for public indecency for having sex in a room tro-rooms removed from the outer wall in their own home. Why? 'Cause the sneaky-peeper neighbor who just happened to be staring into their window could see them *reflected* in a door-hung mirror opened to an unfortunate angle.
Too bad the long-lensed shutterbugs in this particular case did have't their heads explode from sheer hypocritical outrage overload. Of course, then Mr. Nudist would be prosecuted for murder, and terrorism too, likely.
The lengths some people will go, to be disgusted
You'd almost think they enjoyed it.
Painters and decorators across the land know that Screwfix (amongst others) supply disposable coveralls in a nice, tasteful and clearly not-mistakable-for-being-naked white. Maybe it's time they introduced various skin-toned colours to the range?
Then all the Mr. or Mrs. Spriggs' of the country can don them for a wander around their garden, safe in the knowledge that when the cops come a'knockin' they have plausible deniability.
Reminds me of
The Spitting Image puppet of Mary Whitehouse... she'd bitch about some tv prog she'd just watched in its entirety, obvious being too stupid to realise she had a choice of other crap to watch and indeed an OFF button as well as change-channel buttons
All thing bright & beautiful...
... the purple-headed mountain
Is this the world's oldest joke?
Old Maid: Help me officer, there's a naked man outside my bedroom.
Police Officer: I'm sorry madam, I can't see anyone.
Old Maid: Not from there, but if you climb on the wardrobe and look through these binoculars ...
Or to turn it around...
I was naked in my hotel room and the maid walked in. Eventually.
Mine's the flasher's mack
...there wasn't a bicycle there then
Ah - THERE'S the IT angle!
Calm down, dear, calm down!
Trim the bushes
Can't please everyone. On the one hand you got neighbours being peeping toms to catch a glimpse and on the other ( the side you didn't hear) you got neighbours telling you to trim the bushes so they can see the show too. ;-)
Paris.. cause she knows how to put on a good show.
... how to trim her bush.
I'll get my coat.
I hear there's been a streak of this sort of thing at the moment.
"You don't look like your average horti-f***ing-culturist!"
Health and safety nightmare
Pruning shears, rose thorns, nettles, bumble bees...
Title thingy goes here
Might be a medal in it, for gardening above and beyond, in imminent danger.
Sure there's a health'n'safety issue here
which would be far greater bounds for legal action
Since the neighbors took pictures of him, can they be prosecuted for making pornography?
Only if he's got at least a semi.
It's ok if it's a terraced house, bungalow or bedsit...
Counter sue them for being a peeping tom! Honestly what is the world coming to, if a chap wants to walk around naked in his own garden then he bloody well can in my eyes, wont someone think of the children? If men cannot walk around naked in their own gardens (and be accompanied by women), it may well mean one less child on this planet...
He's 62, not a rampant 25 year old waving his engorged hampton about and using it a a dibber for his spuds.
Move along now, nothing to see.
That might be WHY they complained?
Not quite as appealing a sight perhaps?
I've no idea what an engorged hampton is and will just have to (try not to) imagine until I can get off the work network to Google it. Meanwhile, please send a fresh keyboard to my office forthwith.
It is Cockney (or mockney) rhyming slang: Hampton Wick=pr ... ahhh you can fill the rest in yourself. (Hampton Wick is a bit of London - https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Hampton_Wick, though why it was chosen for this usage, I don't know).
Thank you. Every day's a school day
Obviously (yes, this is the missing IT angle: logic.)
It's quite clear what this lawsuit is really about. Mr Nosy Neighbour is upset that Mr Sprigg is better endowed than he, and his wife has found a new photographic hobby dedicated to one subject (or should that be, One Member), and the only way to save face (or should that be Head) is to sue ...
Countersuit / Stiffy
Sprigg should instigate a countersuit for harassment and 'peeping tom' activity, are these perverts allowed to spy on whomever they choose ?
Also please check up the 'rules' for indecent exposure - I think you'll find that unless he had a stiffy it's only disturbance of the peace.
He was initially arrested for exposure (sex offences act 2003) but was subsequently charged with outraging public decency.
To prove exposure they have to show intent to cause alarm or distress.
With outraging public decency they do not have to show any intent: they only have to state that IF he had been seen it MAY have caused outrage IF someone had seen him. He does not have to be seen at all for outraging public decency !
Time to lock up the entire nation - I KNOW each and every one of you has had some nasty thought or done something right awful at some point... Quite sure you're all the most offensive lot ever.
Excepting my lot, of course.
adding my 2p worth
The right to be "shocked, absolutely shocked" is now a mandatory part of the childish remnants of post-western culture.
No grownups allowed, because that would mean minding your own business, allowing that others may differ and not being distressed that some people dont like you. Still, one would think that pruning should be done with basic protective clothing, nudist or not. Would a nudist arc weld? As for bootnotes, sock it to em! Mines the one with the pruning saw rips in the front..
- 'Kim Kardashian snaps naked selfies with a BLACKBERRY'. *Twitterati gasps*
- Crawling from the Wreckage THE DEATH OF ECONOMICS: Aircraft design vs flat-lining financial models
- Pics Facebook's Oculus unveils 360-degree VR head tracking Crescent Bay prototype
- Bargain basement iPhone shoppers BEWARE! eBay exposes users to phishing vuln
- Google+ GOING, GOING ... ? Newbie Gmailers no longer forced into mandatory ID slurp