Rosa Parks with Dr Martin Luther King
The man known as the Naked Rambler has been told he will be arrested again and again if he continues to refuse to wear clothes in public.
The warning came from Sheriff Lindsay Foulis who remanded Stephen Gough into custody for psychological and psychiatric reports after finding him guilty of breaching the peace near Perth Prison on 17 December when he stepped from the jail wearing nothing but a smile and was promptly rearrested. Mr Gough had been serving a sentence for a similar offence.
Representing himself in court, he refused the sheriff’s offer of bail if he put on clothes to return to his home in Hampshire. He conducted his case naked in the court.
Mr Gough has been in and out of jail for the last seven years as he pursues his campaign to be allowed to walk unclothed. He completed a journey on foot from Land’s End to John O’Groats in 2003 despite several brushes with the law en route.
Now, the 50-year-old former Royal Marine has been told he risks spending the rest of his life in prison if he continues his behaviour. Sheriff Foulis said: “When the day comes for you to be released from a prison establishment you will be apprehended and the same process gone through again.
“This is what has happened over the last while and if I impose a custodial sentence that is a scenario which is likely to arise again and again and again.”
The Naked Rambler, who has faced the stiffest opposition to his activities north of the border, compared his campaign to that of US civil rights heroine Rosa Parks, whose defiance in giving up her bus seat to a white passenger in Montgomery, Alabama, and the subsequent boycott campaign, are viewed as a crucial stage in black emancipation in the States.
aebody
14 January 2010I might have some respect for him if he went barefoot, but it's ok to wear boots and socks (and sometimes a hat) but not any other clothes??
He should grow up, and stop comparing his childish behaviour with that of a real civil rights heroine.
WHW
15 January 2010he should just wear a pair of underpants then ppl wouldn't be as offended.
RBP
15 January 2010Good on him - he's harmless, and it's the people getting so worked up who've ended up looking like the lunatics. It's pretty sick that he could spend longer in custody than some convicted murderers for wanting to dress differently. I think as a society we need tae grow up.
Matt Quinn
16 January 2010Harmless? Far from it... Quite apart from the consensual majority rights not to have their sensibilities offended...
His public nudity in places like shops etc represents a health and hygiene issue. One that the rest of society chooses en masse not to bear.
For instance most people would prefer not to use a seat inevitably contaminated by fecal material left by the bare backside of a stranger. Or draw food (or other goods) from shelves potentially contaminated by urinary traces left behind by his unshielded genitallia swinging around!
For the proprietors of public places the only way of mitigating these sanitation risks is by an increased level of cleaning and disinfection of surfaces. By imposing that burden upon others he is in fact acting in an utterly selfish and unreasonable manner imposing his will on others and disrupting their lives and freedoms...
What's more; he could be placing the health of others at risk; even those who are unaware of his passing!
When people chose to enter nudist areas or comminities these are part and parcel of the risks they elect to take. But the majority at large choose not to take those risks or have them imposed upon them... Which is one reason why clothes are the norm...
Rosa Parks fought for natural justice, respect and an equal footing in the face of unwarranted discrimination against a group of people based on the circumstance of their birth... which was and remains a natural right.
What is not a natural right is the forced imposition of a philosophy on others that may rob them of their health and wellbeing.
He should hang his head in shame at drawing what is a very sick and very wrong parallel.
wj
19 January 2010it's just skin!
Harold
27 August 2011Abolish these ridiculous nudity laws. A naked body looks better than alot of the hideous clothing people wear !!!!!!
People should have freedom not oppression. There is NOTHING wrong with the naked body !!!!!!!!!!
Alan Hennessy
09 September 2011Totally outrageous that he should be imprisonned. Its not as if he has actually hurt anyone. In fact he has walked naked over large parts of the Britain and it is only in Scotland that he has serious problems with the legal system. Almost everywhere else it has been sorted out fairly quickly, no-one has really been offended and he has been released from the judicial system to continue on his way - naked.
He is an eccentric - not a criminal and does not deserve this treatment. It doesn't say much for the level of tolerance in Scotland that they have now given him another 2 years in prison for being naked. It puts me off the place.
Can't he be transfered to a jail in a more tolerant area of Britain, so when he is next released he is more likely to be left alone ??? I'm so shocked by this I'm thinking of starting / joining a campaign to highlight his plight.
And as for the comment by Matt Quin (above). I believe he is only naked when he is walking or lodged in the judicial system. He is reported to put on clothes when it is more practical to do so (eg: having lunch). So the point about hygene and sitting in public areas may not be relevant in this case.