First, they came for the perverts
Credit where credit's due.
I haven't written anything here for some time because of work commitments. But finally, I've spotted a story that's just made me determined to create the time.
It appears that Robert Stewart, a 51-year-old Scot, has been convicted of having sex with his bike. Yes, that's right. He was frotting away with the aforementioned vehicle in the privacy of his hostel room, when two cleaners knocked on his door. Presumably he didn't hear them, because he didn't answer. So they went and collected the master key – yes, his door was locked – and entered, only to find him having fun with the, er, bike.
They were so appalled – well, wouldn't you be – that they told the manager. Who was so appalled that he told the police. Who were so appalled that they arrested Mr Stewart and charged him. The Director of Public Prosecutions was so appalled that he was sent to court, where the judge and jury were so appalled that they convicted him and sentenced him to probation and signing on the Sex Offenders' Register.
Were it not so serious, it would be hilarious.
His room was locked. A bike is an inanimate object – just like a dildo or a butt plug. There is no law against shagging a bike. He was interrupted.
The Sex Offenders' Register is for keeping tabs on child abusers and rapists in order to protect the public from them – not someone who is interrupted when they're having a wank with a bike in the privacy of their locked room.
And what does this case say about privacy? If the cleaners interrupted him while he was having a more traditional wank, would he have been prosecuted then? If this was a hotel and two guests, on waking, decided to have sex and were so engaged with their fucking that they didn't hear the maid knocking, and she let herself in and saw them 'at it', what happens then? Do they get prosecuted and popped on the register if she's shocked?
Apart from simply being a stupid, stupid over-reaction to a situation, at a time when the UK is the CCTV capital of the world – in urban environments, you can expect to be photographed around 300 times a day (you'd expect us to have no crime) – at a time when the UK government is pushing ID cards and there is talk of a universal DNA database, this makes a statement that the law does not respect your privacy. You have no right to privacy. It's bleedin' Orwellian.
And all this at a time when the government continues to insist that consent means nothing, since you can be prosecuted for being spanked or spanking someone consensually (even though you can consent to getting in a boxing ring and hitting someone and being hit yourself).
What's really being perverted here? Justice?
I haven't written anything here for some time because of work commitments. But finally, I've spotted a story that's just made me determined to create the time.
It appears that Robert Stewart, a 51-year-old Scot, has been convicted of having sex with his bike. Yes, that's right. He was frotting away with the aforementioned vehicle in the privacy of his hostel room, when two cleaners knocked on his door. Presumably he didn't hear them, because he didn't answer. So they went and collected the master key – yes, his door was locked – and entered, only to find him having fun with the, er, bike.
They were so appalled – well, wouldn't you be – that they told the manager. Who was so appalled that he told the police. Who were so appalled that they arrested Mr Stewart and charged him. The Director of Public Prosecutions was so appalled that he was sent to court, where the judge and jury were so appalled that they convicted him and sentenced him to probation and signing on the Sex Offenders' Register.
Were it not so serious, it would be hilarious.
His room was locked. A bike is an inanimate object – just like a dildo or a butt plug. There is no law against shagging a bike. He was interrupted.
The Sex Offenders' Register is for keeping tabs on child abusers and rapists in order to protect the public from them – not someone who is interrupted when they're having a wank with a bike in the privacy of their locked room.
And what does this case say about privacy? If the cleaners interrupted him while he was having a more traditional wank, would he have been prosecuted then? If this was a hotel and two guests, on waking, decided to have sex and were so engaged with their fucking that they didn't hear the maid knocking, and she let herself in and saw them 'at it', what happens then? Do they get prosecuted and popped on the register if she's shocked?
Apart from simply being a stupid, stupid over-reaction to a situation, at a time when the UK is the CCTV capital of the world – in urban environments, you can expect to be photographed around 300 times a day (you'd expect us to have no crime) – at a time when the UK government is pushing ID cards and there is talk of a universal DNA database, this makes a statement that the law does not respect your privacy. You have no right to privacy. It's bleedin' Orwellian.
And all this at a time when the government continues to insist that consent means nothing, since you can be prosecuted for being spanked or spanking someone consensually (even though you can consent to getting in a boxing ring and hitting someone and being hit yourself).
What's really being perverted here? Justice?
Labels: 1984, bike, consent, control, conviction, court, hostel, law, legal, Orwell, politics, privacy, prosecution, Robert Stewart, Scotland, sex, Sex Offenders Register, UK
posted by Amanda Kendal at 1:54 pm
5 comments
