A man took up skirts pictures of a minimum of 630 women and school girls

Status
Not open for further replies.
Caporegime
Joined
27 Nov 2005
Posts
25,493
Location
Guernsey
Last edited:
Minimum of 630? So someone went through each picture and tallied a total of at least 630 individual.. erm... foofs.

That's a very weird job, how to you even phrase that on a CV?
 
Without this sounding very odd, it's strange where the line is drawn when it comes to taking photos.

If you're on a beach and girls in bikinis are running around you can take photos, or a night out and barely clothed girls are drinking you can take photos. Where do they really draw the line?

Obviously the age issue is terrible, I'd go mental if someone did this as my daughter grows up, but had his victims been all over 18 would it have been so harsh a punishment?
 
Minimum of 630? So someone went through each picture and tallied a total of at least 630 individual.. erm... foofs.

That's a very weird job, how to you even phrase that on a CV?
They wrote it was a minimum of 630 women and school girls
But when reading it sounds more like 630 photo's ..:confused:
 
The Magistrate’s Court heard how the offences were committed at Clinton Cards, Boots the Chemist, Marks & Spencer, The Lexicon and Fat Face.

this isn't any pervert, this is an M&S pervert.
 
They say it was a minimum of 630 women and school girls

But when reading it sounds more like 630 photo's ..:confused:

i belive its more than 600 photos/videos and from them they identified at least 630 unique individuals but there may be duplicates etc beyond that.
 
Jailed for 17 months(I bet he be Out in half that time) That just doesn't seem long enough..:(

Why? In the grand scheme of things, and relative to other offences, why should he get years in prison? I mean, for something like gbh the min term is community service.

Why should taking suggestive photos of clothed women and girls be punished more severely?
 
I believe these are known as creep shots on 4 chan. This guy is just a drop in the ocean of people that do this.
 
It's a very disturbing, odd and creepy thing for someone to do, I wonder if he'll be put on something like a sex offenders register given the nature of the crime.
 
Minimum of 630? So someone went through each picture and tallied a total of at least 630 individual.. erm... foofs.

That's a very weird job, how to you even phrase that on a CV?

I don't get why they didn't finish the job? It sounds like someone got as far as 630 and gave up counting.
 
What i don't get if he had an ‘Addiction’ to female underwear, why did he run the risk of getting caught taking photos when there's literally millions of photos of women of all ages in underwear?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom