What a detestable woman!

[Mike Cledford]

we have in our house too - wish I could say the same

Some women go to the bogs to fart. It must be strange having a tom tit while a wind concerto is being played near the washbasins.

 

[Tuearts right boot]

Given the number of stars I'm presuming it's the girl you're referring to? I'm usually reluctant to comment on newspaper stories as you very rarely get all of the facts but she does come across as having made all of that up.

Snowflake after a payout

 

[Bluemoon dan]

Interesting that he has been completely cleared and yet has his full name, age and picture in the paper under the headline that contains the words 'peeping tom'. By all accounts she made it up and is anonymous.

 

[kippax4ever]

Interesting that he has been completely cleared and yet has his full name, age and picture in the paper under the headline that contains the words 'peeping tom'. By all accounts she made it up and is anonymous.

Have to agree something stinks about this story..

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Interesting that he has been completely cleared and yet has his full name, age and picture in the paper under the headline that contains the words 'peeping tom'. By all accounts she made it up and is anonymous.

She's anonymous because contrary to the title of this thread, she's not actually been charged with a crime. Despite what some apparently believe, a man being found not guilty of a crime is not evidence that the person who made the accusation was lying. That would have to be proven in a separate case. It's entirely possible that her account is correct but they couldn't prove it. It's also entirely possible that in a panicked situation, both of them interpreted events differently and she genuinely believed that he was some sort of sexual predator, and he genuinely made a mistake. I can see why seeing someone unbuttoning his trousers and beginning the get his cock out could seem like a sexual threat, especially as he admitted that he froze after seeing her rather than immediately apologizing and getting out. I can also see why a man in that situation might panic and not act in what seems like a logical way. Of course it's also possible that she made it up, but it seems like a very opportunistic crime against a complete stranger for very little reward.

As for publishing someone's picture before they are convicted, that's always going to be controversial, but I think in the case of alleged flashers, it's probably justified because those types of criminals are often repeat offenders and such crimes are often under-reported. If it turned out that a few other women had seen him in the ladies' toilets, that would probably be evidence that he wasn't there by accident. The fact that no-one else did come forward with accusations about him helps us to believe that it was an innocent mistake.

 

[dannyboy29]

Hate double standards, If a girl walked in while I was on the toilet with her boobs out getting excited I would have the decency not to embarrass her and let her in. Yet a guy does it and its frowned upon and ends up in the paper.

 

[EL APACHE TEVEZ]

He does look a bit of a snide though.

 

[jimharri]

She's anonymous because contrary to the title of this thread, she's not actually been charged with a crime. Despite what some apparently believe, a man being found not guilty of a crime is not evidence that the person who made the accusation was lying. That would have to be proven in a separate case. It's entirely possible that her account is correct but they couldn't prove it. It's also entirely possible that in a panicked situation, both of them interpreted events differently and she genuinely believed that he was some sort of sexual predator, and he genuinely made a mistake. I can see why seeing someone unbuttoning his trousers and beginning the get his cock out could seem like a sexual threat, especially as he admitted that he froze after seeing her rather than immediately apologizing and getting out. I can also see why a man in that situation might panic and not act in what seems like a logical way. Of course it's also possible that she made it up, but it seems like a very opportunistic crime against a complete stranger for very little reward.

As for publishing someone's picture before they are convicted, that's always going to be controversial, but I think in the case of alleged flashers, it's probably justified because those types of criminals are often repeat offenders and such crimes are often under-reported. If it turned out that a few other women had seen him in the ladies' toilets, that would probably be evidence that he wasn't there by accident. The fact that no-one else did come forward with accusations about him helps us to believe that it was an innocent mistake.

In cases of an alleged "sexual crime", which an accusation of being a peeping Tom could be classed as, the defendant should be afforded the same right of anonymity as the alleged victim. We all know how some members of the great unwashed think; "no smoke without fire" etc etc. Once a conviction is secured, then by all means identify the individual involved. Not before then though.

 

[mexico1970]

Unlocked toilet? Who doesn't lock their toilet cubicle? In this new gender free society we live in the sex of the door opener shouldn't have even been an issue.

 

[BigOscar]

Unlocked toilet? Who doesn't lock their toilet cubicle? In this new gender free society we live in the sex of the door opener shouldn't have even been an issue.

Tbf, I don't know about the ladies but half the mens toilets I've ever been in had broken locks. I kind of hope ladies toilets are less terrible than mens though tbh