• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Sign in to follow this  
ccc

Extremely strange story...

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, null; said:

Yes, it is - but was that sexual harassment in the eyes of the law? It wasn't in a place of work.

I'm not sure of the law but I'd imagine that if this bloke had continued to harass women in public despite repeated warnings to bugger off then that would probably constitute a crime.

I think this guy was probably a bit more 'hands on' and pushy than has been mentioned in any articles though that's only my personal opinion on it.

Edited by Sgt Hartman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sgt Hartman said:

I'm not sure of the law but I'd imagine that if this bloke had continued to harass women in public despite repeated warnings to bugger off then that would probably constitute a crime.

I think this guy us probably a bit more 'hands on' and pushy than has been mentioned in any articles though that's only my personal opinion on it.

From my very limited research, if it happens outside o work then it’s “street harassment “. Not against the law. Sexual harassment appears to be a workplace thing. 

Wonder what exactly he did? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sgt Hartman said:

To be honest, I'm wondering if there is a bit more to it that hasn't been mentioned. The guy is obviously a weapons grade creep so I wouldn't put it past him.

 

At a brief glance this guy seems particularly callous and misogynistic in his PUA-ness.  At least a lot of the American guys who do this have some genuine charm and sense of fun about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, One percent said:

From my very limited research, if it happens outside o work then it’s “street harassment “. Not against the law. Sexual harassment appears to be a workplace thing. 

Wonder what exactly he did? 

One report said he is due in Court on Monday so they must have charged him with something.

The police said:

" “This type of predatory behaviour is shameful and unacceptable and will undoubtedly cause significant fear and alarm. No-one should be subjected to this. "

Ok, I agree - but the police are not there to tell us what is moral or acceptable, just to enforce the law.

The BiB - 'fear and alarm', I suspect they have charged him with breach of the peace. It's a nice vague and subjective law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of a X-Mas kiss competition me and me mate had many moons ago in our twenties. No small talk, no asking names, and no definitely no complements, just look for the fit ones and straight in and ask. Over the night we lost count of kisses, must have been in the fifties.

Now IF women can be, or want to be, classed as a homogeneous group then by fuck we harassed the hell out of that group. However on an individual level no one was asked twice, simply weren't spending that amount of effort, there was a game to win.

No, in every pub/club we went into the pattern was the same, regular rejection followed by a slow response then pretty much a queue after that.

Now, it seems to me women want to be a victim of transgressions against the group but have the benefits of individuality, all when it suits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, One percent said:

Ah good point. Does it have to be n a place of work?  

Trots off to find out 

Harassment of any sort can be a crime. A unacceptable act has to be repeated before it can be considered harassment.

Edited by Happy Renting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ccc said:

So what's the angle here then ? Arrested and now charged for simply putting pick up videos online ? :o

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-46843880

Been charged - but wait - no name ?

Been charged - but wait - no detail of actual charge ?

Something being kept from the public here. There is the usual "type" of person possibility but I'm not sure in this case. 

Bizarre.  

I am reminded of a company formed around the time of the South Sea Bubble 'for carrying-on an undertaking of great advantage but no-one to know what it is'. We all know how that ended.

Edited by Panther

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 12/01/2019 at 07:37, Sgt Hartman said:

Bloke sounds like a sex-pest and a massive twat to be honest. 

Anyone who calls themself a 'life coach' or a 'pick up artist' should be slung in jail on general principal IMO.

There was a guy in the States who did this full time as well from what I remember, may have written a book? 

It's a bit sad really.

Is this a serious post Sgt?

I think there's a laughable amount of White Knighting going on in this thread. 
This cad's main crime seems to be that he's managing to get laid while not being handsome and/ or charming.
His targets could easily tell him to fck off but some proportion are buying his line for some reason.
These are his natural prey, just as beta simps are the natural prey of his female equivalent.
Difference is that the latter never get called-out on their manipulations while cads get horse-whipped.
Because Gynocracy.

VwGT1Ow.jpg

Edited by Turned Out Nice Again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Turned Out Nice Again said:

 

Is this a serious post Sgt?

I think there's a laughable amount of White Knighting going on in this thread. 
This cad's main crime seems to be that he's managing to get laid while not being handsome and/ or charming.
His targets could easily tell him to fck off but some proportion are buying his line for some reason.
These are his natural prey, just as beta simps are the natural prey of his female equivalent.
Difference is that the latter never get called-out on their manipulations while cads get horse-whipped.
Because Gynocracy.

VwGT1Ow.jpg

Pretty much.

Sorry, but I don't think much of blokes who make it their business to go around getting into people's faces trying to get laid when they are walking around in public then sticking it on social media for kudos. It's simple bad manners.

Being handsome doesn't have much to do with it as I'd probably get a couple of gullibles into bed with me if I told them I had a million quid or a Ferrari and I'm no Brad Pitt. I'd imagine our lothario is probably very talented in the art of talking horseshit.

There is the matter of context, if he was pulling this off in some provincial club somewhere then it might be more forgivable - though I think if he had been this much of a pain in a club he'd probably have been slung out by the bouncers. Going up to women minding their own business in the street just isn't really on, especially - and as I personally think - if the guy didn't just leave it at 'hi, can I have your number' or whatever 'A-game' pick up line he used.

I've got an acquaintance who crosses the line when it comes to this sort of stuff. We've been out and he's tried to chat up a girl who made it clear she wasn't interested. Instead of taking his knocks he'd persist and persist until it became genuinely uncomfortable for anyone in the vicinity. We've had to have words about it before and I won't introduce him to any female friends of mine as a result. He's the sort of guy that would think this bloke is a legend.

By all means play the game, but don't be a dick.

This man is a dick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Sgt Hartman said:

Pretty much.

Sorry, but I don't think much of blokes who make it their business to go around getting into people's faces trying to get laid when they are walking around in public then sticking it on social media for kudos. It's simple bad manners.

Being handsome doesn't have much to do with it as I'd probably get a couple of gullibles into bed with me if I told them I had a million quid or a Ferrari and I'm no Brad Pitt. I'd imagine our lothario is probably very talented in the art of talking horseshit.

There is the matter of context, if he was pulling this off in some provincial club somewhere then it might be more forgivable - though I think if he had been this much of a pain in a club he'd probably have been slung out by the bouncers. Going up to women minding their own business in the street just isn't really on, especially - and as I personally think - if the guy didn't just leave it at 'hi, can I have your number' or whatever 'A-game' pick up line he used.

I've got an acquaintance who crosses the line when it comes to this sort of stuff. We've been out and he's tried to chat up a girl who made it clear she wasn't interested. Instead of taking his knocks he'd persist and persist until it became genuinely uncomfortable for anyone in the vicinity. We've had to have words about it before and I won't introduce him to any female friends of mine as a result. He's the sort of guy that would think this bloke is a legend.

By all means play the game, but don't be a dick.

This man is a dick.

The day 'being a dick' results in no pussy, I am with you.  However, whilst some women continue to reward dicks, I cannot criticise.  

 

I've told you before the story of a female friend of mine in London who was fumbling for her keys after a night at the pub when from behind a strange voice said 'fancy a shag'.  He'd seen her in the pub, not spoken to her, and followed her home.

She fucked him in her flat that night, because she was drunk and horny.

 

Now, the exact same technique was tried upon another female friend of mine in Sydney and she hit him in the face with her keys.  

 

The day that option 2 is universally adopted, being a dick is going to disappear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, wherebee said:

The day 'being a dick' results in no pussy, I am with you.  However, whilst some women continue to reward dicks, I cannot criticise.  

 

I've told you before the story of a female friend of mine in London who was fumbling for her keys after a night at the pub when from behind a strange voice said 'fancy a shag'.  He'd seen her in the pub, not spoken to her, and followed her home.

She fucked him in her flat that night, because she was drunk and horny.

 

Now, the exact same technique was tried upon another female friend of mine in Sydney and she hit him in the face with her keys.  

 

The day that option 2 is universally adopted, being a dick is going to disappear.

Can't really disagree with that.

It's a bit like blokes who drive around shouting 'get your tits out!' at women on the pavement. 

Maybe one out of a hundred times they might be rewarded with a flash of boob and because of that, they'll keep behaving like arseholes whereas 'fuck off wanker!' would potentially have saved another hundred people being shouted at in the street.

It's an unfixable problem, all we can do, male and female, is try our best not to be arseholes in the first place.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/01/2019 at 17:23, GARCH said:

At a brief glance this guy seems particularly callous and misogynistic in his PUA-ness.  At least a lot of the American guys who do this have some genuine charm and sense of fun about them.

PUA started off pretty harmless. Gave a load of desperado's hope. However with online dating apps basically eliminating people meeting up in night venues and creating peak hypergamy where women just share the few top tier guys PUA has morphed into this very aggressive misogynist day game all women are sluts type thing. I imagine anyone still involved in PUA is quite a disturbed individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Turned Out Nice Again said:

The 4-times rule - discovered after noting the inexplicable success of a parody "dick" character this coach created who "just wouldn't give up".

 

TBH, in his parlance, he's just a wannabe chad/PUA who's actually punching below his weight because despite all the talk about 'game' he's got piss weak chat/wit and reeks of I'm looking for no strings sex. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/01/2019 at 06:00, ccc said:

So what's the angle here then ? Arrested and now charged for simply putting pick up videos online ? :o

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-46843880

Been charged - but wait - no name ?

Been charged - but wait - no detail of actual charge ?

Something being kept from the public here. There is the usual "type" of person possibility but I'm not sure in this case. 

Bizarre. 

 

It depends.  AFAIK under RIPA(2000)  it's illegal to covertly record someone's conversation and put it online without their permission.  You can make covert recordings for personal use, as an aide-memoire for a meeting or for evidential purposes for example, but you can't share it with third parties.  

There are exceptions for cases where there is a public interest angle ( broadcasters use this a lot ), and presumably a judge can permit the recording to made available to a court as evidence, but since neither of those exceptions apply in this case,  the victims have every right to privacy.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MvR said:

It depends.  AFAIK under RIPA(2000)  it's illegal to covertly record someone's conversation and put it online without their permission.  You can make covert recordings for personal use, as an aide-memoire for a meeting or for evidential purposes for example, but you can't share it with third parties.  

There are exceptions for cases where there is a public interest angle ( broadcasters use this a lot ), and presumably a judge can permit the recording to made available to a court as evidence, but since neither of those exceptions apply in this case,  the victims have every right to privacy.

 

 

RIPA applies to intecepting public communications systems, not to intercepting/recording conversations in a public place. And if the person doing the interception or recording is one of the participants in the conversation RIPA doesn't apply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Happy Renting said:

RIPA applies to intecepting public communications systems, not to intercepting/recording conversations in a public place. And if the person doing the interception or recording is one of the participants in the conversation RIPA doesn't apply.

Fair enough.. I'm not a lawyer so I stand corrected.

That said, there's definitely some legislation that covers this, at least in England and Wales, though I don't know the specific legislation.  May be different in Scotland too.

https://www.dma-law.co.uk/is-it-illegal-to-record-conversations/

Quote

Is it illegal to record a conversation in secret?

Recording a conversation in secret is not a criminal offence and is not prohibited. As long as the recording is for personal use you don’t need to obtain consent or let the other person know.

Things change if the matter is addressed with a claim for damages or if the recordings have been shared without the consent of the participants. Even worse, if the recording is sold to third parties or released in public without the consent of the participants then this could be considered a criminal offence.

Googling around, there's also mention of "reasonable expectation of privacy" too.

In this case,  a covertly recorded conversation between two individuals with nobody else nearby,  I'd say the women would reasonably have expected the conversation to be private.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MvR said:

In this case,  a covertly recorded conversation between two individuals with nobody else nearby,  I'd say the women would reasonably have expected the conversation to be private.  

 

 

I'd say the same. it's not a business deal that you might want to refer back to details in.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MvR said:

Fair enough.. I'm not a lawyer so I stand corrected.

That said, there's definitely some legislation that covers this, at least in England and Wales, though I don't know the specific legislation.  May be different in Scotland too.

https://www.dma-law.co.uk/is-it-illegal-to-record-conversations/

Googling around, there's also mention of "reasonable expectation of privacy" too.

In this case,  a covertly recorded conversation between two individuals with nobody else nearby,  I'd say the women would reasonably have expected the conversation to be private.  

 

You can pretty well record or film anything that happens in a public place.

Also, if you are a participant in a recorded conversation, you are generally pretty well free to publish it.

Other matters such as confidentiality agreements, defamation, obscenities, etc are possible, other, obstructions to publication.

Such recordings might not be admissible as evidence in court proceedings.

I suspect that the Police action in the OP does not centre around the act of recording or filming, but might allegedly involve harrassment, procurement, stalking, filming for sexual gratification, or obscenity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ccc said:

An update. Four counts of breach of peace - which can pretty much be used for anything the police want. 

But one for sexual assault. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-46864242

Keep us updated. I had a look at his YT channel and it's just normal PUA stuff. This looks like another step in the direction of criminalizing all sexual approaches of women by men. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Turned Out Nice Again said:

Keep us updated. I had a look at his YT channel and it's just normal PUA stuff. This looks like another step in the direction of criminalizing all sexual approaches of women by men. 

Well Gazza has been charged with sexual assault iirc and all he says he did was try to kiss a burd. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/01/2019 at 17:26, null; said:

One report said he is due in Court on Monday so they must have charged him with something.

The police said:

" “This type of predatory behaviour is shameful and unacceptable and will undoubtedly cause significant fear and alarm. No-one should be subjected to this. "

Ok, I agree - but the police are not there to tell us what is moral or acceptable, just to enforce the law.

The BiB - 'fear and alarm', I suspect they have charged him with breach of the peace. It's a nice vague and subjective law.

 

Well I got the breach of the peace bit right but didn't predict four counts. Looking back its obvious that they would make more than charge.

Sexual assualt? It will be interesting (and perhaps also disturbing) when further details of this come out in Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.