Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
Utah court wipes ‘Diaper Man’s’ record clean
First Published Feb 14 2014 04:11 pm • Last Updated Feb 14 2014 10:43 pm

The man who dropped his trousers and showed his Elmo diaper to two girls in White City may be strange and antisocial, the Utah Supreme Court ruled Friday, but he’s no criminal.

The state’s highest judicial authority overturned the 2010 conviction of Barton Jason Lewis Bagnes in a unanimous decision Friday, saying Bagnes did not violate the laws he was sent to prison for breaking.

Join the Discussion
Post a Comment

Bagnes, who was convicted in 3rd District Court of second-degree felony sexual exploitation of a minor and third-degree felony lewdness, has been in state prison since September 2010 for flashing his Sesame Street diaper to two 8-year-old girls.

Defense attorney Neal Hamilton, who represented Bagnes at the jury trial, praised the Supreme Court’s decision, calling it a "vindication" for the 36-year-old man.

"Mr. Bagnes’ conduct is certainly unusual, strange, creepy, weird. It is a lot of things; it is uncomfortable. But what it is not — it is not criminal," Hamilton told The Tribune late Friday. "We live in a society where we have rights and we have an absolute, unequivocal protection of these rights: We have the right to be weird. We have the right to be strange. We have the right to make people uncomfortable. Those rights end where criminal conduct begins."

According to the court’s ruling, in order for an act to rise to the level of criminal lewdness it must be overtly sexual or expose a body part expressly outlawed by state statute.

In May 2009, Bagnes was sucking on a candy pacifier and throwing fliers folded into paper airplanes onto lawns around a White City neighborhood when the two 8-year-olds approached him.

The girls said Bagnes’ shorts were low enough to show he was wearing a diaper with the little red Muppet character on its front.

One girl said he pulled his trousers down to better show them the diaper. He told the girls he wore it "for fun."

But he never removed the diaper, never made any sexual comments or gestures, never did anything to indicate he was enjoying sexual gratification from the encounter.

story continues below
story continues below

"In exposing his diaper, Bagnes undoubtedly startled those around him. A diaper in this context would certainly have been perceived as unusual, even disturbing," the decision said. "But it in no way resulted in the effective exposure of Bagnes’s private parts."

The justices indicated that a diaper, though unusual for a grown man to wear, affords more coverage than other kinds of undergarments.

They also noted that unexposed, internal sexual gratification is not punishable by law.

"The private realization of a fetishized sexual fantasy alone would not make his conduct criminal," wrote Justice Thomas Lee. "Our Victorian past is well behind us. We no longer live in a society where our style conventions and social mores clamor for head-to-toe cover-up. The opposite is closer to the truth."

Bagnes has claimed he wore diapers because of urinary incontinence and displayed them to children to spread awareness of the medical problem. The fliers, he said, were part of his awareness campaign.

The Utah attorney general’s office did not return calls for comment Friday.

Bagnes will likely not be released from prison for another month or two — depending on several factors, including whether prosecutors choose to request another hearing.

Bagnes, who was referred to as ‘Diaper Boy’ in media across the state throughout his legal proceedings, was first convicted of lewdness in 1999 and placed on the state sex-offender registry. Other allegations followed, but charges were either not filed or dropped because Bagnes did not expose his genitals.

When asked what concerned parents should do to protect their children from this kind of behavior, Hamilton suggested a conversation about strangers and what to do when someone makes a child uncomfortable.

Next Page >

Copyright 2014 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Reader Comments Read All Comments Post a Comment
Click here to read all comments   Click here to post a comment

About Reader Comments

Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
Staying Connected
Contests and Promotions
  • Search Obituaries
  • Place an Obituary

  • Search Cars
  • Search Homes
  • Search Jobs
  • Search Marketplace
  • Search Legal Notices

  • Other Services
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to the Newspaper
  • Access your e-Edition
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact a newsroom staff member
  • Access the Trib Archives
  • Privacy Policy
  • Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.