Note Of Appeal Against Sentence By Andrew James Nelson
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Lord Johnston,Sheriff Principal C.G.B. Nicholson |
| Neutral Citation | [2007] HCJAC31 |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
| Date | 08 May 2007 |
| Docket Number | XJ1263/06[MSOffice1] |
| Published date | 08 June 2007 |
| APPEAL COURT, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICIARY | |
| Lord Johnston C.G.B.Nicholson, CBE |
[2007] HCJAC31 Appeal No: XJ1263/06[MSOffice1] OPINION OF THE COURT delivered by LORD JOHNSTON in NOTE OF APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE u Section 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 by ANDREW JAMES NELSON _______ |
Act: Shead, AdvocateWheatley, Solicitor Advocate
Alt: Murphy, A.D.
8 May 2007
[1] On 30 August 2006 the appellant pleaded guilty before the Sheriff of Grampian Highlands and Islands at Stonehaven in respect of the following charge:
"on 18 February 2006 at Slug Road, Stonehaven, you ANDREW JAMES NELSON did commit an offence of public indecency in that you did remove your clothing, expose your genitals, and gyrate against a hand rail".
[2] The Sheriff fined him and also placed him on the Sexual Offenders Register in terms of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 for the following reasons:
"On the basis of the offence as described, I identified a significant sexual aspect to the appellant's behaviour. It appeared to me that, in so far as the appellant removed his lower clothing and exposed his genitalia, then he only behaved in that way because of the sexual aspect of his behaviour. It was that sexualised behaviour that made his behaviour noteworthy, that drew attention towards him. He could have just dropped his trousers - consistent with horse play - but he went that bit further and dropped his pants. He then gyrated - an act designed, one could reasonably infer - to draw attention to the hanging genitalia. I took the view that the 'reasonable man', watching such behaviour, would have particular regard to the appellant exposing his genitals - that it would be that aspect of the behaviour which would render the appellant's behaviour more noteworthy than it would otherwise have been. I thought that any one observing such behaviour would identify in it a significant sexual aspect.
The appellant's behaviour could, I think, be contrasted with that of a man charged with committing the offence of public indecency by urinating in a public place. The exposing of his genitalia in that context may well be an offence, but the circumstances may suggest no sexual aspect whatsoever".
The appellant appeals to this Court only in respect of having been placed on the Sexual Offenders Register.
[3] It seems to be clear that the sheriff As the sheriff has stated he proceeded upon the basis that he required to consider the issue raised...
To continue reading
Request your trial