Watt v Annan
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 16 June 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 17. |
| Date | 16 June 1978 |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
JC
L. J.-G. Emslie, Lords Cameron, Johnston.
Crime—Shamelessly indecent conduct—Relevancy of complaint—Whether constituted by the showing of an obscene film to a number of persons in private.
The appellant was charged on a complaint alleging that he had conducted himself in a shamelessly indecent manner and had exhibited to a number of persons a film of an obscene or indecent nature which was liable to create depraved, inordinate and lustful desires in those watching the film and to corrupt the morals of the lieges. The relevancy of the complaint was challenged before the Sheriff who repelled the plea, "reserving further argument upon relevance after evidence." The evidence disclosed that the film was shown behind locked doors in the public lounge of public licensed premises to about 25 adult men who were members of a social club. The appellant was convicted.
Held (1) It was not essential to the relevancy of a charge of shamelessly indecent conduct that it must be libelled that the conduct in question occurred in a public place or was a matter of public exhibition. (2) As membership of the club was based on no special qualification nor subject to a period of application or probation, there was nothing to negative the idea that any person could be enrolled in the club and thereby be permitted to view the film. Accordingly the circumstances in which the film was shown were consistent with affront to public decency or morals. (3) As the appellant's conduct was intentionally directed towards whoever could avail himself of the opportunities to be present and was conduct which the Sheriff was entitled to find was calculated or liable to deprave or to corrupt in light of the admittedly obscene nature of the film, the Sheriff was entitled to convict and appeal refused.
David Cuthbertson watt was charged on a Summary Complaint that on 2nd October 1976 at the Grapes Hotel, East Calder, he conducted himself in a shamelessly indecent manner and exhibited or caused to be exhibited to a number of persons a film of an obscene or indecent nature which was liable to create depraved, inordinate and lustful desires in those watching it and to corrupt the morals of the lieges.
The complaint was first called on 18th January 1977 when the relevancy of the complaint was challenged. On 3rd February 1977 argument and submissions were heard and on 8th February 1977 the complaint was held competent and relevant for proof. The appellant pled not guilty and after trial on 16th September 1977 he was convicted as libelled and fined £100. The Sheriff (Hook) stated a case for the opinion of the High Court of Justiciary at the request of the appellant.
The stated case set forth that the following facts were proved or admitted:— (1) The premises libelled are public licensed premises. (2) On Saturday 2nd October 1976 at about 9.15 p.m. two police witnesses sought entry to the public lounge bar situated upstairs on the premises. (3) The door was locked against entry and they heard laughter inside. (4) They declared they were police and requested entry. (5) After brief delay the door was unlocked and they entered. (6) There were about 25 adult men present, an open bar and a barman, and drink was being consumed from the bar. (7) The appellant stood beside a film projector which had been switched off when the police made their presence known and into it the film libelled was loaded and partly run. (8) There was electric cable for operating the projector and a screen, labels produced. (9) The appellant admitted being supplier and owner of the said film and labels and others. (10) He was projecting and exhibiting the film for the others present to see and stopped the film when the police requested entry. (11) The film had been partly projected and exhibited the episodes libelled. (12) It commenced, "Private de Luxe present the Initiation Ceremony." (13) Fully run it lasted about 20 minutes. (14) It consisted solely of a number of naked men and women actively engaged in the episodes libelled and others. (15) The film as a whole and the episodes libelled were obscene and indecent and shameless. (16) They were of a nature and degree liable to deprave and corrupt as libelled. (17) The appellant and others present were members of the Grapes Social Club. (18) The printed rules are a production for the defence. (19) They provide for a committee, a subscription, an annual meeting, an object, conduct and a club championship. (20) Rule 2 is in the terms: "The object of the club is to create a sporting atmosphere among the members, and at future dates provide bus runs and any other activity for the benefit of members." (21) The chairman of the club was present. (22) The door to the lounge bar was locked by him and other members to keep the public out during the showing of the film libelled, and also to keep non-subscribing members out. (23) Before the film libelled, the appellant projected a film of a club outing in a steamer down the Clyde. (24) There had been some previous notice by members of the club and others that a blue film (sic) was to be shown...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Webster v Dominick
...(Watt v Annanoverruled) (para 46); and case remitted to the sheriff court. McLaughlan v BoydSC 1934 JC 19 disapproved. Watt v AnnanSC 1978 JC 84 overruled. Allan Dominick was charged on a summary complaint in the sheriffdom of North Strathclyde at Dunoon at the instance of David Webster, Pr......
-
George Clark+james Smith+liam Fagan V. Her Majesty's Advocate+procurator Fiscal, Airdrie
...charges of lewd, libidinous and indecent conduct and indecent assault. As the Lord Justice Clerk points out, it is not until Watt v Annan 1978 J.C. 84; 1978 S.L.T. 198 that one finds the first reported instance of an express charge of "shamelessly indecent conduct". [12] As the Lord Justice......
-
Procurator Fiscal, Dunoon V. Allan Dominick
...it became apparent that the questions raised by the minute might require reconsideration of the decision of this court in Watt v Annan (1978 JC 84). The case has therefore been remitted to five judges. [3]Watt v Annan is a decision on shameless indecency that has stood for 25 years. It has ......
-
Sneddon v HM Advocate
...517 Moorov v HM AdvocateSC 1930 JC 68; 1930 SLT 596 Robertson v HM AdvocateSCUNK 1998 JC 213; 1998 SLT 1352; 1998 SCCR 390 Watt v AnnanSC 1978 JC 84; 1978 SLT 198 Webster v DominickUNK 2005 1 JC 65; 2003 SLT 975; 2003 SCCR 525 The cause came before the High Court of Justiciary, comprising L......