The man has to pay compensations to his “victims”
It’s rare that it’s hard to tell the difference between what is “pure mommyism” and what is “yeah, okay, I guess people shouldn’t be doing that.”
Part of me says a man has a right to wriggle. But it also seems like a very public anti-social display (whether or not it is sexual, which seems totally irrelevant).
Making him pay money to people who witnessed him wriggling, however, is insane.
A man has been banned for five years from wearing a mask and dressing in an all-black suit in public at night and “crawling, wriggling or writhing on the ground” after police linked him to 25 incidents committed by the so-called “Somerset gimp”.
Joshua Hunt, 32, has been given a sexual risk order after police argued there was a sexual motivation to the incidents.
A district judge imposed the order after a hearing at Bristol magistrates court a week after Hunt, who insists he is not the gimp, was convicted of two offences under the Public Order Act of intentionally causing harassment, alarm or distress.
I don’t even understand what that means.
He insists it was not him in the mask, or he insists he doesn’t identify as “the gimp”?
Lawrence Wilcox, representing Avon and Somerset police, told Friday’s hearing that Hunt had been linked to 25 incidents.
Peter Richardson, defending, said Hunt had taken a “pragmatic and practical approach” to the application. “We are not contesting the application but that is not the same as agreeing with everything that is set out,” he said.
The sexual risk order was imposed for five years and also means Hunt is on the sex offender register for the same period.
The article lists off the things he’s banned from doing in bulletpoint form.
The list is sort of hilarious, actually. This is pure mommyism. Maybe give him a fine, but telling him he’s not allowed to own masks is lunacy. Are the police going to go to his house to check and see if he’s harboring masks? The list is also ridiculously specific, when the judge could have just said “don’t do that anymore.”
- Wearing any type of mask or face covering, including improvised mask or face coverings that cover all or part of the face, in any public place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, unless officially required for medical purposes or by law.
- Being in possession of any type of mask or face covering, including improvised masks or face coverings that cover all or part of the face, in a public place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, between the hours of 9pm and 6am unless officially required for medical purposes or by law.
- Wearing or being in possession of black all-in-one garments or any combination of full-length black-coloured top and black-coloured bottom clothing which has the appearance of an all-in-one garment, in a public place, including in a vehicle in a public place between the hours of 9pm and 6am.
- Crawling, wriggling or writhing on the ground in a public place while wearing a full-body covering, clothing that appears like a full-body covering and/or mask/full-face covering.
Well, that is clearly extreme.
At least they’re letting him wriggle on the ground if he’s wearing normal clothes.
I think. That’s not actually clear.