Ellis Drummond was threatened with an ASBO ordering him to his trousers up - but a judge has ruled it illegal.
Prosecutors requested the anti-social behaviour order after Drummond was convicted of theft, assault and possession of drugs.
The order said that he must not engage in “threatening behaviour” or return to the college where he committed the offences. Controversially, it also banned him from “wearing trousers so low beneath the waistline that members of the public are able to see his underwear”.
However, District Judge Nicholas Leigh-Smith said that the order would break the Human Rights Act. Drummond still received the ASBO, but with the section on trousers removed.
In America, the law can be less forgiving. Cities in Louisiana and Georgia have made sagging trousers illegal. Showing your boxers there could mean a $500 fine or even six months in prison.
Should judges be able to change how people dress? Share your thoughts in the comments box below.
Current rating:
3 Stars
Raising money for charity is a really good and rewarding way to spend your holidays, but it doesn’t have to involve shaking collecting tins in people’s faces. Read on for some top tips to put the ‘fun’ into fundraising.
If you think the new wave of 3D films, TVs and videogames are exciting, imagine watching a star explode in 3D.
Comments
I totally agree with everyone who has posted so far. It's absolutely ridiculous to impose a ban on freedom of expression- which is basically what the judge did. Don't they have better things to do?
I just can't get over it! It's mad!
Fazheelah · 15-06-10
Something that is potentially harmful such as smoking is legal, yet a way of expressing yourself through the way you dress is a right that has been taken away...This is just crazy!
01-06-10
how many asbo will they end up giving out then? wil it become a farce? x
27-05-10
where is the line of wearing clothing which is to the extreme... so if i wore something dazzling at someone's eye (not intentionally but it ws bright) so will they be given ASBO? jusy for some of the bright clothing tat they are wearing? haha funny :D:D
27-05-10
It silly that this is what judges are spending their time on. there is more important thing for them to worry about. it should not have been included in his ASBO. him wearing his trouser low is not hurting anyone else.
19-05-10
Wearing jeans low is a human rights, and this kind of case is just a waste of the judiciary's time. There are more pressing things to be worrying about than the amount of underwear you shouldn't be able to see, to be completely honest.
PS. It says 'animal'. Should say 'Arsenal' though!
12-05-10
Wearing your 'trousers low' is their own indvidual style therefore it is a human right. I think it is ridiculous this was even included in his ASBO in the first place as what you wear does not neccessarily affect your behaviour, at least. Yet I can understand why they probably included this because 'sagging trousers' is clearly an inappropiate attire and frankly not very attractive at all - therefore deemed as 'anti-social'.
PS. Little observation, I like the fact the man in the picture is wearing a shirt with Arsenal written on the back! (at least I am pretty sure it is 'Arsenal' - could be animal).
12-05-10
i think that wearing low jeans is a human right and he should not have recived that asbo my point is that if you dont like it dont look.
12-05-10
Any comments?