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

Dis86 · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:03

hurfdurf said:
We have a poster who completely normalised non consensual male sexual behaviour who is now trying to defend himself by claiming that simply because a penis wasn't inserted into someone that that some how makes it ok.

No. I'm asking how taking photos of fully clothed individuals is the same. You claimed I was defending rape. Now stop talking utter crap and answer the question.

Neil79 · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:04

17th Months :eek:

I think he was used a scapegoat, give him a suspended sentence and a huge slap on the wrist and put people who do actually do harm behind bars :rolleyes:

Pawnless Endgame · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:04

"up skirts"? ... last time I saw that phrase was back in 1999 / early 2000s via banner ads and pop-ups. Definitely confined to Web 1.0!

AHarvey said:
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?

Agreed with you on the age thing. To be done on minors should be about 3 years in jail. To be done on 18+ though should prolly be community service.

Greebo · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:19

Tunney said:
Title of thread makes it sound like the OP did this.

Hence my first post

Greebo · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:24

Hold on article says he got 16 months plus a one month for each picture? Surely that means he got 646 months in jail?

Tefal · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:26

Greebo said:
Hold on article says he got 16 months plus a one month for each picture? Surely that means he got 646 months in jail?

we run sentences concurrently, not consecutively

so 16 months + 646 concurrent 1 month sentences (which equals 1 month)

chaparral · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:28

Edit: Tefal explained it above..

Monkeh · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:29

I hear in Japan mobile phones have the shutter sound permanently on, even when the phone is in silent mode for exactly this reason, its such a huge problem out there.

Greebo · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:30

Tefal said:
we run sentences concurrently, not consecutively

so 16 months + 646 concurrent 1 month sentences (which equals 1 month)

Newspaper article says consecutively :confused:

Grandmaster Fap! · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:31

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?

+10000000

But then again Murdoch has everyone in his grubby little notebook so the press get a free pass :rolleyes:

Tefal · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:33

Greebo said:
Newspaper article says consecutively

it says one month for eah picture concurrent to run consecutivly with the 16 mothn sentence.

so 16 + 600 concurrent 1 months

gEd · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:35

chaparral said:
‘The quantity of videos and photos you have taken is astonishing.(

I initially read that as ‘The quality of videos and photos you have taken is astonishing.

which thought was a bit a of an odd judgement to make...

C.R.A.Z.Y · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:42

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.

That's a ridiculous comparison! When someone goes to the beech they have decided what they are comfortable wearing and what they are happy with revealing in public. Now contrast that with some creep sneaking up in stealth mode and snapping a photo UP a girls skirt!! Disgusting violation of another human being and creepy as hell!

Tefal · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:43

C.R.A.Z.Y said:
That's a ridiculous comparison! When someone goes to the beech they have decided what they are comfortable wearing and what they are happy with revealing in public. Now contrast that with some creep sneaking up in stealth mode and snapping a photo UP a girls skirt!! Disgusting violation of another human being and creepy as hell!

and when they're getting out of a car and the news papers take pictures up their skirts as they're getting out then publish it in millions of printed copies and put it on-line for thr whole world to see?

that's fine?

Dis86 · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:45

Tefal said:
and when they're getting out of a car and the news papers take pictures up their skirts as they're getting out then publish it in millions of printed copies and put it on-line for thr whole world to see?

that's fine?

Exactly. You've been spot on throughout the thread. It just stinks of ridiculous double standards.

AndrewNR · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:46

Tosno said:
If it was a female doing it it wouldn't be 17 days

Nah, she'd blame [insert male figure] and they'd get 17 months.

Mynight · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:49

It's disgusting but to put it in the same league as rape is rather disingenuous. It's violating someone's right to privacy but it's not rape. Don't sully what the poor victims have been through to such a degree.

I must admit I'm always surprised newspapers can get away with some things they do. I fail to see how it's in the publics interest to see a celebrity nip or otherwise.

C.R.A.Z.Y · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:50

Tefal said:
and when they're getting out of a car and the news papers take pictures up their skirts as they're getting out then publish it in millions of printed copies and put it on-line for thr whole world to see?

that's fine?

So you're trying to justify one immoral act with another :confused:

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'!

hurfdurf · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:53

Dis86 said:
No. I'm asking how taking photos of fully clothed individuals is the same. You claimed I was defending rape. Now stop talking utter crap and answer the question.

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

Dis86 · 18 Dec 2015 at 21:54

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'!

Immoral yes. Illegal to the degree it warrants a prison sentence...not so sure.

Just keep in mind the things you can do and not go to prison. Yet this? Had it not come to trial I bet 99.9% of the victims would have been completely unaware.