January 19, 2012

The right to bare arms (and butts)

Canadian Brian Coldin, a naturist in Bracebridge, Ontario, got into a little trouble for showing off his goods in all the wrong places around town. In one instance, he walked naked through a doughnut shop's drive-through hoping to place an order.

Coldin’s lawyer failed to convince the court that his client was not really naked because he had been wearing sandals. The lawyer added that public nudity was protected by freedom of expression laws, making the charges unconstitutional.

The judge didn't quite agree. Justice Jon-Jo Douglas decided that sandals were not enough to protect Coldin in this case, stating that a person's level of dress depended, in part, on one's location and how it would be received by others in the area.

"Defendant Coldin not only chooses to go unclothed, but clearly chooses to do so in places and in a manner that more or less ensures he will be confronting the clothed," Douglas said in his ruling.

As for Coldin's personal right to express himself through his clothing, or lack there-of, Justice Douglas decided that in this case Coldin's nudity was not an act of personal expression, and therefore was not protected 'speech.'

“It’s sad for Mr Coldin because he really believes in what he was fighting for,” said Stéphane Deschênes, from the Federation of Canadian Naturists. “Unfortunately, what he was trying to do was a little too far and too much. I think he was right, but I think as naturists we recognize that most of society has issues with their bodies. It’s wrong and odd, but I think we have to convince them, not force them, to accept it."

Coldin was sentenced to two years probation and fined a total of $3,000 on four counts of public nudity.

He may appeal the decision, but may want to reconsider the crotchless suit next time he appears before a judge.

Ontario judge upholds public nudity law [xtra]

Naturist fights for right to remain naked in landmark challenge to nudity laws [The National Post]

| LINK

xxx