Murderer Wayne Couzens has entered a guilty plea to three counts of indecent exposure.
The counts, which took place between November 2020 and February 2021 were admitted by the former police officer at the Old Bailey.
And the instances all took place months before the 50-year-old abducted and murdered Sarah Everard, as she walked home in Clapham, London in March 2021.
Read more: Sarah Everard's killer Wayne Couzens appears in court charged with flashing offences
The Mirror reports that Couzens was handed a whole-life tariff last year after using his job as a cover to kidnap and rape the marketing worker. Her murder sparked a national outcry and a fresh focus on ending violence against women.
In July last year he lost his appeal against his whole-life sentence, meaning he will die in prison. Today, the court heard he carried out a solo sex act in front of a female cyclist in Deal, Kent, on November 13, 2020.
The former parliamentary and diplomatic protection officer also admitted two counts of exposure which took place at a fast food restaurant in Kent in February 2021. He flashed his genitals while handing over his card for payment for his food in his car in front of shocked female staff members.
Couzens looked straight at the women while he exposed himself, the Old Bailey heard. He appeared at the Old Bailey via video-link from HMP Frankland high-security jail in County Durham with a long grey beard, moustache, wearing a grey prison tracksuit and appearing overweight and admitted the three offences of exposure.
He denied an allegation that on June 9, 2015, he drove without wearing any underwear through Dover. He also denied two more incidents of exposure which were said to have taken place at the McDonald's in January 2021.
Jocelyn Ledward, prosecuting, accepted the pleas and said the Crown is not seeking a trial on the remaining counts. All charges stated Couzens intentionally exposed his genitals 'intending that someone would see them and be caused alarm or distress'.
He will be sentenced on Monday, March 6.
Defence lawyer Jim Sturman, KC, had earlier argued for a 'stay' to get all six counts of exposure thrown out against the former cop. Mr Sturman said it was a 'genuinely unique' case which met criteria to order the 'exceptional' stay.
The court heard the main argument for a stay was how 'adverse publicity' has made it impossible for Couzens to receive a fair trial. Mr Sturman also argued that prosecution of the exposure charges was an 'affront to justice'.
But Mrs Justice May rejected the stay on November 2, last year, it can now be revealed. She said: "The defendant is currently serving a life sentence, with a whole of life term, imposed on 30 September 2021 for the kidnap, rape and murder of Sarah Everard.
"All murders are terrible events causing unbearable grief for family and friends of the victim, but the disappearance, rape and murder of Sarah Everard touched a particular nerve, both in the UK and abroad.
"She was walking home alone down a main street, well lit, in London at night during the pandemic when the defendant, exploiting his position as a serving police officer, stopped her, handcuffed her, put her in his car and drove her away, to rape and murder her in a deserted spot in the country hours later.
"The press interest at the time was intense. Each time something happens that can be linked to the defendant his name and picture appear in the press and online, with reference to his appalling crimes against Sarah Everard.
"He has become a byword for violent sexual offending by men against women."
The judge concluded that a court had no role in revisiting a prosecuting decision and said these proceedings fell 'very far short' of an affront to justice. She then turned to the adverse publicity argument.
"There is no doubt that the publicity surrounding the terrible events of Sarah Everard's killing has been intense, at times lurid and sensational, occasionally wild and inaccurate, always redolent of the revulsion and horror that the offences against Sarah Everard rightly evoke.
"I accept Mr Sturman's submission that the coverage has been exceptional, that his client's name is as a result notorious, forever linked to an horrific sexual killing, and that very few people, if any, could be found to serve on a jury who had not heard or read of the Sarah Everard case."
She said, however, that jurors would be able to fulfil their oaths and separate their knowledge from their decision on the facts in a trial under good directions. She added: "My conclusion at present, therefore, is that the defence have not satisfied me on the balance of probabilities that the effect of publicity to-date will render any trial unfair."
She also noted that the court might review this decision as the trial judge and relevant lawyers keep the effect of publicity on the fairness of the trial 'under close review'.
Read next:
- Eight barrels of alcohol worth £2,500 stolen from Newcastle micropub
- Northumberland driver caused death of teenage girlfriend after losing control and crashing into tree
- Drunk resident caused homes to be evacuated after opening gas pipe and making threats
- Racist Wallsend lout threatened to 'slash' takeaway staff with a vodka bottle during terrifying outburst
- District judge suspends eviction of Gateshead pensioner who has lived in his home for 66 years
