News RSS Feed


The naked neighbour

9:43am Friday 4th January 2008

Comments (11)   Have your say »


A MAN who indecently exposed himself in a window of his home will not be put on the Sex Offenders' Register after magistrates gave him a conditional discharge.

Blackburn magistrates heard that Peter Thompson was twice seen by a neighbour.

And on the second occasion she was with her partner, who also saw Thompson totally naked, the magistrates were told.

Thompson, 46, of Preston Road, Longridge, pleaded not guilty to two charges of indecently exposing himself but was convicted after a trial.

He was given a conditional discharge for two years and ordered to pay £200 compensation and £400 costs.

Because the level of sentence was below a Community Order Thompson does not need to sign the Sex Offenders' Register.

Richard Prew, defending, said his client's argument at trial had been that he had not intended anyone to see what he was doing.

"The risk of him re-offending is very low and I wonder if it is right that he should be stigmatised by being put on the sex offender register," said Mr Prew.

Your Say YourTelegraph

Pete, Midlands says...
4:36pm Wed 9 Jan 08

The guy was indeed practising a lewd act but the CPS couldn't convict on that so he got done for the lesser charge of exposure, and he is NOT a naturist.
The paper has to be careful what it reports to avoid litigation.
The guy is a s*x pest and got of lightly in my opinion.

Sloppy Reporting, says...
11:30pm Mon 7 Jan 08

Thanks for the clarification - pity the journalist couldn't get it right! Do we know if the neighbours suffered "alarm and distress"? The article merely states that "Thompson was seen twice".

Jonty, Preston says...
1:45pm Mon 7 Jan 08

s66 Sexual Offences Act 2003 - intentionally exposing genitals intending to cause alarm or distress.

He tried to claim it was accidental but the court decided from the evidence that they had heard, that he was deliberately flashing his bits out of the window

Jonty, Preston says...
1:43pm Mon 7 Jan 08

He was charged with two counts of exposure, contrary to s66 Sexual Offences Act 2003 - this is where someone INTENTIONALLY exposures their genitals INTENDING TO CAUSE ALARM OR DISTRESS.

Although the man tried to claim he was naked in the house and people accidentally saw him, the court decided he was deliberatly flashing out of the window.

Sloppy Reporting, says...
7:51am Mon 7 Jan 08

As there's no such offence as "indecent exposure" does anyone know what he was actually charged with?

Skinny dip, says...
1:53pm Fri 4 Jan 08

eeewww the guy's probably a naturist

Johnny Wilk, Penzance says...
1:35pm Fri 4 Jan 08

She was so shocked, she nearly fell off the step-ladders.

BA, says...
12:18pm Fri 4 Jan 08

Probably trying to get a better view!

onlooker (in the opposite direction), England says...
11:57am Fri 4 Jan 08

What were the neighbours doing looking in Mr Thompsons windows anyways.

jk, bburn says...
10:59am Fri 4 Jan 08

"Continental people have a sex life; the English have hot-water bottles."

jk, bburn says...
10:59am Fri 4 Jan 08

"Continental people have a sex life; the English have hot-water bottles."

Your sayYourTelegraph

Register for a FREE Preston and Leyland Citizen account and you can have your say on today's news and sport by adding comments on articles we publish. The best comments may even get published in the paper.

Please register now or sign in to continue.


Sponsored Adverts By Yahoo

Local Advertisers


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Sponsored Adverts By Yahoo
Sponsored Adverts By Yahoo