[Closed] WTF - Naked rambler jailed for 5 months?

It's been going on for years - he's almost constantly locked up!

I dunno. I'm really split on this one. On one hand he should have the right to stroll about in the buff if he likes. On the other hand he was doing it near a children's playground and refused to cover up or move away. Not sure prison is the right place for him, perhaps somewhere he can get the help he seems to need.

What happened last time he was released?

Stephen Gough, 53, was seen walking unclothed near a children's play park in Dunfermline, Fife, on 20 July.

[quote=bencooper] Not sure prison is the right place for him, perhaps somewhere he can get the help he seems to need.
He has refused to let them assess his mental state.

He has refused to let them assess his mental state.

That's a Catch 22 in itself...

🙂

Although, his mental state is becoming glaringly obvious up here.Still,look on the bright side; no prison issue clothes will be damaged or torn if his cell mate "gets lonely" one night.

A bit like some of the recently departed from here. If you don't know when to stop trying to make a point. Even when they ask nicely.....

[quote=duckman ]Although, his mental state is becoming glaringly obvious up here.Still,look on the bright side; no prison issue clothes will be damaged or torn if his cell mate "gets lonely" one night.
He is kept in solitary 😐

he can get the help he seems to need.

Why does he need "help" because he likes not wearing clothes? Just because you're different to most people, doesn't make you mentally ill. We should have better things to worry about, and adults shouldn't be traumatised, supposedly on kids' behalves, by non-sexual nudity.

[img] [/img]

zimbo +1

Why does he need "help" because he likes not wearing clothes? Just because you're different to most people, doesn't make you mentally ill. We should have better things to worry about, and adults shouldn't be traumatised, supposedly on kids' behalves, by non-sexual nudity.

Theres making a point, then theres exposing yourself to children.

One is ok generally, the other is not, ever!

zimbo +1

You'd think that by now he'd have got the fairly simple message though

nobody wants to see your cock

exposing yourself to children!

get a grip, or were you recently outraged to discover that prince harry is also a naked human when his clothes are removed.

Stephen Gough, 53, was seen walking unclothed near a children's play park in Dunfermline, Fife, on 20 July.

Fair point Binners,well made. A little bit indelicate use of the language...

Stop press; it would seem that zokes and zimbo DO want to see his cock!

I don't remember Prince Harry hanging around at a kids play area in Las Vegas.

I've no problem with him wandering around naked but just don't do it near a bloody kids park. I'm suprised he didn't get a kicking.

bigyinn - Member
but isnt actually a threat to anyone.

Aye; until he brushes up against you on a busy street. 😛

Theres making a point, then theres exposing yourself to children.

There's a bit of a difference between wearing a dirty mackintosh and deliberately flashing at kids, and being naked ambling around.

One's aiming to shock / derive perverse pleasure, the other's just ambling around without any clothes on. Or is it that noone can breathe near children for fear of being branded a paedo?

He's obviously not quite right, more for his stubbornness than the nakedness itself. But the amount of time he's spent in nick is vastly disproportionate to any harm he may have done. They cant even seem to charge him for what they object to, only for that old 'Breach of the peace' chestnut.
Society needs to be the bigger person here and just let him get on with his life.

Zimbo +1

I met a naked rambler coming down from sprinkling tarn on my D of E expedition when I was 15. I was just amused and if anything thought good on the guy for just doing what he wanted. Wasn't hurting anyone in doing so, so I had no problem. To be honest, if I'd have had kids with me I don't think I'd have seen it a too much of an issue either - we're all the same in the end.

Bit of a tactical error by the Police. Next time he gets out, they should release him in Edinburgh at the start of the Fringe Festival. He will have at least a month of freedom before anybody notices him.

If he was asked to cover him self up near kids and he rufused then he's a ****t.

If you knew me, you'd know I am not adverse to taking my clothes off myself. But there are limits.

I assume you don't have kids your self zokes?

And there's duckman with the [i]ad hominem[/i] again because someone disagrees with his pov.

How's about you challenge the argument for a change, rather than the poster?

Yes, to 'normal' people wandering around naked may seem odd, but it's hardly doing anyone any harm. That British society gets so het up about someone being naked is quite saddening, actually.

I assume you don't have kids your self zokes?

And this has to do with what, precisely?

[quote=sweepy ]Society needs to be the bigger person here and just let him get on with his life.
Or [i]he[/i] does.

The bit I can't understand is that he has children and, through the consequences of his actions, hasn't seen them for years.

He is commiting a crime, keeps doing so and is offending a lot of people.

Keep him locked up until he agrees to wear clothes in public.

No sympathy for him, at all.

Thats what I mean Druidh, he obviously isn't able to back down on this for whatever reason, it's just not right to bang him up this long for what he's doing.

Or he does.

He's happily getting on with his life, at least he was until society picked on him for being different.

Why is British society so scared of a naked human?

He is commiting a crime, keeps doing so and is offending a lot of people.

How does one become offended by the sight of another human in the buff?

Still,look on the bright side; no prison issue clothes will be damaged or torn if his cell mate "gets lonely" one night.

Oooh, is that a reference to male rape? You're hilarious.

And this has to do with what, precisely?

You're attitude to having grown men hanging around at kids play areas with their cocks out!

I'd just like to say i'm not saying this guy is a peado or owt, but he does need to learn some boundaries.

 

he does need to learn some boundaries.

And a lot more people need to learn some tolerance.

I understand and respect his point of view, but I can't help thinking he's a bit of an idiot for continually giving up his liberty to make a point about 'personal freedom'.

I don't think prison is helping in this situation at all really.

I do wonder about the practicalities when he's out and about, and encounters obstacles such as scratchy bushes, barbed wire fences etc. And he goes around naked in Scotland? Tahiti or somehwere hot, I could understand. Brave man.

Passing sentence, Sheriff Williamson told him: “You were indulged by the authorities and the police.

“I understand you to have left prison some time before your arrest.

“Police officers told you that if you carried on your journey you would pass a playground occupied by children.

“You were given three options: one to change direction, two to cover your private parts, or three to enter the police van, who would then take you round the play park, release you and allow you on your way.

“Despite that, you refused. That shows a degree of arrogance and disregard for other members of the public, in particular children, who have a right not to be confronted by naked men.”

What I don't understand is what on earth is he carrying around with him in that bag? There certainly aren't many if any clothes in there 🙄

I believe he wears boots and a hat, Pansy 🙂

in particular children, who have a right not to be confronted by naked men

Was he going to "confront" these children, or was he simply going to walk past them?

There has to be something wrong with his mental state if he is prepared to walk around Scotland, naked, in peak midge season.

Good God I agree with herr zokes.

If it was a woman walking naked "near" to a childs playground would they be jailed.

[quote=Pigface ]
If it was a woman walking naked "near" to a childs playground would they be jailed.
Probably.

He should get a job "au Cap", the naturist place near Cap d'Agde. Surely better to live in a nudist camp than a prison cell.

Pigface [u]didn't[/u] say something stupid 😉

druidh - Member
Passing sentence, Sheriff Williamson told him: “You were indulged by the authorities and the police.
“I understand you to have left prison some time before your arrest.

“Police officers told you that if you carried on your journey you would pass a playground occupied by children.

“You were given three options: one to change direction, two to cover your private parts, or three to enter the police van, who would then take you round the play park, release you and allow you on your way.

“Despite that, you refused. That shows a degree of arrogance and disregard for other members of the public, in particular children, who have a right not to be confronted by naked men.”

POSTED 6 MINUTES AGO #

I take your point there Druidh, but i believe you are reinforcing mine, The guy just isn't capable of backing down on this now. The punishment is disproportionate to the crime.
He's not being punished for nakedness, he's being punished for defying the authorities,

Probably.

You sure?

😆

Slight tangent, but in regard to Pigface's point, there are plenty of ingrained prejudices about men being 'dangerous' near children: [url= http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/nurse-humiliated-by-qantas-policy-20120813-243t4.html ]Nurse 'humiliated' by Qantas policy[/url]

And a lot more people need to learn some tolerance.

Ok.

I suppose a comparable example would be if I were to walk through the city centre, insulting everyone. Sure, it's not logical to prosecute someone because they called someone else a naughty word, but it's behaviour that will cause a reaction - that's why it's covered by Breach of the Peace.

The reason I think he needs help is that most people, even if they did wander about in the buff, would probably understand that some people might not like this, and would moderate their actions a bit - as the police gave him several chances to do.

Prison seems to be the wrong place for him. However, he does need to have some sort of mental health assessment, not because of the nudity but because of his unwillingness to compromise or work around the requests of the authorities (who don't care about the nudity, just prefer its not in certain places).

You'd think that by now he'd have got the fairly simple message though

nobody wants to see your cock

After kayaking a bit too close to shore past a beach where naturism is tolerated the other week I came to the sad conclusion that the section of the population that someone might want to see naked and the section of the population that want to walk around with it all on display rarely intersect. Eye bleech was definately the order of the day.

You're attitude to having grown men hanging around at kids play areas with their cocks out!

Except he wasn't "hanging around" a playground was he? There just happened to be one on his route.

There has never been any suggestion that this bloke has done anything dodgy, lewd or sexual. He's just someone that prefers not to wear clothes.

Fair play to him I say and I really can't see any good reason to lock him up for it.

(and yes I do have kids, thanks)

atlaz - he does need to have some sort of mental health assessment, not because of the nudity but because of his unwillingness to compromise or work around the requests of the authorities

Yeah, and that Rosa Parks should have just got another bus.

At what age are children supposed to be protected from non sexual nudity? Is it ok up to a certain age and then not for a few years and then all ok again?

I only ask because plenty of people seem to choose to bring their children of either sex into the gym changing rooms with them.

LOL @ Rosa Parks

Yeah, and that Rosa Parks should have just got another bus.

Brilliant, overcooking the analogy a bit but brilliant all the same.

I only ask because plenty of people seem to choose to bring their children of either sex into the gym changing rooms with them.

Exactly.

My 2.5yo daughter sees me and the missus naked pretty much every day and I'd have absolutely no problem with her seeing anybody else naked in a non-sexual context. I'm quite happy to take her into the gents if I have to for instance.

We really are ridiculously uptight in this country sometimes.

[i]Yeah, and that Rosa Parks should have just got another bus.[/i]

Oooh good one...

This thread is very interesting, mainly because of the way it exposes those people who think that nudity = threat to children, and that the appropriate response to said nudity is imprisonment.

Perhaps all trail centres should have segregated changing rooms, and we should be forced to use them on pain of imprisonment?

overcooking the analogy a bit

Conceded. Racial equality vs. wandering about with your holiday money dangling in the breeze. Not quite the same!

people who think that nudity = threat to children, and that the appropriate response to said nudity is imprisonment.

I don't think that's it, really. It's about understanding that some behaviour, whatever it may be, will cause a reaction in others that will "breach the peace". Is that reaction reasonable? No, not really.

wow, a high percentage of STW are offended by nudity then, totally contrary to the level of willy waving i see here daily. 🙂

cant understand it at all myself, if you dont wanna see it, dont look, its not like he is stood outside your living room window trying to shock you.

how many people do i upset and offend when i change clothes in a car park after a days riding?

Typical Booties, always liking to be Nekid... 😉

And there's duckman with the ad hominem again because someone disagrees with his pov.

How's about you challenge the argument for a change, rather than the poster?

Check you!

Look; I realise that you take not only yourself but everything on the internet [b]very[/b] seriously,and I am really pleased,as I am sure Mr Gough is, that you have taken up his cause...but like the vast majority of the population up here I don't care that he wanders about naked,other than think it is daft this has cost court time and money for something so stupid,on both his and the laws part...and THAT is my point of view.And you don't actually(as usual,)have an argument I give a toss about.TBH I think they should let TJ back just for you to have somebody to play with.

He goes around without clothes in Scotland, gets 5 months inside. Given that winter is close I'd imagine he wanted 6 months.

He gets arrested as soon as he steps through the Judas gate, so it will continue. He was released the last time to walk back to England as he had cost us £500,000.

This thread is very interesting, mainly because of the way it exposes those people who think that nudity = threat to children, and that the appropriate response to said nudity is imprisonment.

At no point did I say he deserved a prison sentence for what he did, nor do i think that [/i]he[i] was actually a threat to children. But, he was given 3 choices by the police and refused them all.

I don't know the guy, I don't know his previous history but anyone that seemingly wants to wander around naked in the vacinity of kids, to me, shouldn't be allowed near them.

In the home, in the swimming pool/gym changing rooms, on a french beach are all acceptable places for general nakedness. A kids playground is not.

Similarly i would also ask people swearing at a kids playground to refrain, but if took them into a busy pub i would kind of expect it. Although i would hope that people would see kids and act accordingly.

[i]I don't know the guy, I don't know his previous history but anyone that seemingly wants to wander around naked in the vacinity of kids, to me, shouldn't be allowed near them.[/i]

Really?

He doesn't [b]want to wander around naked in the vacinity of kids[/b]

He just wants wander around naked. Big, big difference, yet one which seems to get the old paedo radar all of a quiver..

he didnt want to sit on one side of the see-saw and wait for a playmate.

from what you say, if he was passing a swimming pool full of kids in France, it would be ok? Is it the garlic or the gauloises that promotes liberty?

Dont take your kids to a beach in France is my advice

anyone that seemingly wants to wander around naked in the vacinity of kids, to me, shouldn't be allowed near them.

Yeah except as I said, he doesn't want to [i]"wander around naked in the vicinity of kids"[/i]

He just wants to wander around naked.

(Edit: crikey beat me to this exact point)

He's been doing it for years, walked the length of Britain multiple times and caused no actual harm to anyone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Gough
http://www.nakedwalk.org/

Yeah, and that Rosa Parks should have just got another bus.

Two thumbs up for that. Awesome analogy! Could also have considered some sort of comment about people being forced into cattle cars in the 2nd world war for equal impact or to double up.

Couldn't care about the nudity, I just find a man who is unable to moderate his behaviour despite several prison sentences and requests from the police has something not quite right with him. It's not a human rights issue. Reading the wikipedia post, it seems like half of his problems are about not complying with basic instructions (please wear clothes to court, please wear clothes on a plane).

I think I have solution to this problem.

Body paint.

He gets to walk around nekkid, yet appears to be clothed to the casual observer.

I have some questions about this.

For a start - how does he support himself ? (I mean earn money) Does he live off the land ? If you wander about all the time you can't really work or claim benefits AFAIK.

And surely he must put some clothes on or find indoor residence in winter, I mean, surely ??

I just find a man who is unable to moderate his behaviour despite several prison sentences and requests from the police has something not quite right with him.

He strongly believes in personal freedom and is happy to stand up for that belief even if it means going to jail?

Yea, what a weirdo.

[quote=hels ]I have some questions about this.
For a start - how does he support himself ? (I mean earn money) Does he live off the land ? If you wander about all the time you can't really work or claim benefits AFAIK.
And surely he must put some clothes on or find indoor residence in winter, I mean, surely ??
I don't think he wanders around naked all the time - only when he is trying to make a point..

Gough was arrested again on 19 May 2006 at Edinburgh airport after removing his clothes during a flight from Southampton to Edinburgh

Hels - "And surely he must put some clothes on or find indoor residence in winter, I mean, surely ??"

I refer you to my earlier post, winter is comming and he gets 5 months. Are prisons in Scotland cold? 🙂

edit-trying to do two things at once while eating a chocolate hobnob.

I think he's tapped into a rich vein in British society; the one where people are desperate to be offended. Only he has taken it farther than anyone thought he would by doing the same relatively inoffensive thing over and over again. Doing it again doesn't make it anymore offensive than the first time, but the response of the po-faced; 'He's got a penis! won't anyone think of the children!' means that the response of the state has to become ever more draconian, or a large loss of face will occur.

He should have been ignored from the start, but the paedo-finder Generals have made him a cause celebre.

He strongly believes in personal freedom and is happy to stand up for that belief even if it means going to jail?

Yea, what a weirdo.

But as Druidh points out, he clearly does wear clothes sometimes so it's not like he's not aware that it's not always suitable to be naked.

And surely he must put some clothes on or find indoor residence in winter, I mean, surely ??

From [url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/mar/23/naked-rambler-prison ]The Guardian article[/url], whilst on his 2006 LEJoG with his girlfriend Melanie Roberts (also naked):

"Gough and Roberts reached John O'Groats in February 2006. Once again, he'd finished his journey in the coldest months of the year. "Pretty cold but manageable," he says defiantly, insisting temperature is an issue only "when you stop, as that's when you start seizing up. The trick is to keep going." Local journalists reported Gough and Roberts walking stoically through "lashing rain".

The two would sleep fully clothed in their sleeping bags, Roberts says. "When there's snow on the ground, it's hard to get out of your sleeping bag, let alone your clothes, to do a 22-mile walk."

They made some allowances for the weather. "We wore warm hats, thick socks, gloves and walking boots," Roberts says. "We ate lots of carbohydrates and walked fast. The closer we got to the finish, the easier it was to forget the cold and pain."

so it's not like he's not aware that it's not always suitable to be naked.

Of course he is. That's rather his point.

"One day I was walking and something happened." He had an epiphany: "I realised I was good. Being British, buried in our upbringing is that we're not good or have to watch ourselves – maybe it comes from religion, or school. I realised that at a fundamental level I'm good, we're all good, and you can trust that one part of yourself."

This self-realisation led to Gough often choosing to be naked in public: if he was good, then his body was good. "The human body isn't offensive," he says. "If that's what we're saying, as human beings, then it's not rational."

...

"We can either end up living a life that others expect of us or lives based on our own truth. The difference is the difference between living a conscious life or one that is unconscious. And that's the difference between living and not living."