The Phantom Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 23 minutes ago, Roxanne said: Please tell me you said that on purpose. I can't believe you doubted me Rox! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roxanne Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 1 hour ago, The Phantom said: I can't believe you doubted me Rox! I’m a bit ashamed myself. Poor judgement on my part. 😏 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 3 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: This is yet another example of incompetence on the part of the media - or alternatively the police (which is worse). The article says "They have been assessed under the Copine scale which measures severity from one to five, with five being the most severe", but as the Wiki you quote from shows, the COPINE (NB Caps media people) scale actually goes from 1 to 10. The article goes on to say: The five point scale, established by the Sentencing Advisory Panel for England and Wales and adopted in 2002, is known as the SAP scale. It is based on COPINE terminology and is often mistakenly referred to as such. So they probably mean the SAP scale, where 2 at least is more serious (though nothing like as bad as it can get). And the sex doll thing is mad and for all I know is incorrect. In this case it’s not the fault of journalists. It’s the prosecution who tell the court what the level of the images are. And, yes, they call the scale the COPINE scale, rather than the SAP scale. COPINE was defined for therapeutic purposes. SAP is a judicial adaptation of COPINE excluding category 1, diffident about 2 & 3 and then telescoping or compressing 4-10 into 1 to 5. It’s another of those areas where, for reasons that I find incomprehensible, police, prosecutions and courts work on an assessment of seriousness not used in England for nearly 10 years. They now operate a 3 category scale. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 16 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: See below. I think Peter is wrong about the Customs Consolidation Act 1876. Yes, it does apply to the IoM, but declares the IoM to be part of the Customs Territory of the UK. So moving a doll already in the UK to the IoM wouldn’t be caught. That’s why we have production, rather than importation, for drugs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 14 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Shit...that was close...I nearly got picked up by a 55 year old doll in 1886 t'other night! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 28 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said: Shit...that was close...I nearly got picked up by a 55 year old doll in 1886 t'other night! had you fell over again ?? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 7 minutes ago, WTF said: had you fell over again ?? At my age....if you arrive at 1886 you can easily get confused with upcoming birthdays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 Just now, Albert Tatlock said: At my age....if you arrive at 1886 you can easily get confused with upcoming birthdays. if you're lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 If customs intercepted a doll, would that prompt the fuzz to search the recipient's electronic decices? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 8 minutes ago, Declan said: If customs intercepted a doll, would that prompt the fuzz to search the recipient's electronic decices? you'd like to think so. remiss if they didn't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 12 minutes ago, Declan said: If customs intercepted a doll, would that prompt the fuzz to search the recipient's electronic decices? Proof of purchase...evidence I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2bees Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 If men aren’t allowed sex dolls, what about vibrator’s? Asking for a friend obvs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 (edited) It was a bit of a giveaway. ETA Plain brown wrapper they said, for discretion they said. Edited August 15, 2023 by Gladys 1 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 What about all the ones strapped to motorbikes I've seen over TT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.