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

squired · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:54

I don't recognise him from my time living in Guernsey last year thankfully.

This story reminded me of the doormen back at a nightclub I used to visit. One of them wore a shoe with a mirror attached. Did it for ages. It was an ongoing joke with them that no one ever said anything about it.

Posted from Overclockers.co.uk App for Android

Greebo · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:55

C.R.A.Z.Y said:
So you're trying to justify one immoral act with another
Of course its not o.k for papers to do it, however if the paper you read does this then maybe stop buying trashy 'newspapers'!

Point is shouldn't the photographer be charged with the same crime? And the newspaper too fol publishing it?

Dis86 · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:56

hurfdurf said:
On top of your sickening views towards consent you lack reading comprehension, google rape culture and try again.

I really do think you're a pathetic individual, as Mynight has said, comparing this to rape, you're doing the victims of rape an injustice. I dare you to go up to any rape victim and try to tell them that what they've gone through is remotely in the same league as this.

Can we expect you to be writing constant streams of angry letters to magazines and papers every time they publish an upskirt shot or a 'nip slip'?
Bet you don't because you're full of absolute crap.

hurfdurf · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:57

Tefal said:
sooo the newspapers have consent for all those crotch shot getting out of car pics of celebs?

or the photos taken on their hotel balcony/private beach with massive telescopic lens?

so the guy who took this?

snipppy

(ann hathaway vags in google

and the guys who published it in the national press dont get anything?

It is horrific what celebrities put up with in the name of defending free speech and public interest, reasonable expectations of privacy included.

Mynight · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:59

Actually I misread him. My point still stands but it's not a counter to hurfdurfs.

hurfdurf · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:59

Dis86 said:
I really do think you're a pathetic individual, as Mynight has said, comparing this to rape, you're doing the victims of rape an injustice. I dare you to go up to any rape victim and try to tell them that what they've gone through is remotely in the same league as this.

Can we expect you to be writing constant streams of angry letters to magazines and papers every time they publish an upskirt shot or a 'nip slip'?
Bet you don't because you're full of absolute crap.

Again, you have failed to comprehend what I wrote in my post, try again, google 'Rape Culture' and try a 3rd time. I will happily espouse my views on consent along side yours and lets see who comes out looking bad, me with my understanding of rape culture and you with your "how is this any different to taking a photo of someone on a beach?!"

hurfdurf · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:00

Mynight said:
Actually I misread him. My point still stands but it's not a counter to hurfdurfs.

Well done for admitting it and congrats on your reading comprehension, it takes a lot to admit you were wrong on a forum and come back to post as much, its a shame Dis86 cannot learn from you.

Dis86 · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:01

hurfdurf said:
Again, you have failed to comprehend what I wrote in my post, try again, google 'Rape Culture' and try a 3rd time. I will happily espouse my views on consent along side yours and lets see who comes out looking bad, me with my understanding of rape culture and you with your "how is this any different to taking a photo of someone on a beach?!"

Right just to shut you up

"Rape culture is a term that was coined by feminists in the United States in the 1970's. It was designed to show the ways in which society blamed victims of sexual assault and normalized male sexual violence."

Where is the sexual assault?

Where is the sexual violence?

Where is the blaming of the victims?

Nowhere. Like I said, you're speaking crap.

Dis86 · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:01

So let's see you man up and admit you were wrong.

Oh and from Wikipedia for you...

"In feminist theory, rape culture is a setting in which rape is pervasive and normalized due to societal attitudes about gender and sexuality."

So again, no rape ergo no rape culture.

Mynight · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:04

hurfdurf said:
Well done for admitting it and congrats on your reading comprehension, it takes a lot to admit you were wrong on a forum and come back to post as much, its a shame Dis86 cannot learn from you.

Wow that was condescending

.

hurfdurf · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:04

Dis86 said:
Right just to shut you up

"Rape culture is a term that was coined by feminists in the United States in the 1970's. It was designed to show the ways in which society blamed victims of sexual assault and normalized male sexual violence."

Where is the sexual assault?

Where is the sexual violence?

Where is the blaming of the victims?

Nowhere. Like I said, you're speaking crap.

You need to do a bit more reading on the subject

You need to correct your disgusting views on consent

You need to understand that not all sexual attacks are physical

You are dismissing the victims you horrible person

You couldn't shut me up if you tried

Tefal · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:04

C.R.A.Z.Y said:
So you're trying to justify one immoral act with another
Of course its not o.k for papers to do it, however if the paper you read does this then maybe stop buying trashy 'newspapers'!

so why arent they in prison.

its kinda how our legal system works, everyone gets the same treatment or they should.

Tefal · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:07

this is you isnt it hurf?

C.R.A.Z.Y · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:07

Dis86 said:
Right just to shut you up

"Rape culture is a term that was coined by feminists in the United States in the 1970's. It was designed to show the ways in which society blamed victims of sexual assault and normalized male sexual violence."

Where is the sexual assault?

Where is the sexual violence?

Where is the blaming of the victims?

Nowhere. Like I said, you're speaking crap.

Taking up-skirt photos without consent IS a sexual violation and a form of mild sexual assault! Whats hard to understand about that!!

Dis86 · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:08

hurfdurf said:
You need to do a bit more reading on the subject

You need to correct your disgusting views on consent

You need to understand that not all sexual attacks are physical

You are dismissing the victims you horrible person

You couldn't shut me up if you tried

I have just given you the dictionary definition and you're arguing against that! Brilliant.

You need to correct your disgusting sense of inappropriate self-righteousness.

You need to understand the meaning of phrases you use and not apply them to a greater topic to which they do not apply.

You are dismissing the point that I am making.

You couldn't shut up if you tried.

Dis86 · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:17

C.R.A.Z.Y said:
Taking up-skirt photos without consent IS a sexual violation and a form of mild sexual assault! Whats hard to understand about that!!

So it's 'mild' sexual assault now?

No, what it is is an invasion of privacy to the individuals concerned. Assault is harmful contact - these individuals didn't even know about it. The perpetrator likely gained sexual gratification from it, that's true, but what if he didn't?

Look at it this way using the bikini example I gave before which I chose because every woman in the case concerned was wearing substantially more than that. Most people wouldn't even consider when they're putting on beachwear/bathing costumes that there may be people around who find that sexually arousing. So you or I look at them and it's fine, however someone takes a sexual interest in that and they're now a victim. To them nothing has changed. There is no impact on them at all. They simply do not know it's happened.

This could go for anything, say the chap has a shoe fetish and takes pics of women wearing heels or something. Or a handbag fetish? Are these women victims too?
There has to be a line where we realise that yes, someone has a sexual problem but to jail them when they don't cause harm is nonsensical.

Mynight · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:21

Assault in this context can be harassment as well. Doesn't have to be physical or violent.

Must admit I've had a quick browse of the sexual offences act and I'm struggling to pin what it's breaching. I'd have thought it would be voyeurism but it seems that's defined as witnessing a private "act". The child ones clearly are illegal but I'm unsure on the adult version.

Im just missing it somewhere in there.

I didn't actually know it was illegal to have sex in a public toilet. Just figured it was frowned upon.

Werewolf · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:23

insane200 said:
You still can't buy or sell tho

Very odd, did he have a shoe camera or was he very short, having to bend down each time to get a shot must be fairly noticeable .

Going back a few years in a case in Japan a guy had modified a web cam or similar and hidden it in the toe of a smart/business shoe connected via a cable that ran up his leg to the device that stored the pictures.

These days with the modern camera modules used in drones, mobile phones and even wireless security/spy cameras it would be very easy and cheap to do.

Dis86 said:
Take a picture of a woman in a bikini - nothing.
Take a picture of a woman in underwear she's inadvertently showing - prison.

WTF?!

Keep in mind that most of these people with have no idea it's happened. Therefore can there be significant harm done by it? What we don't know can't hurt us after all.

Granted, the kids bit is seriously off.

Someone wearing a bikini or swimsuit in public has pretty much no expectation of privacy and will have chosen the outfit to be one they don't mind being seen in public in (however if you continue to take pictures after they've asked you to stop you're probably a creep).
Also most bikinis etc tend to be made of a thicker material and tighter weave than many forms of underwear, specifically because they are effectively outerwear.

What someone wears under their outer clothing is normally expected to remain their own business and won't have been chosen to be something you don't mind some random pervert seeing.
They have not consented in any way shape or form for someone to be "sneaking a peak" let alone taking covert photos and/or video.

This completely ignores the age aspect of some of his victims which would make it far more serious.

C.R.A.Z.Y · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:24

So provided you don't know a crime has been committed it's no longer a crime?? lawl

Also the whole bikini thing is silly, I'm guessing you don't know that some girls don't always wear underwear but I guess now you're going to say it's their fault now that some creepy perv now has a picture of their fanny!! Serves them right for not wearing underwear hey :rolleyes:

Dis86 · 18 Dec 2015 at 22:31

C.R.A.Z.Y said:
So provided you don't know a crime has been committed it's no longer a crime?? lawl

Also the whole bikini thing is silly, I'm guessing you don't know that some girls don't always wear underwear but I guess now you're going to say it's their fault now that some creepy perv now has a picture of their fanny!! Serves them right for not wearing underwear hey

Think about it. What changes to a person between you or I looking at them in a completely none sexual manner and someone looking at them in a sexual manner? Nothing. Not a thing. They have no clue of the thoughts going through that persons head. It makes not one iota of difference to them.

Put it another way, I'm sure at some point you've checked out a womans cleavage or (mans) bum and found it attractive. Have you just committed a crime? This seems to be saying that putting a sexual motive behind something that can be done without a sexual motive suddenly makes it worthy of a prison sentence.

I also understand that some women don't wear underwear. I'd say in my head not wearing underwear and wearing a skirt I could understand there's a pretty high probability of someone seeing some chuff. Ergo I wouldn't do it. But then I wouldn't wear a skirt either as I work in a building with a lot of staircases and can appreciate someone might get an eyeful of something.