Mary Whitehouse Gets Director Sent For Trial (Press, 2 July 1981)
This is a Generative AI summary of this newspaper article. It may contain errors or omissions. Please note that the language in the summary is reflective of the original article and the societal attitudes of the time in which it was written.
Summary: Mary Whitehouse Gets Director Sent For Trial (Press, 2 July 1981)
On 2 July 1981, Michael Bogdanov, a prominent English theatrical director, was ordered to stand trial at the Old Bailey Central Criminal Court. He faces charges of procuring an act of gross indecency by staging a controversial scene depicting homosexual rape in a National Theatre production titled "The Romans in Britain." After a two-day hearing, Magistrate Kenneth Harrington noted the existence of evidence warranting a jury trial, describing the case as one of public significance despite being a relatively mundane offence. The prosecution stems from the Sexual Offences Act, which is typically applied to cases involving homosexual behaviour in public places such as lavatories and parks. The contested scene occurs during the Roman invasion of Britain and displays an attempted rape of a British man by three Roman soldiers. The case was initiated by Mary Whitehouse, a leading anti-pornography campaigner who undertook a private prosecution after her request to bring action under the 1968 Theatres Act was denied. This Act abolished stage censorship, and Parliament had intended for it to prevent frivolous prosecutions from irate individuals or groups. Defence lawyers argued that Whitehouse's actions were an attempt to circumvent the protections provided by the Theatres Act. Following the hearing, Whitehouse expressed her justification for pursuing the prosecution, stating that allowing such a play to proceed unchallenged could have had a significant negative impact on the media and society. In support of Bogdanov, the actors' union Equity expressed its strong opposition to the criminal proceedings that could suppress artistic expression. A spokesman for the union stated that they believe the stifling of artistic freedom should be actively resisted. As the trial approaches, debates about artistic licence, the limits of decency in theatre, and the implications of this prosecution for freedom of expression are at the forefront of public discourse.
Important Information
The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact
The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand