Member's opinion sought on this rather odd legal case

[CelticMuscle]

October 2006
A man has been ordered by a judge not to feel people's muscles or ask them to do exercises in public. Akinwale Arobieke, 45, from Liverpool, was also banned from measuring the size of muscles, under the order requested by Merseyside Police.

Arobieke, who is known in the area as Purple Aki, is out of jail on licence after a sentence imposed in 2003 for 15 counts of harassment. He pursued young people with requests such as asking to feel their muscles. Deputy District Judge Aled Jones granted the order to coincide with Arobieke's release on Thursday.

Merseyside Police applied to Liverpool Magistrates' Court for a Sexual Offences Prevention Order against Arobieke - despite the fact he has not been convicted of a sex crime.

A spokeswoman for Merseyside Police confirmed an interim order had been granted until 23 November. Under the terms of the order Arobieke cannot touch, feel or measure muscles or ask people to do squat exercises in public. Neither can he approach or do paid or voluntary work with any young person under 18. He is also banned from St Helens, Warrington or Widnes without the permission of either the chief constable of Merseyside or the chief constable of Cheshire. And he cannot loiter near educational establishments, gyms or sports clubs.

February 2007
A 46-year-old Liverpool man who was banned from feeling people's muscles has had the decision overturned. Akinwale Arobieke, of Devonshire Road, Toxteth, was given the order in October but judges at Liverpool Crown Court have since branded it "draconian". Police applied for the order when Mr Arobieke was let out on licence after being jailed for six years in 2003 on 15 counts of harassment. The charges related to him asking young people if he could touch their muscles. He also requested to measure them and asked them to perform squats.

Mr Arobieke successfully appealed against the order, with prosecution lawyers unable to prove his behaviour was sexually motivated or had caused serious psychological harm to his victims. Under the terms of the order Mr Arobieke was also not allowed to approach or do paid or voluntary work with any young person under 18. He was also banned from St Helens, Warrington or Widnes without the permission of either the chief constable of Merseyside or the chief constable of Cheshire. He could also not loiter near educational establishments, gyms or sports clubs.

Judge Bruce Macmillan, at Liverpool Crown Court, said: "No evidence has been put before us to prove that such draconian measures are necessary to protect the public from serious sexual harm." A legal technicality means a second order of a similar nature against Mr Arobieke - who is known locally as Purple Aki - is still in force. However, it is expected to be lifted in light of the judges' ruling.

July 2008
A man banned from squeezing people's muscles and asking them to do squat thrusts has launched an appeal to overturn the court order. Akinwale Arobieke, 46, known as Purple Aki in his home city of Liverpool, was jailed for six years in 2003 for 16 counts of harassment. When he was released in 2006, he was given a Sexual Offences Prevention Order by magistrates.

He is challenging the order at a civil court hearing at Liverpool Crown Court.
Mr Arobieke has been known to police for years because of what he admits was an "unusual interest in muscles" but has never been convicted of a sex assault. He believes the magistrates made the order illegally and its terms were too punitive.

Kendrick Horne, on behalf of Merseyside Police, told the court Mr Arobieke kept what he described as a "stalker's manual" containing details of young men he became fascinated with. He said during a search of his house, police had found "copious hand-written notes in relation to other young males around the country including body part measurements and an address book (referred to as the 'stalker's manual') with an index of contact numbers including previous and ongoing victims, electoral roll numbers and victims' personal details."

Mr Horne said: "The appellant would repeatedly approach boys and young men who did weight training or played rugby. "Before some encounters, the appellant would do research into his victim, confronting them with such details as their father's car registration number or sibling's place of education.

"Then he would take them, often by car, to secluded locations. There he would feel their muscles, make them do squat thrusts and jump on their backs."

The court heard from a bodybuilding champion who said Mr Arobieke felt and prodded his muscles over three years. He said the attention culminated in 1996 when on holiday in Tenerife, Mr Arobieke stabbed him, for which he needed hospital treatment. Mr Arobieke's barrister Rob Wynn-Jones denied the accusations, saying they were prompted by a fall-out the bodybuilder had with Mr Arobieke's brother.

He said: "You knew his reputation as Purple Aki and the stories that were going around." Such is his reputation as Purple Aki that at last weekend's Glastonbury festival a huge purple flag could be seen featuring Arobieke's police mug shot and a defamatory allegation. Mr Wynn-Jones said: "He became a local celebrity, infamous among younger members of the community."

April 2009
A 47-year-old man broke a ban on him approaching young men and touching their muscles, a court has heard. Akinwale Arobieke, of Toxteth, Liverpool - known as "Purple Aki" - was jailed in 2003 for harassment. Liverpool Crown Court heard Mr Arobieke asked a 17-year-old to show him his biceps - after a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (Sopo) was imposed. Mr Arobieke denies approaching the boy and breaching the Sopo in June last year, two months after it was made.

The court heard Mr Arobieke had a "predilection" for approaching young men and touching or feeling their muscles. His reputation had spread across north-west England and was considered by many to be an urban myth, the jury heard. The prosecution said the Sopo was imposed in April last year and banned him from approaching males under the age of 18, touching their muscles and asking them to squat.

Trevor Parry Jones, prosecuting, said two months later Mr Arobieke approached a 17-year-old in the street in Birkenhead and asked to see his biceps. When the teenager realised it was "Purple Aki", he ran away "very frightened and very shaken", Mr Parry Jones said. Speaking from behind a curtain, the teenager said: "As I turned a corner I heard a sound behind me so I turned around and he was there. "He said he had noticed me around the area and asked me had I been working out. "He asked me how much I could bench (press)."

The boy told the court that Mr Arobieke then pointed to his arms and asked to see the youngster's biceps. The boy said: "As soon as I heard that I realised who it was. I backed away and told him I had to go. "I felt sick and walked away as fast as I could. I went to a friend's house and looked back but he had gone." The following month the youngster picked out Mr Arobieke in a video identity parade organised by police.

Mark Barlow, defending, told the jury that Mr Arobieke had once been convicted of the manslaughter of Gary Kelly, a distant relative of the victim, but the conviction was later quashed by the Court of Appeal. Cross-examining the teenager, Mr Barlow said: "Your allegation is a false one, borne out of connection between Gary Kelly and your family and an opportunity to get back at Mr Arobieke."

The trial continues.

[TheMM]

Wow, hmm...

He certainly has a muscle fetish, that's for sure. Though unlike most of us, it may have gotten to him a bit more than many of us would let it get to.

I really can't say anything about him, since the report doesn't really say much more than the court cases and the immediate stories around them. Stalker? Perhaps. A mental problem (it's possible)? Perhaps. Or has his muscle fetish simply gone beyond what even we might do? Perhaps.

That's really all I got.

[RPM]

Eh, I wouldn't mind being felt up. I'd probably enjoy the attention.

Anyway, if he's that into it, I'm surprised he hasn't arranged legit deals. There's guys who do those feel sessions and all.

It does seem like he's a bit deprived though. He really should get some of his own muscles, or this'll just go on forever.

[Gene]

He's a preditor, he's a stalker, he's mentally sick and should be locked away. The fetish has turned into a crime. In the US I'm sure the stalking laws would take care of him.

[Mad Dog]

What a creep.

[BlueMM]

Lots of sick and twisted people in this world. Bizarre.

[Mdlftr]

He apparently has prior convictions for manslaughter, and he did serve a six year prison term ending in 2003 for stalking.

Sounds like a recidivist.

I wonder if Britain has a "three strikes and you're out" policy.

[Username3]

I can't say that he's a bad guy, he just needs to control himself a little better.
Perhaps he should get a computer?

[CelticMuscle]

Originally Posted by Mdlftr

I wonder if Britain has a "three strikes and you're out" policy.

The UK does not have a "three strikes" policy. It was considered but rejected on the grounds that it would have been deemed illegal under the Human Rights Act 1997 (adopted by the Labour government as part of it's "ethical foreign policy")

[droz]

OK I find myself a bit contradictory/conflicted here and I'm sure that the victims in these cases feel similar to the way I do.

I am a straight guy living in San Francisco, I was born and raised here. I'm a bodybuilder, by no means pro level, but I am near heavyweight size and well defined, not ripped.

I am not a major homophobe, I have gay friends and coworkers. Gay men, lebians, trans-sexual/gender people are common here.

I do however find it very bothersome/offensive when a gay man approaches me and tries to talk/hit on me assuming I'm gay also. For the life of me I can't understand why gay men hit on me. I do not dress "gay" (shoot me for stereotyping) nor do I have gay mannerisms, posture, voice, etc (shoot me again for stereotyping). I still seems to get talked up quite a bit by gay guys...I find it flattering but I have to politely tell them I'm not gay or even curious. There are some gay guys out there that try to be extremely persuasive and want to "show me what I'm missing".

I've had guys like this one in Liverpool come up and very indecently run their hand over my back or arms and feeling my muscles. This can happen on the streetcar, on the street, in a club or bar. Even just some guys looking at me with a certain look really annoys me. What really bothers me the most is that they assume I'm gay or at the very least bisexual, simply on the premise that I am very muscular. I will admit that there is a large number of gay men at my gym, and oddly enough none of them have ever touched me or hit on me in appropriately. Nor I have noticed any of the guys in the gym look at me in an inappropriate way

Now, if it was a woman to touch, feel or look at in the same way. It wouldn't bother me. A woman could run her hand over my bicep and give it a squeeze just like a guy could and I could tell if it was a woman or not and I wouldn't think twice about pulling away from her.

I will agree with another person who said the guy in Liverpool is sick....he is and he needs help. The fact that there have been so many victims from this guy makes it clear that this guy has a problem. He may or may not be gay, that is not the issue here. The issue is the appropriate place, time and people in which to touch in certain ways or watch them do certain things.

I think that whether the person touching is gay or not...they should at least confirm with the person they are touching is ok with it before they they do it. And take no for an answer if that's what they get.

[Slevin]

There was no mention of any mental health pleas or evaluations. He definitely needs one.

I think "creepy" best describes his behavior but I think it is important to note that he is not stalking 8 year olds. Any post pubescent person should have reasonable control that they can avoid this man's advances and most certianly prevent him from touching them. Its interesting in the case of the bodybuilder that he actually found someone to feed into his behavior. I would be interested to know how someone with his reputation could accomplish that.

His behavior more than qualifies as behavior and should be left up to a mental health professional, not a prison warden.

I suppose it is slightly ironic that he would be sent to prison with other large men.

[CelticMuscle]

Originally Posted by Slevin

I suppose it is slightly ironic that he would be sent to prison with other large men.

A recent study of UK prisoners found that 67% of them are obese / overweight (this compares with US prisoners where a figure of 23% has been published in the past)

[Mdlftr]

For those of you who think this should be a mental health issue, rather than a legal one:

Record excerpt July 2008:
Kendrick Horne, on behalf of Merseyside Police, told the court Mr Arobieke kept what he described as a "stalker's manual" containing details of young men he became fascinated with. He said during a search of his house, police had found "copious hand-written notes in relation to other young males around the country including body part measurements and an address book (referred to as the 'stalker's manual') with an index of contact numbers including previous and ongoing victims, electoral roll numbers and victims' personal details."
Mr Horne said: "The appellant would repeatedly approach boys and young men who did weight training or played rugby. "Before some encounters, the appellant would do research into his victim, confronting them with such details as their father's car registration number or sibling's place of education."


The court heard from a bodybuilding champion who said Mr Arobieke felt and prodded his muscles over three years. He said the attention culminated in 1996 when on holiday in Tenerife, Mr Arobieke stabbed him, for which he needed hospital treatment. Mr Arobieke's barrister Rob Wynn-Jones denied the accusations, saying they were prompted by a fall-out the bodybuilder had with Mr Arobieke's brother.


April 2009 Record excerpt:

The boy told the court that Mr Arobieke then pointed to his arms and asked to see the youngster's biceps. The boy said: "As soon as I heard that I realised who it was. I backed away and told him I had to go. "I felt sick and walked away as fast as I could. I went to a friend's house and looked back but he had gone." The following month the youngster picked out Mr Arobieke in a video identity parade organised by police.

Mark Barlow, defending, told the jury that Mr Arobieke had once been convicted of the manslaughter of Gary Kelly, a distant relative of the victim, but the conviction was later quashed by the Court of Appeal. Cross-examining the teenager, Mr Barlow said: "Your allegation is a false one, borne out of connection between Gary Kelly and your family and an opportunity to get back at Mr Arobieke."

The trial continues.

Commentary

This defendant has been convicted of assault and manslaugter, as well as faced with accusations of stalking. NO matter what his "mental health issues" are, he is a clear danger to the community. He should be locked up.

Sexual orientation, either that of the defendant or of the alleged victims has NOTHING to do with this. This man is a violent criminal. The fact that he targets bodybuilders does not change the underlying crimes. There is nothing remotely sexy or sexual or provocative about what this guy is doing. He is committing serial assault on a series of victims who have not asked or encouraged his behavior. Before anyone says, "oh, as a bodybuilder, you ask for/welcome/want the attention" keep in mind that that is eXACTLY like saying, "oh, that Matthew Shepherd - he was asking for it- he deserved to be beaten up and left to die." Or, "That woman is just a slut, wearing that tight, short skirt. She deserved what happened to her." WRONG!

This is a career criminal. Charge him, convict him and lock him up!

End of story.

Mdlftr

[Mad Dog]

Actually the article mentioned the manslaughter conviction was overturned. And everything else you pointed out could very well be signs of mental illness. I'm not saying he should've gotten off scot free because of it, but at the very least he should be getting in-patient treatment somewhere for this obsession.

[Mdlftr]

Originally Posted by Mad Dog

Actually the article mentioned the manslaughter conviction was overturned. And everything else you pointed out could very well be signs of mental illness. I'm not saying he should've gotten off scot free because of it, but at the very least he should be getting in-patient treatment somewhere for this obsession.

The fact that the manslaughter convicition was overturned does not address the underlying act. Someone is dead, and he was responsible. Whether or not he was convicted in court is not the point I am addressing.

{For a similar example, O.J. Simpson was found criminally "not guilty" of the deaths of his ex-wife and a man. He was found civilly liable. Difference: he owes money, but no jail time for the act. Were his acts the cause of two deaths? Yes. }

NO where does it say that this defendant is claiming diminished capacity (the "legalese" for mental illness) to any of the charges.

What I am responding to are the comments in the forum which are operating on the assumption that "if someone does something wrong repeatedly, they must be mentally ill."

I disagree.

Some people are just criminal.

[cutlerfan]

Regardless of whether he is aware that he is worrying people with his behavior he needs a psych evaluation...STAT! To remove personal bias from the case the authorities might want to consider doing psychiatric screenings on all his alleged victims if they can do so without further traumatizing them. Peace, Cutlerfan

[Mad Dog]

Originally Posted by Mdlftr

I disagree.

Your choice!

[Slevin]

We entrust our legal system to make these judgments. If he had committed to crime that it stands to reason that his conviction would not have been overturned. Thus, he is not guilty of that crime. Your basing your opinion that he is guilty based on an archetype of a predator-criminal. He has numerous convictions of continually attempting this act. One of the oldest definitions of insanity is repeating the same behavior over and over expecting a different result. In these cases, his mental illness does not absolve him of responsibility. Clearly he is not psychotic and is more than capable of foresight.

I simply suggest that his methodical obsessive behavior is characteristic of many mental illnesses and he needs a mental health evaluation. Rehabilitation strictly through the penal system is not working. His abnormal behavior (repetitive stalking) needs to be addressed by professionals and hopefully a treatment plan will prevent him from continuing this behavior. I remember that my aunt used to justify the behavior of her children by saying "boys will be boys." You are essentially saying "criminals will be criminals." That has never been enough of an explanation for me. He needs treatment not jail time.

[Mdlftr]

Originally Posted by Slevin

We entrust our legal system to make these judgments. If he had committed to crime that it stands to reason that his conviction would not have been overturned. Thus, he is not guilty of that crime.

==================

That's a pretty optimistic view of the legal system. Saying that "it stands to reason that his conviction would not have been overturned if he committed the crime" is not a valid hypothesis.

In Civil actions, a conviction may be vacated if a defendant dies before the appeal is heard. The conviction of Kenneth Lay in the Enron scandal was vacated after he (conveniently) died of a heart attack after the guilty verdict, but before he could complete an appeal. As is customary, his conviction was vacated, and the guilty verdict was wiped out. Good for his wife and family, who have a better shot at keeping all his ill-gotten gains, bad for the thousands of Enron employees who are trying to recoup their losses from his estate.

As far a criminal cases go, just look at the O.J. Simpson case previously mentioned. He was not convicted criminally of murder, mostly due to prosecutorial errors (trying on the dried bloody glove, which had shrunk since he first put it on) discredited witnesses (Mark Furman) tainted evidence (contamination of the crime scene) and a strong defense which raised issues which had nothing to do with the evidence and played on people's fears and prejudices (the "race card"; "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit")
[The totally separate fact that he was found guilty in a civil action of the two murders, and has to pay money, has no bearing on the criminal case. He is still "not guilty" of the criminal charges - lucky for him, although the entire world believes him to be a celebrity murderer who escaped punishment through the use of good lawyering. It doesn't matter what "people think". It matters what you can prove in court.]

Convictions can be overturned for all sorts of procedural errors (In the U.S., those could include the lack of a valid search warrant, which could cause the evidence necessary for conviction to be thrown out, thus making it impossible for the prosecutors to make a prima facie case. Another procedural error would be a delay in bringing charges past a statutory deadline. ) Procedural errors do not go to the merits of the underlying case. [i.e., did the defendant commit the underlying crime] They address the circumstances surrounding the format or bringing of the case.

Still, a win's a win, no matter how it happens. That just doesn't mean that "justice is done."

=============================================
" I simply suggest that his methodical obsessive behavior is characteristic of many mental illnesses and he needs a mental health evaluation. Rehabilitation strictly through the penal system is not working. His abnormal behavior (repetitive stalking) needs to be addressed by professionals and hopefully a treatment plan will prevent him from continuing this behavior. I remember that my aunt used to justify the behavior of her children by saying "boys will be boys."

You are essentially saying "criminals will be criminals." That has never been enough of an explanation for me. He needs treatment not jail time.

===================

Let me be clear here. I am NOT saying "criminals will be criminals" and this this somehow excuses his actions. I am saying, based on the facts cited in the excerpts, it appears that he is guilty of several crimes, and he should be found guilty and sentenced.

Whether or not he gets counseling or mental health treatment while he is incarcerated or out on supervised probation, is a different issue. He probably could benefit from it. That does not change the nature of his underlying offenses, which are criminal in nature.

My reason for bringing this up was because some of the comments went into the mindset of the victims, whether they "enjoyed it" or "asked for it". That is not the issue. The defendant's behavior is reprehensible. The victims are, at a minimum, being harassed by this defendant, who invades their privacy, assaults them, commits battery upon their persons (legal definition of assault: "unwelcome or unwanted attention" Battery: harmful or offensive touching] and in some cases, shoots or kills them.

The quirky or interesting thing about this case is that he choses to approach bodybuilders. Not a good course of action, one would think! Take out the bodybuilding angle, and the case becomes a garden variety assault/stalking scenario.

Mdlftr

[RPM]

LOL, "legal definitions". If those are true (how absurd), then they render the words completely harmless and nothing to even consider an issue. Then every single human alive is an assaulter and batterer. So he's a human too. Hmm, how dangerous.

You also take an optimistic view of the legal system in even defending their definition of "criminal", which really couldn't be further from the truth, at least in cases of asking stats or to feel.

If that's the cause of concern or fear, I can tell you what's far more concerning or frightening. Sports fans who know all the stats and info better than the players. Celebrity fans chasing their idols in screaming hoards and treasuring their slightest acknowledgement (not washing their hand for weeks after it was shaken, etc etc etc). Tabloid reporters who breach far more private issues of popular people, then publish it for the world to see. And on, and on. The only reason this guy's getting what those people "deserve" is the mainstream popularity of the obsession.

Anyway, that covers the stats and the conversation attempts at least. The violence episodes are more questionable, but again, I think you take an incredibly optimistic view of the legal system if you think so many of the charges made in the first place are legitimate, especially knowing those legal definitions of assault and battery. What's the legal definition of manslaughter, coughing on somebody and making them get a cold?

This is why nobody who knows even the basics of the legal system will ever take it seriously.