Indecent Act?

[Max Power]

The Examiner reported that a visitor aged 56 was jailed for performing an indecent act on a secluded beach, i.e. masturbating.

Apparently this was witnessed by a woman who had 2 children with her, who didn't see what the man was doing, and he apparently did not expose himself nor was he looking at the children.

He denied that he was masturbating, and was in pain from a foot problem with his hand in his pocket. and the woman was mistaken.

The woman however, said she had a clear view and watched him for 'FIVE MINUTES!!!' and decided to report him. (Was she watching to confirm what she had seen, or purely for titilation?)

Surely this is one persons word against the other, and a warning would have been more appropriate when the man had never been in any sort of trouble before?

[thebees]

I agree Max, I read the story in the Examiner (my 3rd hand copy of the rag) and wondered why he had been sent to prison. It did seem like the woman who reported him was a little 'off her head' and the parents of the children didn't see him doing anything strange, so really it was 3 people against one and the courts favoured the one. Typical monkey justice.

[Mr. Sausages]

I thought he had a suspended prison sentence, and a 5 year ban from the Island?

 

It was pretty a funny read though. Moyle thanked the media and public for helping to bring him to justice. Very suspicious behaviour, but certainly no proof. The Daily Mail would be proud.

[Minxie]

I like your new 'Hitler Cats' Avatar Mr. Sausages

[thebees]

Could have been a suspended sentence, I dont really pay too much attention to detail.

[catchy]

perhaps someone could tell us what really happened! if he ws jailed,then thats ott, if suspended still ott but not worthy of coplaint perhaps?

[Lonan3]

The problem is that we're relying on IoM Newspapers for our information about the case. If their reporting is accurate it's unexpected a rather strange case and decision, but perhaps there was more that simply wasn't reported?

[catchy]

The problem is that we're relying on IoM Newspapers for our information about the case. If their reporting is accurate it's unexpected a rather strange case and decision a fucking miracle

not bought any of their rags for years, fucking imbeciles with their tongues right up the asses of anyone wielding the slightest power

[thebees]

Ditto Catchy, but I do get the paper on a Wednesday from the lady next door who gets it from her daughter, hence 3rd hand paper.

[Lonan3]

Apart from a small aside, I hadn't intended hijacking the thread into another rant about the local press. I was merely wondering whether the facts that were presented in court might have given a clearer indication of the reasoning behind the sentencing than a brief report in the paper?

[catchy]

and what good will wondering do? if your that concerned go buy the filthy rag and tell us all.

[Lonan3]

perhaps someone could tell us what really happened! if he ws jailed,then thats ott, if suspended still ott but not worthy of coplaint perhaps?

 

catchy Posted Today, 02:08 PM

and what good will wondering do? if your that concerned go buy the filthy rag and tell us all.

 

catchy Today, 11:36 AM Post #10

fair paoints,the crystal though,mmmm

dont know what its all like these days,past it myself too,but wouldnt say no!!!

[catchy]

yes?

[thebees]

You are being stalked Catchy.....

[Stu Peters]

I don't know any more than the court report you've heard, but I think Lonan3 is probably right - there's possibly more to this than a shock horror headline to deserve such sentencing.