Jay Walking
TACKLE the cancer of crime at its source, before it can fester. Prevention not cure. That’s the way.
And so we study of the case of the “HOODLUM”. For reasons that become apparent on further reading, the Mirror ends its headline with a question mark.
The grammar invites debate. And when presented with a picture of Jay Cowper’s head wrapped in a grey hoodie, we begin to form opinions.
But wait. Jay has not broken any law. But he is wearing that hood. And when he wears his hood into Monkton Road Stores in York, the shopkeeper senses trouble.
“Could you ask the little boy to remove his hood?” asks the shopkeeper. Jay’s grandfather replies: “He’s only two-and-a-half. I don’t think he’s going to rob you!” Grandpa refuses to lower the hood. It is what grandma calls “a matter of principle”.
“SHOP BANS HOODIE…AGED 2,” says the Sun. “And there’s a picture of Jay wearing a lambswool cardigan with hood raised.
Jay did not lower his hood. And, as the Mirror says, his grandfather left the shops, choosing to buy his cigarettes elsewhere.
Yes, cigarettes. Can this be right? Perhaps it should be grandpa who moves about with a hood masking his features from CCTV cameras?
As for Jay… Well, he’s now part of the debate: does the hood make the criminal or the criminal choose the hood? Is Jay’s lambswool sweater a gateway garment to more dubious gear?
Posted: 23rd, January 2007 | In: Tabloids Comment (1) | TrackBack | Permalink
