Is "teabagging" a sex offence?
mentalguy2004
and questioned, no charges as yet.
Allegedly he was at a party with friends, drunk, and they started messing
with sleeping/passed out people. They drew on their faces, etc. but in the
case of one sleeping girl (over 16 I assume), he apparently put his balls in
her face and his mate took a photo on his phone. Somehow she discovered this
picture and made a complaint to the Police of sexual assault. The Police
also have the phone with the photo on it.
So is this a sex offence? Could he be put on the SOR? I don't think he has a
history of offences.
Stuart B
No wonder your mental if you cant work this out
Stuart
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Essex Laptops - Andy Usher
"Scoobs" <X@X> wrote in message news:mn.3cfe7d8303c45cb1.88110@X...
> mentalguy2004 wrote on 07/03/2008 :
>
>> So is this a sex offence?
>
In this country, I feel sorry for the Boy, could ruin his life. Maybe im
wrong but In a more cultured country it would be just having a laugh.
Terrible situation to be in
Dragon Slayer
What if it was your daughter ?
Gaz
I would have wondered how good a job i did in bringing her up, that she was
so drunk at the age of sixteen that she passed out.
Gaz
Dragon Slayer
Read the original again...and then try and post a sensible response
Svenne
His daughter doesn't have any balls to stick in anyones face.
Svenne
Dragon Slayer
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 13:35:22 -0800 (PST), Dragon Slayer
>
How do you know ? was you there ?
She could have been a transvestite for all you know.
Would you have liked to have been there ?
Could you be some sort of pervert ?
mentalguy2004
"Stuart B" <"Stuart B"> wrote in message
news:47d1a5b3$0$13845$8826...@free.teranews.com...
That's "you're" and "can't".
mentalguy2004
"Scoobs" <X@X> wrote in message news:mn.3cfe7d8303c45cb1.88110@X...
> mentalguy2004 wrote on 07/03/2008 :
>
>
>
>
I know what I think, but I might be wrong, I'm not a lawyer. That's why I
asked.
mentalguy2004
"Gaz" <gaz...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:63dqtbF...@mid.individual.net...
Yeah, she "asked for it", right?
Robbie
more, if she's under 18 I wonder if the police would be looking into
bringing charges of making child pornography.
Wouldn't this be covered by one of the levels, level 3 perhaps?
--
Robbie
Svenne
<pauls...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> His daughter doesn't have any balls to stick in anyones face.
>How do you know ? was you there ?
>She could have been a transvestite for all you know.
>Would you have liked to have been there ?
>Could you be some sort of pervert ?
I reckon the whole story is a load of bollocks.
Svenne
Gaz
No, not even close. She just needs to take responsibility for her safety.
Gaz
Dragon Slayer
>
> - Show quoted text -
So every girl who goes to a party must now take steps to vet every
male attendant in case he is a perv ?
What a sad fuckin situation.
I have the perfect antidote for any arsehole who thinks young girls
ask for it.
Steve Walker
Yeah, you've hit that one on the head, Svenne
Ian
> Allegedly he was at a party with friends, drunk, and they started messing
> with sleeping/passed out people. They drew on their faces, etc. but in the
> case of one sleeping girl (over 16 I assume), he apparently put his balls in
> her face and his mate took a photo on his phone. ...
> So is this a sex offence? Could he be put on the SOR?
Oh, I do hope so. Serve the little shit right.
Ian
Blah
>> So is this a sex offence? Could he be put on the SOR? I don't think he has a
>> history of offences.
>
> thinks this is acceptable behaviour?
Have you never played rugby?
This was compulsory at the club I played for.
Not right maybe....
Cynic
wrote:
>> I would have wondered how good a job i did in bringing her up, that she
>> was so drunk at the age of sixteen that she passed out.
>
>Yeah, she "asked for it", right?
She was the victim of a bit of pretty harmless horse-play is all. So
she got a bit miffed rather than laughing it off. The consequences
for the man are likely to be *far* more serious than his misdeed
deserves, because the court will probably blow it out of all
proportion - just as you are doing.
--
Cynic
Cynic
>>So is this a sex offence? Could he be put on the SOR? I don't think he has a
>>history of offences.
>
>Have we really arrived at the level of debauchery that someone/anyone
>thinks this is acceptable behaviour?
Lots of things are unacceptable behaviour. Whether they deserve the
sort of punishment that is likely in this case is however something
entirely different.
Had he shaved off her eyebrows I expect he would have got away with a
slap on the wrist. as it is, it will probably affect the rest of his
life quite significantly.
--
Cynic
Joe Lee
"Dragon Slayer" <pauls...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d2e21490-70e4-42d1...@13g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> So every girl who goes to a party must now take steps to vet every male
> attendant in case he is a perv ?
Whether at a party or ont every girl should take steps to protect her own
safety, that includes not drinking so much that it renders her unconscious.
> What a sad fuckin situation.
No, it's simply common sense.
> I have the perfect antidote for any arsehole who thinks young girls ask
> for it.
--
Joe Lee
Mike_B
Lon...@ezauza.com writes
>>So is this a sex offence? Could he be put on the SOR? I don't think he has a
>>history of offences.
>
>thinks this is acceptable behaviour?
At a drunken teenage party, this has always been acceptable behaviour.
--
Mike_B
MM
Quick! Where's the Instamatic!
MM
MM
If he washed his teabags she won't have to worry too much.
MM
MM
>>So is this a sex offence? Could he be put on the SOR? I don't think he has a
>>history of offences.
>
>Have we really arrived at the level of debauchery that someone/anyone
>thinks this is acceptable behaviour?
Like Cynic, I have to laugh this "case" out through uncontrollable
derisory laughter, sorry. The sort of thing the kids on "Skins" get up
to regularly. She should either (a) get over it or (b) not go to such
parties, stay home and spend a nice evening in with the old codgers
instead.
MM
Dr Zoidberg
news:q7iAj.562$5i5...@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
> Just got a call from friends, apparently their son, 19, has been arrested
> and questioned, no charges as yet.
>
> with sleeping/passed out people. They drew on their faces, etc. but in the
> case of one sleeping girl (over 16 I assume), he apparently put his balls
> this picture and made a complaint to the Police of sexual assault. The
> Police also have the phone with the photo on it.
>
> a history of offences.
It sounds very much like a clear case of sexual assault.
There was unwanted physical contact with an obvious element of indecency ,
so I'd expect that the police will take this seriously and he'll be
interviewed.
I'd suggest that if they have evidence as you describe then a full admission
and explanation is his best course of action.
It'll probably be submitted to the CPS for a decision , and they may or may
not decide to proceed with it by way of court , a caution , or NFA.
Either of the first two do lead to an entry on the SOR
It may well be the sort of thing that is considered a bit of a laugh by some
people but taking an independent view I don't think it's going to be seen as
acceptable by the majority of society
--
Alex
"I laugh in the face of danger , then I hide until it goes away"
mentalguy2004
"Dr Zoidberg" <alexNOOOO!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote in message
news:63f4jnF...@mid.individual.net...
Thanks Alex for taking the time to answer the original questions.
I've since learned that the girl in question previously (maliciously)
reported him for hitting her, which he didn't. Apart from being grossly
stupid to have opened himself up to further allegations (and having his mate
accidentally provide the Police with solid photographic proof), I don't
think he's likely to sexually offend in the way that being on the SOR would
tend to imply. Just goes to show what peer pressure and alcohol can lead to.
AFAIK, he was interviewed without being charged, but with the warning that
he may be charged at a later date.
Thanks again for your help.
Colonel Colt
>
>
> Thanks Alex for taking the time to answer the original questions.
>
> I've since learned that the girl in question previously (maliciously)
> reported him for hitting her, which he didn't. Apart from being grossly
> stupid to have opened himself up to further allegations (and having his
> mate accidentally provide the Police with solid photographic proof), I
> don't think he's likely to sexually offend in the way that being on the
> SOR would tend to imply. Just goes to show what peer pressure and alcohol
> can lead to.
>
conception, and its usefulness is being diminished as a result. Entry onto
to the SOR means for most people a serious sexual offence, such as rape or
child sexual abuse; it does not mean drunken horseplay, however
inappropriate. My own bet for the consequences would be a caution and being
placed on the SOR for five years. Which pretty much much fucks up his life.
Dr Zoidberg
Indeed.
Trouble is that the public perception of the SOR is that it is just for
rapists and peedyfiles , so finding your way onto it for a much less serious
can still have very unpleasant consequences.
It's a difference between the common (mis)understanding and reality just
like my other pet hate - "making an indecent image of a child". Most people
would see that and assume it means being stood there with a camera and a
naked 8 year old , rather than simply downloading an existing image from the
net.
> AFAIK, he was interviewed without being charged, but with the warning that
> he may be charged at a later date.
>
As I said , it's very likely that they will be passing it onto CPS for a
decision on how to proceed.
Hopefully they will realise that the seriousness of the offence is grossly
disproportionate to the consequences of him being charged or cautioned and
being put on the SOR and decide to leave it at that - I'm guessing he's
realised this sort of thing is a really bad idea - but it's not certain.
Was he released on bail with a date to return , or just released without
charge?
Francis Burton
Dr Zoidberg <alexNOOOO!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
>It sounds very much like a clear case of sexual assault.
>There was unwanted physical contact with an obvious element of indecency ,
>so I'd expect that the police will take this seriously and he'll be
>interviewed.
>I'd suggest that if they have evidence as you describe then a full admission
>and explanation is his best course of action.
>It'll probably be submitted to the CPS for a decision , and they may or may
>not decide to proceed with it by way of court , a caution , or NFA.
>Either of the first two do lead to an entry on the SOR
>
>It may well be the sort of thing that is considered a bit of a laugh by some
>people but taking an independent view I don't think it's going to be seen as
>acceptable by the majority of society
It was totally unacceptable behaviour in my opinion. He should
know this by now. As to whether his life should be blighted by
being on the SOR is another matter. What harm was done to the
girl? I'm not suggesting she wasn't harmed in any way, but would
like to know where it ranks with other types of assault. Would
the harm have been more or less had the boy/immature man shaved
off her eyebrows (as mentioned elsewhere)? What if he had stolen
her purse and iPod? What if he had burgled her house?
Francis
johannes
Francis Burton wrote:
>
> In article <63f4jnF...@mid.individual.net>,
> Dr Zoidberg <alexNOOOO!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
> >It sounds very much like a clear case of sexual assault.
> >There was unwanted physical contact with an obvious element of indecency ,
> >so I'd expect that the police will take this seriously and he'll be
> >interviewed.
> >I'd suggest that if they have evidence as you describe then a full admission
> >and explanation is his best course of action.
> >It'll probably be submitted to the CPS for a decision , and they may or may
> >not decide to proceed with it by way of court , a caution , or NFA.
> >Either of the first two do lead to an entry on the SOR
> >
> >It may well be the sort of thing that is considered a bit of a laugh by some
> >people but taking an independent view I don't think it's going to be seen as
> >acceptable by the majority of society
>
> It was totally unacceptable behaviour in my opinion. He should
> know this by now. As to whether his life should be blighted by
> being on the SOR is another matter. What harm was done to the
> girl?
It was a sexual assault IMO. Harm could be to her dignity and reputation,
especially since the phone video was bandied around.
> I'm not suggesting she wasn't harmed in any way, but would
> like to know where it ranks with other types of assault. Would
> the harm have been more or less had the boy/immature man shaved
> off her eyebrows (as mentioned elsewhere)? What if he had stolen
> her purse and iPod? What if he had burgled her house?
I wouldn't say he was a boy, at 19 he should know better.
johannes
Obviously, if you commit a crime and mates supply the evidence, then you open
up yourself to allegations... I would have thought so.
Stuart B
> "Stuart B" <"Stuart B"> wrote in message
> news:47d1a5b3$0$13845$8826...@free.teranews.com...
>>
>> No wonder your mental if you cant work this out
>
> That's "you're" and "can't".
>
That's a W and Wanker
Stuart
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Nick
>
> AFAIK, he was interviewed without being charged, but with the warning that
> he may be charged at a later date.
>
> Thanks again for your help.
>
>
FFS he was told he was a naughty boy and told to piss off with the
warning that they wouldn't forget what he'd done.
I always like to slag the police off but even I can't criticise them
here. A very appropriate response.
gonzo
"Joe Lee" <invalid@noaddress> wrote in message
news:47d1f666$0$22422$fa0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
>
> "Dragon Slayer" <pauls...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d2e21490-70e4-42d1...@13g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> So every girl who goes to a party must now take steps to vet every male
>> attendant in case he is a perv ?
>
> Whether at a party or ont every girl should take steps to protect her own
> safety, that includes not drinking so much that it renders her
> unconscious.
>
totally hammered I was incapacitated. My friends carried me into another
room so I could sleep it off and whilst I was in there alone our drug dealer
came in and emptied my wallet. I was too fucked to do anything about it.
Cheers
James
mentalguy2004
AFAIK released without charge, but with in implied threat that a charge may
be forthcoming. I think the Police may be just letting him stew on it. If
so, it's had the desired effect... I think a fine, caution, probation etc.,
would be insignificant compared to what he's been through in the last few
days. And rightly so, he's learnt a valuable lesson.
mentalguy2004
"Stuart B" <"Stuart B"> wrote in message
> mentalguy2004 wrote:
>> "Stuart B" <"Stuart B"> wrote in message
>> news:47d1a5b3$0$13845$8826...@free.teranews.com...
>>>
>
>>> No wonder your mental if you cant work this out
>>
>> That's "you're" and "can't".
>
> That's a W and Wanker
Well done on learning where the apostrophe goes, we'll work on the full stop
next week.
MM
<alexNOOOO!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
>It may well be the sort of thing that is considered a bit of a laugh by some
>people but taking an independent view I don't think it's going to be seen as
>acceptable by the majority of society
You are an interferring busybody and ICMFP!
MM
Gaz
> "mentalguy2004" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
> news:q7iAj.562$5i5...@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>
> It may well be the sort of thing that is considered a bit of a laugh
> by some people but taking an independent view I don't think it's
> going to be seen as acceptable by the majority of society
You are right that it is unacceptable, but his entry ont he SOR would
essentially ruin the rest of his life, which for someone so young is an
awful punishment. And people say lashings are an uncivil and dehumanising
punishment.
Gaz
Gaz
Did i read somewhere that public urination can put you on the SOR now?
Gaz
Gaz
You take his comments outside of the wider context, he has made the point
that the potential punishment, ie entry onto the SOR is far greater then the
impact of the offence.
Gaz
Ian
> It was totally unacceptable behaviour in my opinion. He should
> know this by now. As to whether his life should be blighted by
> being on the SOR is another matter. What harm was done to the
> girl? I'm not suggesting she wasn't harmed in any way, but would
> like to know where it ranks with other types of assault. Would
> the harm have been more or less had the boy/immature man shaved
> off her eyebrows (as mentioned elsewhere)? What if he had stolen
> her purse and iPod? What if he had burgled her house?
Eyebrows grow back. iPods can be replaced. And photographs of a young
woman with a scrotum in her face (or mouth - that's the traditional
definition of "teabagging", isn't it?) can be circulated, stuck on
lamp-posts and cause hurt and real problems for years to come.
"Look, miss, everyone in class has a picture of you sucking a man's
balls. You're a slag, miss."
Ian
Ian
> AFAIK released without charge, but with in implied threat that a charge may
> be forthcoming. I think the Police may be just letting him stew on it. If
> so, it's had the desired effect... I think a fine, caution, probation etc.,
> would be insignificant compared to what he's been through in the last few
> days.
What he's gone through in the last few days will be insignificant to
five years as a registered sex offender. University? Forget it. Any
job requiring CRB clearance? Forget it.
But then, a man who thinks it funny and appropriate to perform and
record a sexual assault on a young woman deserves what's coming to
him.
Ian
Michael C
> Just got a call from friends, apparently their son, 19, has been arrested
> and questioned, no charges as yet.
>
> Allegedly he was at a party with friends, drunk, and they started messing
> with sleeping/passed out people. They drew on their faces, etc. but in the
> case of one sleeping girl (over 16 I assume), he apparently put his balls
> in her face and his mate took a photo on his phone. Somehow she discovered
> this picture and made a complaint to the Police of sexual assault. The
> Police also have the phone with the photo on it.
>
> So is this a sex offence? Could he be put on the SOR? I don't think he has
> a history of offences.
I hope he doesn't get put on the SOR or even charged with anything. She
should get over herself.
Gaz
"Ian" <ian.g...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:3fb56763-0745-42f3...@60g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
He deserves to be punished, but not his life to be ruined. Five of the best
with the birch would be a perfect punishment for this crime. He learns a
very sore lesson, she gets retribution, and he gets to not have his life
ruined. As i said earlier on, putting they boy on the SOR and ruining the
rest of his life is far more a cruel punishment.
Gaz
Andrew McGee
"Cynic" <cyni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hep3t39h0mthtkq9c...@4ax.com...
>>>has a
>>>history of offences.
>>
>>thinks this is acceptable behaviour?
>
> sort of punishment that is likely in this case is however something
> entirely different.
>
> Had he shaved off her eyebrows I expect he would have got away with a
> slap on the wrist. as it is, it will probably affect the rest of his
> life quite significantly.
>
> --
> Cynic
The question was not whether the behaviour was morally reprehensible, but
whether it was criminal.
So far I have little in the way of credible suggestion as to what offence
has been committed.>
Graham Murray
> Did i read somewhere that public urination can put you on the SOR now?
If so then it is a disgrace considering the number of public toilets
which are either being (or have already been) completely closed or whose
opening hours have been reduced. Maybe people who are caught short
outside are supposed to wet themselves, or will that be made illegal as
well?
Dragon Slayer
> "Cynic" <cynic_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
A good thrashing and the blacking of his balls would have been
sufficient.
A much better punishment and deterrent than anything courts could
adminster
nully
Oh do fuck off you judgemental twat
--
tim (not at home)
"Andrew McGee" <amh...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:4_qdnXNGvM6ZaE_a...@bt.com...
indecent exposure?
tim
Alex Heney
wrote:
>Just got a call from friends, apparently their son, 19, has been arrested
>and questioned, no charges as yet.
>
>Allegedly he was at a party with friends, drunk, and they started messing
>with sleeping/passed out people. They drew on their faces, etc. but in the
>case of one sleeping girl (over 16 I assume), he apparently put his balls in
>her face and his mate took a photo on his phone. Somehow she discovered this
>picture and made a complaint to the Police of sexual assault. The Police
>also have the phone with the photo on it.
>
>So is this a sex offence? Could he be put on the SOR? I don't think he has a
>history of offences.
>
Yes to both, if the police decide to press charges.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
GURU: One who knows more jargon than you.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
Richard Miller
<3fb56763-0745-42f3...@60g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>, Ian
<ian.g...@btinternet.com> writes
I've been following the debate on this one back and forth. I have heard
the arguments that a young man does not deserve to have his life ruined
for a bit of horseplay. And the view I have come to is that this young
man knew full well that what he was doing was seriously wrong. He was
deliberately sexually humiliating this girl. He was deliberately having
it recorded in order to publicise the humiliation. This is more than
just morally dubious, it is criminal. He should be prosecuted, and he
should be jailed for a short period.
As to the SOR, I agree that it is not now a useful record of serious
sexual offenders. But this guy believed that a sexual assault on a young
woman was an OK way of acting. He specifically wanted other people to
see what he had done to this girl. His wish should be granted. He should
go on the register.
--
Richard Miller
MM
I think it was harmless horseplay, a storm in teacup. The knee-jerk,
excessive reaction to it is just the sort of thing that is rife in
basket case nanny state Britain today. Along the lines of bra-strap
snapping.
MM
MM
wrote:
Exactly, a faint echo of common sense does resound in this newsgroup
after all.
MM
Dragon Slayer
wrote:
> In message
> <3fb56763-0745-42f3-a65c-8c6922064...@60g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>, Ian
> <ian.gro...@btinternet.com> writes
Fuck off ! where you ever young or have you always been a
sanctimonious prick ?
Richard Miller
<kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
Rubbing your genitals in someone's face without their consent and
photographing it is many, many steps beyond bra-strap twanging. I am
quite startled that anyone could see this as being quite so trivial.
--
Richard Miller
Joe Lee
> whether it was criminal.
>
> So far I have little in the way of credible suggestion as to what offence
> has been committed.>
Possibly The Sexual Offences Act 2003
Sec. 66 Exposure
1) A person commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally exposes his genitals, and
(b) he intends that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress.
--
Joe Lee
Michael C
news:R5gf5vD5...@seasalter0.demon.co.uk...
>>society"
>>
>>I think it was harmless horseplay, a storm in teacup. The knee-jerk,
>>excessive reaction to it is just the sort of thing that is rife in
>>basket case nanny state Britain today. Along the lines of bra-strap
>>snapping.
>
> Rubbing your genitals in someone's face without their consent and
> photographing it is many, many steps beyond bra-strap twanging. I am quite
> startled that anyone could see this as being quite so trivial.
I don't see what the big deal is - the 'victim' isn't being held down
against their will and doesn't even suffer as much as someone who has had
their eyebrows shaved off.
It strikes me as being just a drunken party prank that, had it happened five
years ago, wouldn't have got to the police because it wouldn't have been
filmed.
stillno...@gmail.com
<ian.g...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>On 8 Mar, 15:04, "mentalguy2004" <n...@none.com> wrote:
>
>> AFAIK released without charge, but with in implied threat that a charge may
>> be forthcoming. I think the Police may be just letting him stew on it. If
>> so, it's had the desired effect... I think a fine, caution, probation etc.,
>> would be insignificant compared to what he's been through in the last few
>> days.
>
>What he's gone through in the last few days will be insignificant to
>five years as a registered sex offender.
What ? You can't get in to Uni bcos you are on the SOR ?
Joe Lee
There may also be an aggravating factor in that we are told there was a
previous (allegedly malicious) accusation made against him by the same girl.
His position will be the more serious if there is evidence that his motive
was one of revenge or retribution. ISTM it would be difficult for him to
argue that it waslt & that he chose to perform it on her in particular, was
nothing more than a coincidence.
> As to the SOR, I agree that it is not now a useful record of serious
> sexual offenders. But this guy believed that a sexual assault on a young
> woman was an OK way of acting. He specifically wanted other people to see
> what he had done to this girl. His wish should be granted. He should go on
> the register.
--
Joe Lee
Ian
> Ian wrote:
> > But then, a man who thinks it funny and appropriate to perform and
> > record a sexual assault on a young woman deserves what's coming to
> > him.
>
> Oh do fuck off you judgemental twat
What's wrong with being judgemental? Anyway, aren't you judging me?
Ian
Ian
> I don't see what the big deal is - the 'victim' isn't being held down
> against their will and doesn't even suffer as much as someone who has had
> their eyebrows shaved off.
Doesn't suffer? Really? Not even when the picture he had taken is
passed round her school? Or posted on the net?
Ian
Ian
> >What he's gone through in the last few days will be insignificant to
> >five years as a registered sex offender.
>
> What ? You can't get in to Uni bcos you are on the SOR ?
In Scotland, as I understand it, no. And quite right, too.
Ian
Svenne
<ian.g...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> What ? You can't get in to Uni bcos you are on the SOR ?
>In Scotland, as I understand it, no. And quite right, too.
So some 19 year old on his way home from the pub late one night gets
caught short, nips down a dark, deserted alleyway, has a pee deep in
the shadows of a secluded corner and on turning round sees a couple of
coppers approaching him can never go to university and has a whole
range of occupations cut off for the rest of his life for being on the
SOR?
I wouldn't say that is right.
Svenne
MM
Wouldn't the blacking have rubbed off on to her face?
"Hi, mum, I'm home!"
"What's that dirty mark on your face, dear?"
"Oh, some stupid boy put his balls on my nose."
"Well, come and have your breakfast and tell me all about it!"
MM
MM
>Did i read somewhere that public urination can put you on the SOR now?
For example, British squaddies in Norway urinating on each other?
MM
MM
Been reading The Taliban for Beginners, have you?
MM
MM
So you support waterboarding, I suppose? Good game! Good game!
MM
MM
Abso-fucking-lutely!
MM
MM
Yet another completely ludicrous response to some high jinks.
Rejected! Next!
MM
MM
So what would you say if a scientist who was on the SOR discovered a
vaccine for HIV?
MM
MM
Rubbish. Sod off with your stupid, over-the-top, knee-jerk reactions,
puhleeze! As if this girl is going to have any lasting damage from
having a couple of balls rested on her face and photographed. God, you
people in the "justice" industry! No wonder you're all filthy rich!
You'd make money if the wind changed direction, wouldn't you!
MM
MM
wrote:
>"Richard Miller" <ric...@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
Exactly! Richard Miller says he's startled. So am I - with all the
Talibanese being spoken here, for the mindset is pretty similar.
MM
Mike_B
<46e8578f-6639-4c92...@o77g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, Ian
<ian.g...@btinternet.com> writes
>On 8 Mar, 12:58, fbur...@nyx.net (Francis Burton) wrote:
>
>> It was totally unacceptable behaviour in my opinion. He should
>> know this by now. As to whether his life should be blighted by
>> being on the SOR is another matter. What harm was done to the
>> girl? I'm not suggesting she wasn't harmed in any way, but would
>> like to know where it ranks with other types of assault. Would
>> the harm have been more or less had the boy/immature man shaved
>> off her eyebrows (as mentioned elsewhere)? What if he had stolen
>> her purse and iPod? What if he had burgled her house?
>
>Eyebrows grow back. iPods can be replaced. And photographs of a young
>woman with a scrotum in her face (or mouth - that's the traditional
>definition of "teabagging", isn't it?) can be
...destroyed if the girl has no sense of humour.
Maybe next time he'll just stick her hand in a bowl of warm water or put
sugar in her bed or cling film over the toilet bowl. All of which, IMO,
are in the same league when it comes to drunk teens passing out at
parties.
--
Mike_B
MM
No. They have a laugh at her expense. If she wants to be invited to
other parties, she'll laugh along with them and it will all be
forgotten about in a week. By blowing it up out of all proportion,
THAT'S what she'd probably remember later in life, far more than the
actual event itself. Still, it makes you feel so GOOOOOOD, doesn't it!
MM
Richard Miller
<war...@warblyet.tyc> writes
>"Richard Miller" <ric...@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:R5gf5vD5...@seasalter0.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <3356t3542v1oh5dbo...@4ax.com>, MM
>> <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>>>
>>>"I don't think it's going to be seen as acceptable by the majority of
>>>society"
>>>
>>>I think it was harmless horseplay, a storm in teacup. The knee-jerk,
>>>excessive reaction to it is just the sort of thing that is rife in
>>>basket case nanny state Britain today. Along the lines of bra-strap
>>>snapping.
>>
>> Rubbing your genitals in someone's face without their consent and
>> photographing it is many, many steps beyond bra-strap twanging. I am quite
>> startled that anyone could see this as being quite so trivial.
>
>I don't see what the big deal is
That's what bothers me.
> - the 'victim' isn't being held down
>against their will and doesn't even suffer as much as someone who has had
>their eyebrows shaved off.
You don't think having film of this circulated to all her peers will
have a traumatic effect on this girl? That's just naive.
>
>It strikes me as being just a drunken party prank that, had it happened five
>years ago, wouldn't have got to the police because it wouldn't have been
>filmed.
>
>
And it strikes me as being the sort of sexual assault that is about
power and humiliation, and that we should be taking a lot more seriously
in this country. This guy believes it is OK to use a sexual assault to
humiliate someone. I believe people like that need locking up.
--
Richard Miller
Ian
> >> What ? You can't get in to Uni bcos you are on the SOR ?
> >In Scotland, as I understand it, no. And quite right, too.
>
> So some 19 year old on his way home from the pub late one night gets
> caught short, nips down a dark, deserted alleyway, has a pee deep in
> the shadows of a secluded corner and on turning round sees a couple of
> coppers approaching him can never go to university and has a whole
> range of occupations cut off for the rest of his life for being on the
> SOR?
The question of what should happen to people on the register is
different from the question of who should go on it. I think a
university would be perfectly right to refuse admission to someone
with a track record of sexually assaulting your women at parties.
Is there any case of someone behaving as you describe and finding
himself on the list?
Ian
Ian
> On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 10:18:34 -0800 (PST), Ian
> >But then, a man who thinks it funny and appropriate to perform and
> >record a sexual assault on a young woman deserves what's coming to
> >him.
>
> Been reading The Taliban for Beginners, have you?
Oh dear. Don't you think that's maybe just a wee bit simplistic?
Ian
Mogga
>Rubbish. Sod off with your stupid, over-the-top, knee-jerk reactions,
>puhleeze! As if this girl is going to have any lasting damage from
>having a couple of balls rested on her face and photographed. God, you
>people in the "justice" industry! No wonder you're all filthy rich!
>You'd make money if the wind changed direction, wouldn't you!
>
>MM
I think it has probably already caused her distress.
The photograph is the killer. If it'd been a private joke between the
two lads then it's still pretty horrid, but no one is ever going to
see it. It'd be dismissed quickly by the peer group as something that
probably didn't happen.
A photo however can come back to haunt you throughout your life and
has problem caused her immense grief amongst her peer group.
--
http://www.orderonlinepickupinstore.co.uk
Ah fetch it yourself if you can't wait for delivery
http://www.freedeliveryuk.co.uk
Or get it delivered for free
Svenne
<ric...@seasalter0.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>It strikes me as being just a drunken party prank that, had it happened five
>>years ago, wouldn't have got to the police because it wouldn't have been
>>filmed.
>And it strikes me as being the sort of sexual assault that is about
>power and humiliation, and that we should be taking a lot more seriously
>in this country. This guy believes it is OK to use a sexual assault to
>humiliate someone. I believe people like that need locking up.
I'm with Richard on this one.
That guy inflicted a sexual assault on a defenceless girl. It was
filmed in order to increase her humiliation and suffering.
Richard is right, he is a sex offender and deserves punishment.
It can be argued that the punishment prescribed by law for sexual
l assault is too harsh, but that is a different debate and should not
be conflated with him having committed an offense.
If anyone wants to start a separate debate about how sex offenders
should be dealt with, then that is fine, but whatever the law says
about what should be done with sex offenders, it does not alter that
fact that this person is a sex offender and should be prosecuted.
I believe a spell in jail would not be out of place.
Svenne
Michael C
>>against their will and doesn't even suffer as much as someone who has had
>>their eyebrows shaved off.
>
> You don't think having film of this circulated to all her peers will have
> a traumatic effect on this girl? That's just naive.
No, I don't think it will have a 'traumatic effect' on her at all. If a
teenager can't handle a bit of humiliation from a drunken party like this
then they are going to have an extremely hard life.
>>It strikes me as being just a drunken party prank that, had it happened
>>five
>>years ago, wouldn't have got to the police because it wouldn't have been
>>filmed.
>>
>
> And it strikes me as being the sort of sexual assault that is about power
> and humiliation, and that we should be taking a lot more seriously in this
> country. This guy believes it is OK to use a sexual assault to humiliate
> someone. I believe people like that need locking up.
Sexual assault? Power and humiliation? Are we talking about the same
incident here? You make it sound as if they undressed her, shoved
tootbrushes up her holes and then tied her to a lampost.
Nick
> On 9 Mar, 06:39, Svenne <tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 16:43:04 -0800 (PST), Ian
>>
>> <ian.gro...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> What ? You can't get in to Uni bcos you are on the SOR ?
>>> In Scotland, as I understand it, no. And quite right, too.
>> So some 19 year old on his way home from the pub late one night gets
>> caught short, nips down a dark, deserted alleyway, has a pee deep in
>> the shadows of a secluded corner and on turning round sees a couple of
>> coppers approaching him can never go to university and has a whole
>> range of occupations cut off for the rest of his life for being on the
>> SOR?
>
> The question of what should happen to people on the register is
> different from the question of who should go on it.
This is the most ridiculous statement I have seen for quite a while. We
don't have to consider what people have done before we decide upon the
punishment?
Ian
wrote:
> And it strikes me as being the sort of sexual assault that is about
> power and humiliation, and that we should be taking a lot more seriously
> in this country. This guy believes it is OK to use a sexual assault to
> humiliate someone. I believe people like that need locking up.
Well said, that man. There is an interesting amount of "young women
should be expected to take this sort of thing, it's only a bit of fun"
around here.
Ian
Ian
> A photo however can come back to haunt you throughout your life and
> has problem caused her immense grief amongst her peer group.
It also speaks of an intent to cause humiliation and distress rather
than a quick joke.
Ian
Michael C
No, it's a "young, drunken people should be expected to take this sort of
thing" attitude.
Ian
> Ian wrote:
> > The question of what should happen to people on the register is
> > different from the question of who should go on it.
>
> This is the most ridiculous statement I have seen for quite a while. We
> don't have to consider what people have done before we decide upon the
> punishment?
That's not what I wrote.
Ian
Ian
> No, it's a "young, drunken people should be expected to take this sort of
> thing" attitude.
What else should they be expected to take? Bit of slapping? Rape?
Ian
Nick
>> But then, a man who thinks it funny and appropriate to perform and
>> record a sexual assault on a young woman deserves what's coming to
>> him.
>
> I've been following the debate on this one back and forth. I have heard
> the arguments that a young man does not deserve to have his life ruined
> for a bit of horseplay. And the view I have come to is that this young
> man knew full well that what he was doing was seriously wrong. He was
> deliberately sexually humiliating this girl. He was deliberately having
> it recorded in order to publicise the humiliation. This is more than
> just morally dubious, it is criminal. He should be prosecuted, and he
> should be jailed for a short period.
>
> As to the SOR, I agree that it is not now a useful record of serious
> sexual offenders. But this guy believed that a sexual assault on a young
> woman was an OK way of acting. He specifically wanted other people to
> see what he had done to this girl. His wish should be granted. He should
> go on the register.
What punishment would you recommend for an assault. Say a, possibly
drunken, boy hits another boy in front of his friends, maybe causes a
minor injury like a bruise or fat lip, but less than ABH.
This crime seems to posses all the deliberately publicly humiliating
characteristics you mention and to my mind is worse than the above crime
due to actual physical damage and the implied threat of further
violence. If this happened between school children it would be largely
ignored. I'm not sure what would happen to a 19 year old, but I suspect
it would not be jail for a first offence.
Why do you think tea bagging is worse. I don't think there was any real
implied sexual threat which I could understand you treating more seriously.
Nick
the person who did write it.
Michael C
And how is rape anywhere near what actually happened? Going to the other
extreme it sounds like you think this girl would be humiliated by merely
being in the same room as a male.
Svenne
<ian.g...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> So some 19 year old on his way home from the pub late one night gets
>> caught short, nips down a dark, deserted alleyway, has a pee deep in
>> the shadows of a secluded corner and on turning round sees a couple of
>> coppers approaching him can never go to university and has a whole
>> range of occupations cut off for the rest of his life for being on the
>> SOR?
>The question of what should happen to people on the register is
>different from the question of who should go on it. I think a
>university would be perfectly right to refuse admission to someone
>with a track record of sexually assaulting your women at parties.
>Is there any case of someone behaving as you describe and finding
>himself on the list?
What I described happened to me exactly as related except for the fact
that it occurred in 1967, before there was such a thing as the SOR and
so I was not affected as described and went on to a successful career.
What upset me most at the time was not being nicked, or with being
charged with "committing a public nuisance." I did it and could have
taken it as a fair cop, what got me was what the police said. The
charge sheet read that I had "urinated in the street in full view of
passers by of both sexes." That was a pile of bollox. There was nobody
about for miles, except for me and the coppers. I had gone out of my
way to find somewhere dark, secluded and private. The police had seen
me go down the alleyway and had deliberatly followed.
I got off with a £5 fine and all was rapidly forgotten, but if the
same thing had happened in todays climate and under present laws I
think I would have ended up on the SOR and my life would have taken an
entirely different course all because of the urgent need to pee after
an end of term celebration.
Svenne
Svenne
wrote:
>"Ian" <ian.g...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
So you think it would be a jolly jape to have a pair of great, hairy
bollocks dangled all over your unconcious face and the film of it
shown to your friends posted on the internet?
Svenne
Michael C
news:lvd7t393lhnvilfpd...@4ax.com...
I certainly wouldn't call it traumatic.
Mike_B
<tvaer...@aol.com> writes
Actually I think there already is a picture like that out there
somewhere....
I think it sounds like exactly the sort of thing that teenagers do when
they get pissed to the point of unconsciousness at parties and that if
they don't want to be involved they should choose not to go to those
parties rather than try to force everyone at those parties to conform to
their own sensibilities.
--
Mike_B
Gaz
He seems to have fallen for the Harriot /Harman feminist agenda crap, not
that this wasnt a crime , and should be punished, but please, lets remember
perspective.
Gaz
Palindrome
of what took place. If not, I do wonder where some would draw the line -
if he had shoved his erect penis in her mouth, would that have been
"horseplay" too? After all, she would never have known, unless some
idiot filmed it..
Society does seem to have strange ideas about what is acceptable to do
to a drunk and unconscious person. Apply a bit of lipstick to the face?
What about permanent marker, instead? Pose with a suitably positioned
daffodil? What about a quick grope? What about sex? She might suspect
when she wakes up a bit sore in odd places, but, who cares?
What about a bit of human compassion and an attitude that unconscious
people should be protected and cared for, irrespective of how they got
into that state?
What unites most of them, however acceptable or unacceptable, is that
there is seldom enough evidence to prove brd who did what and under what
circumstances.
In this case, there is such evidence. Let those that have seen it make
the judgement on what it was.
--
Sue