Naked Tim Horton's trip not harmful, lawyer argues

[crasher35]

A self-described Christian naturist arrested for passing through a Tim Horton's drive-thru in the buff returned to court Monday in Bracebridge, Ont.

Brian Coldin, was charged with three counts of being nude on public property and two counts of being nude on private property within view of the public.

The incidents, which are said to have taken place between April 2008 and May 2009, include hiking through a public park, passing through drive-thrus at both Tim Horton's and A&W and getting into an argument with a family that mistakenly visited the beach at Coldin's High Falls Resort clothing optional water park in Bracebridge, 190 kilometres north of Toronto.

Defence lawyer Clayton Ruby argued Coldin wasn't completely nude as he was — at the very least — wearing sandals. He was also on or near his own private property and never behaved in a "prurient or indecent manner," Ruby said.

"The Crown failed to produce any evidence showing that innocent, non-sexual nudity causes harm," Ruby said in his statement of facts, adding the Crown also failed to rebut expert testimony that "exposure to nudity alone does not cause harm.

"As the Crown has failed to prove the legal elements . . . beyond a reasonable doubt, Mr. Coldin must be acquitted."

Coldin will return to court on Jan. 25, when he's expected to challenge the constitutionality of Canada's nudity laws.

The judge will likely give his decision in writing at a later date.

tcohen@postmedia.com

twitter.com/tobicohen

© Copyright (c) Postmedia News


Read more: http://www.canada.com/Naked+Horton+trip+harmful+lawyer+argues/3901965/story.html#ixzz16j9nn5EW

This is pretty exciting news coming from Canada. If this man wins, it could make it legal to be nude any where! That would be amazing. Not that I live in Canada, but it gives me hope for the more prudish United States that I reside in ;)!

I really hope this man wins and gets Canada's nudity laws labeled as unconstitutional ^_^... although his lawyer's argument about him not being naked because he was wearing sandals is very weak, lol.

[Dan]

I really hope this man wins and gets Canada's nudity laws labeled as unconstitutional ^_^... although his lawyer's argument about him not being naked because he was wearing sandals is very weak, lol.

You are allowed to mix weak and strong arguments and even give contradictory arguments. The judge will decide which ones he likes or not.

[crasher35]

I really hope this man wins and gets Canada's nudity laws labeled as unconstitutional ^_^... although his lawyer's argument about him not being naked because he was wearing sandals is very weak, lol.

You are allowed to mix weak and strong arguments and even give contradictory arguments. The judge will decide which ones he likes or not.

I figured as much, but I just thought to point it out because it is one of the weakest arguments I have heard in a very long time.

[Dan]

I figured as much, but I just thought to point it out because it is one of the weakest arguments I have heard in a very long time.

Might have been tongue-in-cheek. Might have been during an argument about what is nudity. Maybe the lawyer was trying to make the other lawyer say "His genitals were visible so it's wrong!". Without context, it's hard to say what kind of argument it is.

[Jann]

Outbreak of coffee-crazed nudity sweeps Canada 

In addition to Mr Coldin's case

April 03, 2009 Workers at a Tim Hortons in New Brunswick had to do a double-double take after a drive-thru customer placed an order in the nude. Police officers were called to the coffee shop in Saint John’s north end today after reports of a naked driver. The women working at the drive-thru window were not impressed.       Honest to god it wasn't me, it was a guy.  So the women weren't impressed, hmm, April can be chilly here. 

November 24, 2010 --- The Toronto Sun reports that a 22-year-old Cambridge man was arrested at 1am Tuesday morning for using a Tim Horton’s drive-thru in the nude. The incident occurred at at Tim Hortons drive-thru in Paris, Ontario. The man now faces at least 7 charges in relation to the incident including possession of marijuana, possession of cocaine and driving while disqualified. Police pulled over the man because they suspected him of being drunk at the time.      Gosh, do you think so?

The Coldin case is interesting because the Attorney General's permission must be sought before charges can be laid under the statute dealing with nudity.  Left to their own devices police usually lay charges under provisions concerning public decency.  One gets the feeling that this case is a set piece constitutional challenge.  Let's hope for a common sense ruling.

[HelicopterBob]

Oh Tim Horton, where has your hockey stick gone...

[Dan]

Oh Tim Horton, where has your hockey stick gone...

Tim Horton died in 1974 of a car accident. Remember kids, don't drink and drive!

[HelicopterBob]

Oh Wow. I didn't know that, how sad.
S that why they are so much stricter on drinking and driving up there?

[Dan]

Oh Wow. I didn't know that, how sad.
S that why they are so much stricter on drinking and driving up there?

Actually, he was also on strong painkillers because he broke his jaw. Bad combination.

We are much stricter on drunk driving? I thought you were.

[Riot.EXE]

Outbreak of coffee-crazed nudity sweeps Canada 

In addition to Mr Coldin's case

April 03, 2009 Workers at a Tim Hortons in New Brunswick had to do a double-double take after a drive-thru customer placed an order in the nude. Police officers were called to the coffee shop in Saint John’s north end today after reports of a naked driver. The women working at the drive-thru window were not impressed.       Honest to god it wasn't me, it was a guy.  So the women weren't impressed, hmm, April can be chilly here. 

November 24, 2010 --- The Toronto Sun reports that a 22-year-old Cambridge man was arrested at 1am Tuesday morning for using a Tim Horton’s drive-thru in the nude. The incident occurred at at Tim Hortons drive-thru in Paris, Ontario. The man now faces at least 7 charges in relation to the incident including possession of marijuana, possession of cocaine and driving while disqualified. Police pulled over the man because they suspected him of being drunk at the time.      Gosh, do you think so?

The Coldin case is interesting because the Attorney General's permission must be sought before charges can be laid under the statute dealing with nudity.  Left to their own devices police usually lay charges under provisions concerning public decency.  One gets the feeling that this case is a set piece constitutional challenge.  Let's hope for a common sense ruling.

Men do it and catch a case; Women do it and end up on a flashing site!  DOUBLE STANDARD!

[Jann]

Charges against naked walker dropped

By Sara Ross, QMI Agency in Toronto Sun, Saturday, December 4, 2010

ORILLIA, Ont. - The law has tried to stop an Ontario man from walking outside naked - but failed.

"It's like total freedom. You can just feel the breeze, the sun, unless you try it you have no idea what it feels like," says the 60-year-old naturalist who frequents a recreational trail on the shores of Lake Simcoe, north of Toronto.

"Other naturists are still fearful of being in the general public on out-of-the-way trails because of the fact they think they're going to get convicted."

On Monday, the man, who requested anonymity, went to trial for a charged of an indecent act.

Two off-duty police officers witnessed him walking naked in September 2009. The charge was dismissed because the man was not doing anything harmful - such as public masturbation, luring or flashing.

"[Some members of the community] might not think it's appropriate, or they might think it's not moral, but it's not indecent in the sense that it causes anybody any harm," said the man's Toronto-lawyer Gleb Bazov.

The man was initially also charged with nudity in a public place but that charge was withdrawn earlier this year.

Bazov said the court's decision sets an important precedent.

"It is a landmark case in the sense that the law has been applied to nudists and naturists. Now there is a clear pronouncement that a naturist is not engaging in an indecent act."

But Charlene Ewanchuk, who's home backs onto the Uhthoff Trail in Severn Township, disagrees with the decision.

She told QMI Agency she has called police on the "naked man" several times.

"I find it offensive. If I catch him going by my house I'll call the cops.

"If it's so acceptable why isn't he doing it in downtown Orillia?"

Ewanchuk said she has encountered the man while walking on the trail with her children, aged 10 and 14.

"Turn your head the opposite way and just go by," Ewanchuk said she told her children. "Don't look, don't talk to him, just go by."

The township has also previously written a letter to the man "prohibiting" him from using the recreational trail while "improperly clothed."

"If the courts can't charge him, I guess he's within his (rights.) Personally, I don't think it's appropriate," said Severn Township Mayor Phil Sled.

Stephane Deschenes, director of the Federation of Canadian Naturists, says naturists are just embracing their “natural self” and shouldn't "have to fear being out in the public.

"We, as a society, have a real phobia about our own body. We are so incredibly uncomfortable that we find our own image embarrassing, shameful and offensive."

Deschenes, who also operates the Bare Oaks Family Naturist Park, says most naturists prefer to practice their lifestyle only in nudists resorts.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/weird/2010/11/20/16233256.html

Let's hear a cheer for free range naturism     

[HelicopterBob]

Oh Wow. I didn't know that, how sad.
S that why they are so much stricter on drinking and driving up there?

Actually, he was also on strong painkillers because he broke his jaw. Bad combination.

We are much stricter on drunk driving? I thought you were.

Yes really bad combo.
Well when I was working in Whistler it was pretty strict.  Here it depends on where you are at

[Dan]

We are much stricter on drunk driving? I thought you were.

Yes really bad combo.
Well when I was working in Whistler it was pretty strict.  Here it depends on where you are at
[/quote]

Canada's legislation is also per province.

It has one component which is much, much better than the US laws. It's legal for minors to drink in Canada. It's legal for minors to buy alcohol. It's legal to give alcohol to minors.

It's illegal for minors to be in a bar and it's illegal to sell alcohol to minors.

Yes, the law is asymmetric.

So it's perfectly legal for parents to give a glass of wine to their kid on Christmas. It also means that if you are a minor, you are drunk and you get into trouble, you can go to the authorities or the hospital without getting into more trouble.

Way saner.

[crasher35]

More news on Brian Coldin's battles in Canada. I'm bringing this back up because it reminds me of the article I just posted about the U.S. Supreme Court hearing the FCC case... if that passes, then it would just take someone like Brian Coldin here in the U.S. to argue that nudity is a form of expression for us to be allowed to go nude in public places.

Lawyers for an Ontario man fighting several public-nudity charges — including one for allegedly going through a burger-joint drive-thru in the buff — are expected to argue Tuesday in court that Canada's nudity laws are too broad and unconstitutional.

Brian Coldin, the owner of a clothing-optional resort in Bracebridge, Ont., is on trial on several charges stemming from incidents that occurred in 2008 and 2009, including driving through an A&W and Tim Hortons without any clothes and walking in a park and on a road wearing only his sandals.

Nader Hasan, one of Coldin's lawyers, said Monday in an interview that existing laws punish people for "innocent" acts of nudity, such as sunbathing in a backyard or changing clothes at a swimming pool.

"These laws violate freedom of expression. If you're going to limit someone's rights, you have to do it in a way that's narrowly tailored," he said. "These criminal laws are far too broad. They criminalize all kinds of harmless conduct, all kinds of innocent nudity."

While exposure to nudity may cause embarrassment or discomfort, there is no evidence that it causes any enduring, psychiatric harm, Hasan said. He said the laws should be narrowed to apply only in those instances where it can be shown that actual harm was caused.

Lawyers working in the constitutional law branch of the Ontario ministry of the attorney general declined to comment Monday through a spokesman.

But in a court filing, provincial lawyers Robert Charney and Zachary Green say the constitutional challenge should be dismissed.

"The defendant is free to practice naturism in private, on his own property or at a naturist resort," the lawyers write. "However, he is not free to be nude without lawful excuse in circumstances where members of the public have not been forewarned about his nudity, have not consented to see him nude, and must suffer a loss of their liberty to go lawfully about their business in order to avoid him."

The criminal trial, which got underway last fall, has previously heard testimony from an A&W employee, who broke down on the stand while describing how Coldin and two others drove up to the pickup window completely nude.

The worker testified that Coldin and the driver of the vehicle both pretended to reach for their wallets causing their genitals to sway back and forth.

A Tim Hortons employee testified seeing Coldin's genitals when she leaned out the window to give him change. It was her first day on the job.

In the incident in the park, Coldin was described as "strutting" across a bridge by a witness. Since that encounter, she is "apprehensive every time" she walks in the area, the court heard.

Lawyers for Coldin are expected to cite a Supreme Court of Canada ruling in 2005 that legalized commercial sex clubs — or swingers clubs — that engage in partner-swapping and orgies.

The court ruled that in order for acts to be considered "indecent," they have to result in harm that "can be objectively shown beyond a reasonable doubt to interfere with the proper functioning of society."

In a column published earlier this year, another one of Coldin's lawyers, Clayton Ruby, described his client as a naturist who "believes that being nude in nature fosters greater respect for self, for others, and for the environment.

"He believes that modern society does not respect individuals as they are, but rather imposes impossible-to-reach ideals, which causes us to be offended by our own image."



Read more: http://www.canada.com/news/accused+making+naked+trips+Hortons+challenge+nudity+laws/5048171/story.html#ixzz1RMrVricS

[sargent]

It seems risky to do something like that, considering that the outcome of the case could go either way. I'm 130% sure that the AANR would never condone doing something like that to make a statement, either, but maybe it's a good thing. If someone here and there stands out, it opens people eyes to nudism/naturism (Interesting that nudists/naturists are more or less unnoticed by the general public...), and if someone goes to court over it, then they can argue their case. It may not necessarily do a lot of good, but it can't do much harm.

I like the comment someone made about double standards, too.