Guy touches girls arm, faces 10 years for sexual assault

ohnonotgmail

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

If you had the emotional intelligience of an adult woman, you would understand that I'm trying to explain to you that touching a woman's/man's arm or waist cannot be classed as sexual assault as it is within the range of normal tactile touch.



How about a touchy feely woman who is attracted to women? Would that be sexual assault as there could be a sexual element?

it is with people you know. not with randomers staring into a bush.

LillySV

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it is with people you know. not with randomers staring into a bush.

I’d love to be touched by a female staring into a bush haha

RandomName2

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

By the way - the girl didn't 'destroy this lads life' - she made a complaint - the police investigated - he was charged, tried and convicted. I suspect that if this had been a rape case and the guy had got off the same self-righteous indignants would be defending the justice system for getting a guy falsely accused of rape acquitted.

It would be interesting to see if it's possible for someone to get convicted for murder for threatening to burst someone's face.

Outlaw Pete

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

Oh - you mean that you should be nice to someone when you are talking to them - that is definitely a new one. :rolleyes:

The point was the young guys today are bombarded with rules of how they should interact with girls, what not to say, how to say say, and with that you see the consequences in society of not doing just that, which is generally being labelled a creep ......... and all this is generally something girls don't have to deal with. There are no pressures on girls with regards to them having to careful about how they approach guys they like, as let's face it, young girls are not going to be called creepy for being awkward around boys.

Boggles wrote: »

Just to point out again, the shyness was his defense, his sole excuse for touching young girls. There is absolutely no evidence to back up his claim.

Didn't he Google "how to make a friend" or something similar?

El_Duderino 09

RandomName2 wrote: »

It would be interesting to see if it's possible for someone to get convicted for murder for threatening to burst someone's face.

I don't think that would be interested at all as the answer would obviously be no.

I imagine you see an insightful analogy in there somewhere.

Boggles

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

It is not clear in any shape or form. the only 'evidence' is a few chat logs and chinese whispers of other 'incidents'.

I had reported the previous incident to the police to days before hand as it had been going around that other incidents had occurred and I thought I could give more evidence, and then it happened again. It came up on a local Facebook group chat

No lad, the police were aware that some díckhead was going around touching multiple young girls.

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

Grand, if you think a man touching a woman's arm or waist is sexual assault, then that's your opinion

It's not my opinion.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Didn't he Google "how to make a friend" or something similar?

No, he claims he did.

He didn't seem to offer the website he found that told him stalking and touching young girls was a great way to make friends.

I think the prosecutor pretty much nailed his BS.

"What rational person looks up: 'how to make a friend'? Even if the defendant is advancing he was just seeking to make a friend he waits in two areas that are isolated on her route home, he touches her.

“An attempt to make a friendship with anyone surely starts with a hello or a wave.”

blueshade

Boggles wrote: »

No lad, the police were aware that some díckhead was going around touching multiple young girls.



It's not my opinion.



No, he claims he did.

He didn't seem to offer the website he found that told him stalking and touching young girls was a great way to make friends.

I think the prosecutor pretty much nailed his BS.

That's actually a lot of nonsense. Take a look at the posturing of politicians on a global scale. Every gesture they make from holding a person's hand with both of their hands in order to seem more sincere to holding random babies to appear more family friendly. There's a difference between being tactile and touching someone's arm or waist and sticking your hand between their legs. It doesn't matter that she ''thought'' he'd touch her breast, he didn't. She's obviously either extremely naive or just plain manipulative. Taking this to court was a political stunt. The CPS have been too quick to do this with many cases which have blown up in their faces.

ohnonotgmail

blueshade wrote: »

That's actually a lot of nonsense. Take a look at the posturing of politicians on a global scale. Every gesture they make from holding a person's hand with both of their hands in order to seem more sincere to holding random babies to appear more family friendly. There's a difference between being tactile and touching someone's arm or waist and sticking your hand between their legs. It doesn't matter that she ''thought'' he'd touch her breast, he didn't. She's obviously either extremely naive or just plain manipulative. Taking this to court was a political stunt. The CPS have been too quick to do this with many cases which have blown up in their faces.

Nice bit of victim blaming. good man. Ignore what actually happened and just **** on the woman involved. Incels united.

blueshade

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Nice bit of victim blaming. good man. Ignore what actually happened and just **** on the woman involved. Incels united.

There was no victim, that's the part you seem to be missing.

blueshade

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

This was an actual psychologist who works with criminals. So maybe it was armchair psychology by a professional psychologist. And maybe it was perfectly innocent behaviour masquerading as stalking. And maybe the escalation to touching was a complete coincidence.

Or maybe it is what it looks like. CPs Thought it was worth pursuing. The magistrate agreed. Now you’re setting yourself up as an expert against the psychologist and the magistrate. That's brave at the very least and unless you have some credentials, probably foolish.

Yeah, sure it was. :rolleyes:

Boggles

blueshade wrote: »

There was no victim, that's the part you seem to be missing.

What?

There is a victim and a perpetrator who now has a conviction.

What part of that is confusing you?

ohnonotgmail

blueshade wrote: »

There was no victim, that's the part you seem to be missing.

In your opinion. Which isnt based on the facts of the case.

El_Duderino 09

blueshade wrote: »

That's actually a lot of nonsense. Take a look at the posturing of politicians on a global scale. Every gesture they make from holding a person's hand with both of their hands in order to seem more sincere to holding random babies to appear more family friendly. There's a difference between being tactile and touching someone's arm or waist and sticking your hand between their legs. It doesn't matter that she ''thought'' he'd touch her breast, he didn't. She's obviously either extremely naive or just plain manipulative. Taking this to court was a political stunt. The CPS have been too quick to do this with many cases which have blown up in their faces.

How has it blown up in their faces if they secured the prosecution. If the case was thrown out and deemed frivolous then it would have blown up in their faces. But it wasn’t, so it hasn’t.

blueshade

Boggles wrote: »

Just to point out again, the shyness was his defense, his sole excuse for touching young girls. There is absolutely no evidence to back up his claim.

He had friends, a job and has since gone on to college.

And it would appear from the court report that he tried it on with multiple girls.

That doesn't sound like a very shy individual to me.

Shy people know the difference between right and wrong, it isn't a mental disability.

She screamed at him to stop the first time, he came back and did it again.

His defense was BS IMO.

I think you need to read the article again. She did not scream at him, she says she told him to stop. As for the part where she claims to have struggled to cope for several months afterwards, sorry but that's absolute horse manure designed to cover her arse for not being good enough to get into Oxford. Jesus wept, people are very naive. Unless the girl suffers from Aspergers or Autism there isn't a chance in hell that she was as affected as she claimed she was.

Reviews and Books Galore

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The point was the young guys today are bombarded with rules of how they should interact with girls, what not to say, how to say say, and with that you see the consequences in society of not doing just that, which is generally being labelled a creep ......... and all this is generally something girls don't have to deal with. There are no pressures on girls with regards to them having to careful about how they approach guys they like, as let's face it, young girls are not going to be called creepy for being awkward around boys.



Didn't he Google "how to make a friend" or something similar?

You know, on a sociological level I feel like this gives women a lot of power in interpersonal relationships as tactile touch is quite important for creating relationships with people.



So, instead of a man touch being seen in the dynamic of protection or threat, female touch can be comforting, nurturing, and many other different uses.



An obvious example would be flirtation where a woman can seduce a man by giveing a lingering touch on the arm, or hand, but men do not really have that option.



Just interesting.

Reviews and Books Galore

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Nice bit of victim blaming. good man. Ignore what actually happened and just **** on the woman involved. Incels united.

So you're critique of a man is basing his worth on how often he gets laid? Not sure it's victim blaming either as he never blamed her for what happened tbh.

ohnonotgmail

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

So you're critique of a man is basing his worth on how often he gets laid? Not sure it's victim blaming either as he never blamed her for what happened tbh.

I'm going to have to call bull**** on that. The poster doesnt even think they were a victim.

She's obviously either extremely naive or just plain manipulative.

She is being blamed for this being brought to court. Nothing to did with the perpetrator. It is all the fault of the girl that he was convicted.

ohnonotgmail

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

You know, on a sociological level I feel like this gives women a lot of power in interpersonal relationships as tactile touch is quite important for creating relationships with people.



So, instead of a man touch being seen in the dynamic of protection or threat, female touch can be comforting, nurturing, and many other different uses.



An obvious example would be flirtation where a woman can seduce a man by giveing a lingering touch on the arm, or hand, but men do not really have that option.



Just interesting.

Or, you know, just dont go up to people you dont know and start touching them. Especially do not do it again after being told no the first time.

Boggles

blueshade wrote: »

I think you need to read the article again. She did not scream at him, she says she told him to stop. As for the part where she claims to have struggled to cope for several months afterwards, sorry but that's absolute horse manure designed to cover her arse for not being good enough to get into Oxford. Jesus wept, people are very naive. Unless the girl suffers from Aspergers or Autism there isn't a chance in hell that she was as affected as she claimed she was.

So you think at the moment she was being touch by this creepy young man she formulated a plan and used it to hamper her own academic future?

Logic wouldn't be one of your go to tools when accessing a situation, would it?

El_Duderino 09

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Or, you know, just dont go up to people you dont know and start touching them. Especially do not do it again after being told no the first time.

This is why I suspect the guy was reading pick up artist stuff. They probably talk about touching being important to rapport. If the guy doesn’t get social interactions then there’s a great chance he was just doing what he read about and it backfired.

NUTLEY BOY

Boggles wrote: »

I don't know what reviewed means.

I imagine the appeal court would agree that young male adults should not be touching school girls for self gratification.

Or what specific point of law do you think the Judge erred on?

Reviewed means that the matter is put before a judge of the Crown Court by way of an appeal hearing.

Right of appeal to the Crown Court is automatic if notice is filed within a specified time period i.e. no application required for an order to make an appeal.
It is always dangerous to "imagine" what an appeal court might decide !
The conviction could be overturned.
Even if conviction is upheld sentence could be reduced.

Ironicname

Boggles wrote:

There is a victim and a perpetrator who now has a conviction.

Just to extrapolate your position a little further, do you by this reasoning accept there was no victim in the NI rugby rape case?

Sittingpretty

Victim? Victim of what? Feeling uncomfortable?

Sure he sounds odd, but she appears hysterical. Two common traits of teens. Don’t think either one of them deserved to come out of an awkward encounter with an actual conviction though. Smacks of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

What an insult to actual sexual assault victims that this boy has been convicted of sexual assault for touching a girl on her arm twice.

We are hell bent on round pegging into square hole women into the role of victimhood.

Reviews and Books Galore

Sittingpretty wrote: »

Victim? Victim of what? Feeling uncomfortable?

Sure he sounds odd, but she appears hysterical. Two common traits of teens. Don’t think either one of them deserved to come out of an awkward encounter with an actual conviction though. Smacks of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

What an insult to actual sexual assault victims that this boy has been convicted of sexual assault for touching a girl on her arm twice.

We are hell bent on round pegging into square hole women into the role of victimhood.

I think that sums up why I can have a negative opinoin of her but not actually view anything she did as wrong.



Yes, the report is very leading, manipulative and there is links to the Oxford thing (mentioned as often as the thruama), but she's a teenage girl and it really is par for the course imo.

ohnonotgmail

Sittingpretty wrote: »

Victim? Victim of what? Feeling uncomfortable?

Sure he sounds odd, but she appears hysterical. Two common traits of teens. Don’t think either one of them deserved to come out of an awkward encounter with an actual conviction though. Smacks of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

What an insult to actual sexual assault victims that this boy has been convicted of sexual assault for touching a girl on her arm twice.

We are hell bent on round pegging into square hole women into the role of victimhood.

so it is commen for men to stand facing a hedge, turn around when a girl walks by, touch her while saying nothing, then run away when she tells them to go away? And then come back later and do the same thing? you think that is common? maybe we had different upbringings.

Sittingpretty

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so it is commen for men to stand facing a hedge, turn around when a girl walks by, touch her while saying nothing, then run away when she tells them to go away? And then come back later and do the same thing? you think that is common? maybe we had different upbringings.

No I said being hysterical and odd were common traits amongst teens.

My upbringing is not up for discussion here, please don’t alude to it again.

ohnonotgmail

Sittingpretty wrote: »

No I said being hysterical and odd were common traits amongst teens.

when in doubt describe women as hysterical. they should just accept whatever men want to do with them.

Sittingpretty wrote: »

My upbringing is not up for discussion here, please don’t alude to it again.

spare me the junior modding.

Reviews and Books Galore

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so it is commen for men to stand facing a hedge, turn around when a girl walks by, touch her while saying nothing, then run away when she tells them to go away? And then come back later and do the same thing? you think that is common?maybe we had different upbringings.

What's wrong with staring into a hedge? It's strange how it's being potrayed as a negative/scary mannerism.



I'm not entirely sure what men are meant to do to not be percieved as non threatening. Stoicly stare off into the distance?

Reviews and Books Galore

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

when in doubt describe women as hysterical. they should just accept whatever men want to do with them.



spare me the junior modding.

I won't



The fact that you are alluding to the poster's upbringing is quite rude imo.

ohnonotgmail

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

What's wrong with staring into a hedge? It's strange how it's being potrayed as a negative/scary mannerism.

Combined with what he did next it is very odd behaviour. I dont remember ever staring into a hedge in my life. Perhaps you find it a more fulfilling hobby than i would.

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure what men are meant to do to not be percieved as non threatening. Stoicly stare off into the distance?

What happened to saying hello to somebody before trying to grab them? is that old-fashioned now? Whatever happened to ****ing off when asked to do and not repeating the same actions that led to said ****ing off?