1. ITV Report

A man who has to give police 24 hours notice before having sex is to go on hunger strike

York Magistrates Court Credit: PA

A father who must give police 24 hours' notice before he has sex is planning to go on hunger strike in protest at the "extreme" order.

The man - who cannot be named - had previously been cleared of rape, but was subjected to the Sexual Risk Order (SRO) after an application by North Yorkshire Police.

The single man, who is in his 40s, has accused the force of "sour grapes" after his acquittal at a retrial, having spent 14 months on remand.

Previously he admitted to having an interest in sado-masochistic sex and used to visit a Fifty Shades Of Grey-style fetish club with an ex-partner.

He denies having any criminal convictions.

The terms of the SRO, currently an interim order which the police will apply to be made permanent at a hearing in August, have a list of conditions including a requirement for him to inform police 24 hours before he has sex with a new partner.

But the man says the order condemns him to "a life alone".

I intend to commence hunger strike in protest over the SRO to which I am subject.

I protest that even though a jury found me unanimously not guilty, after nearly two years I still find myself being punished for a crime that never happened.

I protest to being subject to an order that is unlawful in almost every syllable, is unjustified and is so extreme as to be utterly unlivable.

Home Office guidelines clearly explain the types of behaviour that SROs are designed to prevent, and none of it applies in any way to me.

The law has been misapplied deliberately by North Yorkshire Police out of sour grapes over being shown to be prejudicial and incompetent in their investigation of the original complaint against me.

I have no life under this order. This order condemns me to a life alone and without work. I have seen nothing but bitter injustice these last two years.

I cannot, and will not live like this. Who could? I am, and always was, innocent just like the jury said. Article 6, which provides a presumption of innocence, has been comprehensively ignored in my case, even following an acquittal.

If I must lose, and all of the outrageous rulings thus far make it clear that I will, then I will at least choose the manner of that loss.

– A statement from the man

The terms of the man's SRO mean he cannot use any internet-enabled device that cannot be later checked by the police. He has been charged with breaching the terms of his order by refusing to give the police the PIN to his phone.

He said that banned him from using certain fridges and lifts that are connected to the web. The wording of the order also stops him from using an intercom such as those used to get into a nursery or a flat.

Following the man's last appearance in court he said there was "no prospect" of him having a relationship: "Can you imagine, 24 hours before sex? Come on."

He gave the example of chatting to a woman and saying: "There's a nice French restaurant I'd like to take you to, but first the police are just going to come around for a little chat."

He said the disclosure process to a potential partner would be "horrendous", saying: "Knock, knock, knock, this is the police, (Mr X) is subject to a Sexual Risk Order and is considered to be potentially dangerous ... Then they leave."

The man intends to begin his hunger strike on Wednesday.

The case is due back before York Magistrates Court on July 14 before a full hearing on August 19.

SRO's can be applied to any individual who the police believe poses a risk of sexual harm, even if they have never been convicted of a crime. They are civil orders imposed by magistrates at the request of police.