o/t: Sex crimes law updates

A read-only and searchable archive of posts made to the BGAFD forum from 11/08/2000 to 14/03/2003.
Bubinga

o/t: Sex crimes law updates

Post by Bubinga »

Printed all over the papers today are the updates to the sex-crimes laws.

I have no direct interest in the matter, but was wondering why the laws on necrophilia (the use of corpses for sexual jollies) were updated?? Have their been any reported cases? We've seen cases of bestiality reported in the press...

Some of you may deem this a rather sick request, but as they say; everyone stares when they see a car crash.
marcusallen

Re: o/t: Sex crimes law updates

Post by marcusallen »

I was in Maidstone nick in '62 and there was a guy on my landing serving two years (a lot of bird in those days) for necrophilia. He was the son of an undertaker and developed this obsession of fucking female corpses, before or after embalming, I have no idea. Apparently it was his second conviction, for the first he was given some kind of non-cuctodial sentence.
Check out the current sentences if you are that way inclined & decide if it is worth it.

I personally HATE people who stare at road crashes and clog up the motorways by doing so and fuck up my wanderings.
Jamer

Re: o/t: Sex crimes law updates

Post by Jamer »

"Check out the current sentences if you are that way inclined & decide if it is worth it."

You've misunderstood my question...

I was merely asking whether it was an offence that was regularly committed, thus enforcing Blunkett to review them. We heaer of bestiality in the press, but not so much of necrophilia - i wanted to know why.
joe king

Re: o/t: Sex crimes law updates

Post by joe king »



Interesting -
'A new offence of voyeurism capturing those who observe others without their knowledge for sexual gratification.'

Seriously officer, I didn't have an erection while I photographed that copulating couple in the park (who were breaking the 'A new offence to protect the public from unacceptable sexual behaviour in public, complementing existing public order offences. ')
David J

Re: o/t: Sex crimes law updates

Post by David J »

It's all right for Blunkett - he can never be nicked for this one - unless listening and sniffing count as 'observing'!
marcusallen

Re: o/t: Sex crimes law updates

Post by marcusallen »

Hey Joe,
How about the judge who gets a hardon under the scarlet robes when a certain witness gives evidence? etc etc. God knows where it will all end but meanwhile, poor innocent bastards are being mugged, burgled and generally abused whilst our masters are tinkering with petty bullshit to gain votes. Personally I'd nick the lot of them for Fraud/Conspiracy/Gaining money by False Pretences/and any other damn thing I could think about would I ever take the time to pursue such an unobtainable goal.
Guy Fawkes had a hell of a point-I'd buy him a drink!
marcusallen

Re: o/t: Sex crimes law updates

Post by marcusallen »

I misunderstand nothing. You have posted twice using two different names on the same theme and refer to yourself in the second.
You wanna fuck a corpse? Give me a few grand and I'll provide one-fresh or putrid. I can think of a couple of bods who's time is almost up.
PS. You are not the kid from Maidstone, are you?
Jamer

Re: o/t: Sex crimes law updates

Post by Jamer »

The point of my post was to ask if cases of prosecution for necrophilia have been posted in the press...

I'll concede that i have addressed the topic using two names, "Bubinga" i use for off-topic posts which are "grey", "Jamer" for topics more suited to the cause of this forum.
A simple mistake by me has disclosed this fact to you, but is by the by.

It was a lighthearted request for information and this is still the case.
If i've offended any parties then i apologise, that was not my intention.

Jamer
marcusallen

Re: o/t: Sex crimes law updates

Post by marcusallen »

Bloody hell, he's back! "Two names," "Grey areas,"
He is DEFINATELY the poor fuck I was banged up with. J. Walker suggests he needs a very strong dose of medicine (which I am prepared to hand deliver (at a ridiculuosly exorbitant price)
Jamer

Re: o/t: Sex crimes law updates

Post by Jamer »

Aaaah......

You've taken the easy route out i see.

Perhaps YOUR criminal history has destroyed your ability to see my post for what it was, a lighthearted question asking whether cases have been reported.
I feel the need to re-iterate this point to those who interpret it the wrong way, so I shall do so until my point is understood.
Locked