A Peel man who was caught using a mobile phone under a changing cubicle at the Western Swimming Pool has been put on probation for three years.

Stephen Matthew James Bell, formerly of Mourne View, Peel, but now of Tromode House, admitted an offence of provoking behaviour after a woman snatched his phone when she spotted it. He was also ordered to pay the woman £500 in compensation.

High Bailiff Jayne Hughes warned the 34-year-old that a new Sexual Offences Bill before Tynwald would most likely result in this type of offence being charged differently in the future.

Mrs Hughes told Bell that the provoking behaviour offence is unique to the island in that it currently often covers sexual type behaviour. In the UK this sort of offending is covered by charges such as voyeurism and upskirting.

The maximum sentence for provoking behaviour is six months’ custody and the High Bailiff said that, after credit for his guilty plea, this would have resulted in a 16-week sentence if she decided upon a custodial sentence. But she said this would have allowed little time for probation to work with Bell and carry out psychological assessments.

We previously reported that on November 1, a woman and her two-year-old daughter were in a changing cubicle in the parent and child changing room area at the pool.

The woman said she had removed her child’s costume and was drying her hair with a towel which reached the floor.

She said she then noticed the bottom of the towel lift up and she quickly pulled her daughter away.

The woman saw a hand coming from the next cubicle holding a mobile phone with the screen facing up and a red light on suggesting it was on record. She grabbed the phone and then reported the matter.

Bell was identified as the owner of the phone from personal details held in it and was later arrested. He was interviewed but remained silent throughout.

Cubicle

In court, Bell’s advocate, Ian Kermode, entered a basis of plea on behalf of his client, which was accepted by the prosecution, in which Bell accepted that he was sexually interested in the adult but said he had no interest in children.

Prosecutor Ms Carroon said that it was accepted the phone had not been recording as no video or images were found.

Defence advocate Ian Kermode said: ’The real issue is why did Mr Bell put the phone under the cubicle.

’At best, and giving him the benefit of the doubt, he says he doesn’t know.

’At worst this was audacious voyeurism.

’Our position is that it was linked to a clinical psychological disorder rather than sexual pleasure. ’

He added: ’In the months prior Mr Bell said he had been feeling very depressed about a number of issues and he would say he was not thinking straight. His electronic devices were interrogated and there were no further charges.’

Mr Kermode asked the court to take into account the fact that the phone was not recording, his client’s guilty plea, the fact he has no previous convictions, his willingness to work with relevant professionals, and a recommendation from probation that work be carried out with mental health services to get to the bottom of why the offence occurred.

Bell was also ordered to pay £125 costs.