'Slurry pervert' threatens to kill farmer

'Slurry pervert' threatens to kill farmer

4
SHARE

Truscott, DavidWell when we saw the headline ‘Camborne man with slurry fetish back in court over threats to kill farmer’ we couldn’t resist.

David Truscott, aged 43, was found naked at Woodbury House Farm, covered in mud and slurry and surrounded by tissues. He has reportedly been caught numerous times
sexually pleasuring himself, naked, whilst surrounded by slurry.

He was subject to a restraining order imposed after a ‘campaign of harrassment’ – lasting at least six years – against the family who own the farm. He had breached the order twice, by going onto the farm and rolling naked in the slurry. He was imprisoned for both breaches.

The family subsequently cleared the slurry from the farm in an attempt to stop Mr Truscott.

So what next for Truscott? Well he has most recently pleaded to making a threat to kill the farmer and ‘threatening to damage’ the farm (it is unclear which offence has been charged).

The news story can be accessed here.

What did the court say?

Well Mr Truscott has not yet been sentenced. The Judge said:

“His conduct is bizarre and raises the question of whether he is a dangerous offender. I would like to see a psychiatric report that addresses dangerousness.”

I have read the letter from the multi agency protection coordinator and it is clear there needs to be a psychiatric report, at least one, if not two.

Comment

The statement by the judge indicates that Mr Truscott may finally receive the help that he quite clearly needs. A disposal under the Mental Health Act 1983 involves detention in a secure hospital and treatment for any mental illness which has been diagnosed.

In 2011, when Mr Truscott was before the courts for offences in relation to his delictation for
pleasuring himself whilst surrounded by slurry. His brother, speaking to a local newspaper, called for the courts to help Mr Truscott, instead of sending him to custody.

He said: “This is the fourth time he has been caught and when he is released from prison he will probably do it again. The courts need to wake up and give him the help he needs.”

A finding that Mr Truscott is dangerous means that the judge must imposed a special type of sentence. This will be an EDS Extended Determinate Sentence, which comprises of a custodial sentence and then an extended licence period. The licence period is designed to protect the public from serious harm caused by the defendant.

A disposal under the Mental Health Act would, it appears, be a far better outcome, as Mr Truscott would be able to receive treatment and medication if necessary, and to properly address the causes for his offending. Instead of imprisoning him, and releasing him without really attempting to understand why Mr Truscott continues to act as he does.

We’ll keep an eye out for reports of the sentence.

4 COMMENTS

  1. Sexual orientations aren’t mental illnesses, you bigot. They are protected characteristics. In a modern, free and equal society, this man cannot be punished differently from how any other offender would be, for the mundane offences that he has most recently admitted, merely because he happens to have this or that sexual orientation. Not even if the book of Leviticus itself takes a dim view of practices enjoyed by those with his sexual orientation.

    The mad community doesn’t want Mr Truscott lumped together with us. You of the sane community can keep him. He’s yours, not ours.

    Try re-addressing him to the LGBTQ community. They’ll have to sign for the package, because, whatever else he may be, this man is undeniably *queer*. He is queer enough to be more-or-less unique, as far as I know. If there was a Mud Pride March, he’d likely be the only person marching.

    • John, you misunderstand. I did not say that sexual orientations are mental illnesses, nor did I say that Mr Truscott was or is suffering from a mental illness.

      The Judge has requested reports on Mr Truscott to help the judge assess dangerousness. That will include an assessment of his mental health. That will obviously impact on which is the most appropriate disposal-a determinate sentence, an EDS sentence or a disposal under the Mental Health Act.

      Mr Truscott-like all offenders-should be treated as an individual. Two offenders committing the same burglary do not necessarily require the same treatment. To treat Mr Truscott the same as any other, as you suggest, doesn’t help him, the farmer, nor the public who pick up the bill when he reoffends.

      I pass no comment or judgement on Mr Truscott’s actions, save that they transgress the law and that he needs help, as many offenders do.

  2. I am reminded of the gentleman who was awaiting sentencing for benefit fraud. When his previous were read out they included a conviction for the [i]attempted[/i] buggery of a chicken.

    How it came about that it was a mere attempt, i.e. actions more than merely preparatory, was not revealed.

LEAVE A REPLY