When Is A Dirty Pervert Not A Dirty Pervert?

Well, clearly, when he’s just doing it for ‘a giggle’:

Trevor Perry, who has six previous convictions for indecent exposure, deliberately performed lunges in small running shorts outside Didcot Girls’ School so his genitals were exposed.

Case closed? Well, not so fast…

But the 52-year-old environmental consultant was cleared of exposure by magistrates as they felt it was not proven he “intended to cause alarm or distress”, as set out in the wording of the charge.

Looking at the comments, there seems to have been a bit of a battle between the mags and the CPS over this…

But their decision seems nonsensical, and when you add in the gratutitous slap in the face of refunding his fares….

The three magistrates on the bench spent an hour and 15 minutes deliberating before clearing the defendant, and then agreed to pay for his travel costs and the bill for an overnight stay in a hotel.

Would any defendant get this?

Magistrates’ chairman Roger Clarke said: “This has not been an easy decision for the three of us to come to.”

He said it was proven that Perry had exposed himself.

But he added: “You have been consistent throughout that your intent, albeit unacceptable to the average individual in this country, was purely to get a giggle or a laugh. We therefore find you not guilty.”

So, ignorance of the law is no excuse (not that this guy could plead it anyway, with his list of previous convictions) but having a laugh at the law is, at least in this court?

I’m sure that’ll be a great comfort to Paul Chambers…

Mr Clarke added: “Obviously this is a case that has caused distress, it has caused alarm, and there may be people in this court room who struggle to know how we came to this decision.”

Not just in the court, you utter buffoon…

Didcot Girls’ School headteacher Rachael Warwick said: “I do not understand how a man who has come into our community and exposed himself to three female students cannot be thought to have intended harm to our young people. The fact that no sentence was given seems to send mixed messages to schools and the community.”

Leaving aside her desire to shoehorn the word ‘community’ into the statement as many times as possible, it’s hard not to agree, isn’t it? Still, perhaps when some outraged father gives this undesirable a bloody good hiding, the mags will let him off if he says he only did it for a giggle?