Risca teacher 'relieved' as indecency ordeal ends (From South Wales Argus)
Get involved: Send your photos, video, news & views by texting ARGUS NEWS to 80360 or email
us
Risca teacher 'relieved' as indecency ordeal ends
10:10am Friday 22nd February 2013 in News
A TEACHER cleared in court of committing an indecent act in a cinema said he was relieved the ordeal was all over.
He thanked the hundreds of parents and pupils who have supported him after a district judge found him not guilty of committing an act of outraging public decency.
Nigel Blunt, 55, of Crescent Road, Risca, had been accused of touching himself inappropriately at Newport’s Cineworld on November 8 last year by a mother and her young daughter.
But, at Cwmbran Magistrates’ Court yesterday, District Judge Richard Williams said they had misinterpreted “something innocent”
in pointing the finger of blame. A trial started earlier this month and the District Judge took the unusual step of visiting the cinema yesterday morning.
He sat where the mother and daughter had been sitting, with Mr Blunt taking the same seat he was in on November 8.
The case then resumed at Cwmbran Magistrates’ Court, where the district judge said he believed the complainants were sincere in what they alleged. However, he added: “They believe what they are saying is true, but this isn’t the same as it being correct.”
After the trial began earlier this month, hundreds of people took to social networking site Facebook, praising Mr Blunt’s teaching skills and pouring scorn on the allegations.
Mr Blunt said yesterday: “The judge said it all, I am just relieved. I am extremely grateful to everyone who joined the support campaign and this brings closure to it.”
On November 8 last year, Mr Blunt entered the cinema to watch The Sapphires – a film about an all-girl Aboriginal singing group starring Chris O’Dowd.
The mother and daughter had been the only ones in the cinema apart from Mr Blunt and had been sat four rows behind him.
Defence solicitor Jonathan Holmes said the layout of the cinema meant the pair would have been unable to see anything but the back of Mr Blunt’s head and they had mistaken his movements while he scratched his chest.
District Judge Williams said: “They went to see a film they thought was a girlie film.
When a man walked in, they were instantly wary, the daughter frightened. That instant impression clouded what came next.”
He said from visiting the cinema and sitting where they were it would have been very difficult from them to have seen much of Mr Blunt’s body, especially in dim light.
He added: “Fromtheir sense of apprehension and anxiety that a man had walked in, this affected their interpretation of his movements. I am anything but sure they could see and something innocent was misinterpreted.”
Comments(8)
Katie Re-Registered
says...
12:54pm Fri 22 Feb 13
When a man walked in, they were instantly wary, the daughter frightened. That instant impression clouded what came next.”"
Tbh...the judge's verdict on this case does not really seem to bring 'closure' on it. I must admit that I find the mindset of the mother and daughter, and a court of law's seemingly over-readiness to accept that mindset as somehow normal quite bizarre.
This case leaves more questions than answers.
Why on earth is this particular girl so terrified of men? It begs the question as to what a. has either happened to her in the past to make her feel this way; or b. what has been taught to her and by whom to make her so frightened at the sight of a male?
Until these issues are addressed - possibly through psychiatric assistance - I can only see this issue cropping up again and again. Both the daughter - and her mother - are going to have to come to terms with the fact that we don't live in a gender-segregated society and that as the daughter grows up there are likely to be a lot more 'challenging' issues cropping up in relation to the opposite sex than to be 'exposed' to the sight of a man walking into a cinema.
As for Mr. Blunt, this must have been an horrendous ordeal for him and he must be so relieved that it's over. I'm hoping that the mother and daughter understand the impact that their allegations had upon him and their gravity.
One wonders though, as to what would have been the outcome if Mr Blunt had - like many men accused of such crimes - not had behind him the weight of popular support and testimony to his good character from the evidence supplied by hundreds of people who knew him?
How many other innocent guys have ended up in prison in this way and on the sex offenders' register for no other reason than someone felt 'creeped out' by them?
Chunkmeister
says...
7:24pm Fri 22 Feb 13
Society will otherwise degrade into one where these spurious allegations will increase in number, because accusers will make allegations without fear of being named, or discovered as serial accusers.
What is the chance that this woman hasn't made similar false accusations in the past? Yet, nobody knows. Nobody will be able to Google this woman's name, and find who else she's alleged to have committed crimes. Unfortunately, Mr Blunt's name is now forever in the internet archive of the Argus, and other sites, for something he didn't do. Sad.
Kane gwent
says...
10:35pm Fri 22 Feb 13
shelts
says...
12:52am Sat 23 Feb 13
It seems to me that the judge has actually done the police's job for them and had they actually properly investigated the claims would not have proceeded with the case.
Unfortunately the reputation of an innocent man has been sullied due to unfounded allegations that were clearly not properly investigated in the first place
Dai Rear
says...
8:51am Sat 23 Feb 13
shelts wrote:This is correct. In particular why the charge of outraging public decency? Basically if CPS had believed the defendant had exposed himself with the appropriate intention they should have charged under the 2003 Act. We know he wouldn't have been visible in that respect and a 2003 Act charge couldn't have succeeded . They should have established that months ago and binned it.Why didn't they? An explanation should be given by Keir Starmer.
One has to question the role of both Gwent Police and the Crown Prosecution Service in pursuing this case to court.
It seems to me that the judge has actually done the police's job for them and had they actually properly investigated the claims would not have proceeded with the case.
Unfortunately the reputation of an innocent man has been sullied due to unfounded allegations that were clearly not properly investigated in the first place
Dai Rear
says...
10:00am Sat 23 Feb 13
rlewis
says...
9:39am Sun 24 Feb 13
UpsetResident says...
10:34am Fri 22 Feb 13
Perhaps we should all know her name, occupation and the street she lives on?
I think its important to name and shame convicted deviants, but in too many cases now, women are crying fowl where no wrong-doing has taken place, the men in question get publicly humiliated and vilified only to be found innocent.
but mud sticks.