How is this Possible?!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7095134.stm
How the heck did this guy manage this?! I mean I don't see how it is possible?
Truly strange...
How the heck did this guy manage this?! I mean I don't see how it is possible?
Truly strange...
Post edited by Klepto on
Comments
He must be bike-sexual.
Yeah, good one!
He was just giving the neibourhood bike a good seeing to I suppose.
That was one desperate guy.
Oh it's easy. You just hold the saddle from the back of the bike, and then once you have crouched over the....
...erm, pretend I didn't say anything. :p
He was on his own, in a locked room.
It's weird but where's the crime?
Why the heck is he on a register? Do bicycles have rights all of a sudden?
Did he take the saddle off and put himself inside the frame?? :confused:
Flippin oddball. Got no sympathy for him.
What an idiot, if i was shagging a bike (i mean metal one) i would sure as hell listen out for the door in case anyone tries to come in.
Again what is it with the UK and feeling sorry for people like this ! Might be a waste of taxpayers money but i'm happy this nutters been arrested
I read about another nut yesterday who staplegunned himself several times and made out he was attacked by kids with a staplegun. Was rushed to hospital as some just missed his heart. Turns out HE did it to himself ! He was trying to get compensation. The dozy muppet had done it 3 years earlier in Bristol and got 4 grand so tried the scam again ! What an idiot !
I feel sorry for the guy because basically he didn't do anything wrong - he didn't hurt anyone, he was just busted in on by the cleaners. The article doesn't tell us whether he's possibly hard of hearing and didn't realise the cleaners were about to come in. Is it a crime these days to be merely strange? The article doesn't mention any previous convictions (it usually will if there are any), so he's probably been harmlessly shagging bikes for years without hurting a single person.
It was in Scotland, and its degrees of decency. For example you would not necessarily get arrested if caught shagging in a secluded wood, but you would if you were caught on your local high street.
Also there's more to it than in that article. Alledgedly, Firstly he was pi$$ed, secondly it was a homeless hostel, thirdly he did not stop when confronted by the two staff.
There's more here:-
http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/tm_headline=accused---of-having-sex-with-his-bike--&method=full&objectid=19347288&siteid=64736-name_page.html
Mental note to myself - must clear google history before wife goes on computer.
If my mum worked at that hostel and walked in to see this freak shagging a bike i'm sure she would be quite offended by seeing some bloke naked with his cock trying to shag some bike.
Again theres MANY other people i would feel sorry for with miscarriages of justice or some old dear going to jail because she refuses to pay her high council tax (good on her) so my sympathy would rather go to them than this oddball.
Same with Barry George (Jill Dando case), i'm unsure if he is innocent because of that tiny particle but having his entire bedroom covered with pictures of her, just odd so i'm personally glad this other oddball is locked away.
If you want to shag bikes then make sure you arent caught. Not rocket science ! Why do you have to feel sorry for this freaky oddball ?
How can people be stupid enough to be offended by what someone is doing alone in his own locked room? How can you compare that to pedophilia?
It was a bicycle. A B I C Y C L E!!!
I agree its gone far but on the other hand i dont feel sorry for him. Hes just stupid for not hearing them knocking and then hearing a key in the door.
Imagine as a kid looking at a dirty mag and having a tommy, you'll be watching/hearing for people coming upstairs 100% !!
We all know the joke:-
Q:- Whats the most sensitive part of the body, whilst W#nking.
A:- The Ears !! :lol:
A fully grown adult being offended by something does not justify a criminal record and a 3 year sentence, suspended or otherwise.
Because in this case, I don't think justice was done. He didn't hurt anyone, merely offended someone he didn't hear coming up the stairs because he was drunk/hard of hearing/the bicycle was rattling loudly or whatever.
In any case, a very large portion of the population has odd fetishes. If it is a crime to be a freaky oddball, at least a third of the population should be in jail.
It's not a question of feeling sorry for someone. If they put someone on on trial, jail and/or a register, it takes away a huge amount of money from fighting crime elsewhere. We're possibly talking hundreds of thousands of pounds when you tot it all up.
Do you think the police and courts should spend their limited cash on catching muggers/murderers/rapists/burglars/conmen etc, or should they waste it locking people up who are weird but do no actual harm to anyone?
Jail is especially expensive, it can be more expensive than putting someone in a five star hotel. It also makes it much more difficult to get a job afterwards, so the tax payer will have to pay out even more to cover a lifetime of benefits, money that could have gone on things like hospitals or schools.
The police and the prosecutors don't have unlimited funds, a lot of crime is left uninvestigated or unprosecuted because the police and prosecutors simply don't have the resources to cover it all. This kind of pointless prosecution makes matters worse.
It was a locked door, it was his room. People lock the doors of their rooms precisely because they don't want anyone just walking in.
This guy did everything he reasonably could to stop anyone seeing him.
Being drunk and in a homeless hostel has no bearing on this being a crime or not. They gave him this room, he went in the room and he locked the door.
He didn't force the staff to watch, they were the ones who chose to unlock the door and walk in on him. If they wanted to leave, they could have just shut the door.
I could totally understand them throwing him out, presumably they have rules about not drinking in the hostel, being polite to staff etc. But why did the police prosecute him? Why not just tell him to leave? How was he a threat to the public?
He didn't have any pictures of her on his walls at all.
He had a large stack of newspapers some of which contained pictures of her, but the vast majority of them didn't. None of the pictures were marked in any way, they weren't at the top of the pile, there's no evidence that he even knew she was in those papers.
In fact there's no evidence he had any interest in Dando whatsoever. He was worryingly obsessed with many women, but Dando wasn't one of them.
Jailing an innocent person for a crime is exactly the same thing as freeing a guilty person. If George is innocent and he stays in prison, that means the real killer can never ever be convicted, even if the police find him/her, even if the killer boasted about it and released a bestselling book about it.
if i found a drunk having sex with my bike, fair enough its not much of a crime, but i'd give him a sound beating. (please don't edit this beanz)
Even more so Blackstone's formulation also known as Blackstone's ratio popularly stated as "Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer", forms part of the very basis for British (and American) justice.
At the end of the day you dont know what these women were like, they could be church followers, the types to be offended easily. We dont know the rules of these hostels etc etc.
Theres people dying out there and some people seem to be upset at the amount of police resources or money with this case.
Yeah its an obscure case and yeah people have weird fetishes. If you have a weird fetish basically dont get caught !
I just personally dont feel sorry for him. Okay he locked his door but he was in a hostel, how the hell could he not hear them knocking on the door. If i had a locked door and i knew other people had a key and i was about to have sex with a pushbike i would make sure my key was in the lock so no one could enter and make sure the curtains were drawn.
Its ridiculous how people seem to be sticking up for him. Sounds like stupid EU laws about 'rights' of terrorists that they cant be deported back etc to their original birthplace in case that country tortures them. If thats the case Mr Terrorist dont get into any trouble then you wont be sent back !
I remember reading about that oddball who was having sex with a sheep in a field when several people who went past on a train saw it , were shocked and reported it. Thankfully they found that nutter. What next ? He has 'rights' to do his perverse pleasures ?
Granted my comments about Barry George were OTT and yes there 'may' be a miscarriage of justice there and its hard what to believe is reported, okay i was wrong about the pictures of her but he had a strange stalking obsession and again is another nutball. If hes off the streets i'm happy.
Theres lots of bad cases of miscarriages of justice out there and people getting killed everyday etc. But here we are 4 pages now into rabbitting on about why its unfair this bloke got nicked for this. I dont care so much about this incident with the bike, my taxes are going on not only the court case but keeping this muppet on his dole money. The police/courts cant win. They get abuse when they let someone off lightly, then get abuse when they charge someone as the 'money could be better spent elsewhere'. I'm glad this perv got nicked. Its not like this mark on his record will affect his job status, he was unemployed before, not like he was about to get a great job and get off the dole.
So i pay my taxes to keep this loser on the dole so he can get cans of white lightening and be allowed to chat up a Raleigh bike or a Chopper and have sex with them ?
It doesn't matter if they were church followers or not - a fully grown adult getting offended should not be the basis for giving somebody a criminal record. Ever.
Because justice wasn't done. It's disproportionate to give someone a 3 year sentence (suspended or otherwise) for doing nothing more than causing someone offence.
That's entirely different since it's animal cruelty and raping a sheep can quite rightly be counted as a violent crime, almost as much as raping a person.
But a bicycle? You can't be cruel to an inanimate object. Raping a sheep and masturbating with a bicycle aren't even in the same league - the difference isn't merely night and day, it's like the difference between absolute zero and the core of the Sun.
Absolutely he has rights to do his perverse pleasures - he had, after all, locked the door and had a reasonable expectation to privacy while engaging in perverse pleasures that didn't involve any human being or animal. Perhaps he was hard of hearing (the article doesn't say) or perhaps he was drunk (how many people have been busted in on, while plastered, doing something that would cause them embarrassement?)
So being a nutball should mean you're off the streets? If you're not a good conformist sheeple, who gets married, has two children, does everything that the tyrannical majority considers "normal" should be locked up?
It is not a crime to be a nutball, and hasn't been so for centuries - the framers of our justice system made sure of that, and fortunately, there are still guardians of our system of law that make sure that remains so, despite bogus arguments trotted out all the time about the favorite boogeyman, "terrorists".
I worry because of popular moral panics (like the current "terrorism" flap - since 2001, only 50-odd people have died in terrorist attacks in the UK, but over 18,000 have been killed in car accidents - yet little of consequence is done to improve the standards of driving, and huge, pointless exercises are done for the "war on terror") result in unacceptable erosions of liberties. So if you have a fetish with inanimate objects, and get busted in on, you can get a three year sentence because someone got in an offended flap?
Should I be "off the streets"? I will confess right now I am a bit of a nutball - I'm unmarried, no children, have no care to get married or have children, I have a harmless fetish (which I will not reveal here!), my table downstairs is covered in materials that "could be useful for a terrorist" (golly gosh, I have a dozen 555 timers that could easily be used in a time bomb, plus I have a bucket of sodium chlorate in the shed and sugar in the cupboard - the two are listed in the US Army's improvised explosives manual for how to make simple bombs in the field)? Should I have my life ruined because I don't conform to some arbitrary expectation of what is "normal"?
No system is perfect, and the fact that these cases make the press means that misapplied justice is relatively uncommon. After all, car crashes seldom make the national news (because they are so common) but someone given a too harsh/too light sentence often does (because it's uncommon and newsworthy). The justice system, by and large, is fit for purpose but like any imperfect system there will always be corner cases and oddities that are hugely at odds over what the system was intended to do. The police and the justice system more often than not does win.
How is giving him a criminal record and a three-year sentence going to help in this regard? It's not. It's going to hinder and act as a further impediment for him to ever become an independent member of society. Giving someone a three year sentence and a criminal record because someone got offended is massively disproprotionate. In a civilized society, we look after and try to help the weak, not condemn them and make their lot in life worse. What he received was a shafting, not justice. When I see weak people getting shafted, I'm sorry. No, I'm not sorry - I will not apologise for showing compassion for someone who's weak for whatever reason: I have compassion for them - even if they got shafted because they did something which was bizarre in the extreme.
It is not a crime to be an oddball, and hopefully never will be. Fortunately, the framers of our justice system also agreed. There have been some aberrations, of course - this case being one of them. However, if you want to see what it's like to have a justice system where anyone "oddball" is taken off the streets - at the risk of invoking Godwin's law... just look at a certain European country of the mid 20th century, and their treatment of nonconformists. I'm sure you will agree we don't want to go there - but the act of wanting every oddball off the streets will inevitably end in a very similar result.
In the case of Barry George, if he is innocent, he can be as odd as he likes and he should not, ever be in custody merely for being odd - regardless of whether someone thinks he is normal or not. Being an oddball is not a crime, and I will have sympathy for any oddball who is treated in a disproportionate manner.
Finally, having a debate over a subject isn't a bad thing - we are having a 4 page debate not over some "nutball", but actually over the fundamentals of justice. It's healthy to debate this in an adult fashion, and so far, there's been no resorting to invective or ad-hominen, so I think that counts as a useful debate :-)
If he'd been having a wank, would they still have nicked him?
Seems a bit harsh if the door was locked. Weird shit, but hardly criminal surely?
oh go on...........