Security:
News ToolsReg Shops |
Comments on ‘Masturbating lag cops 60 days' extra porridge’'Indecent exposure' rap for five-knuckle shufflePublished Thursday 26th July 2007 10:48 GMT
Why do we take the piss out of Americans again?By Cameron Colley
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 11:16 GMT
It seems that the US can't help but give us examples of their prudish, puritanical mindset. Wouldn't someone signing up to become a guard in a prison containing male inmates expect this kind of behaviour and, more importantly, why did she have to look at the offending area of the screen which, if the CCTV I've seen is anything to go by, will be a very small area anyway? and what else?By Karim Bourouba
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 11:23 GMT
do you think she would bring them up on charges for farting, swearing and hitting eachother too? this is a tad ridiculous isnt it? i wonder how much money it cost to take these guys to trial over wanking. Poor Little GirlBy Tony
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 11:32 GMT
What if an inmate steps up to the toilet to take a leak and she decides he was too vigorous in shaking off the last drop? Anyway who was he hurting? Couldn't she just look away for a minute? If this delicate flower of a deputy is too sensitive to be exposed to such behavior she needs a new career. Next thing you know she'll be exposed to spitting or even cursing. I'm sure there are 101 similar comments waiting for approval but...By Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 11:32 GMT
Where's the IT angle? Or are you saying all techies are wankers? Slightly disappointedBy Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 11:36 GMT
...that you didn't mange to work in a "chokey for choking the chicken" gag. Seemed like an, er, natural. Well done on the IT angleBy Kevin Crisp
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 11:41 GMT
Brilliant use of "glass-enclosed master control room" to pretend there's an IT angle - keep up the good work - especially these dolphin polishing stories Ten yearsBy Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 11:47 GMT
So if I understand correctly, the poor guy is going to have to spend ten years without having a Barclays. The mind boggles... not to mention the testicles. Hold on a moment...By Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 11:49 GMT
If I'm reading this right, he was given extra jail time for indulging in a little stress relief in his own cell, with noone around. He didn't deliberately expose himself, he simply failed to hide (when there was noone around to see him). 'Coryus Veal told a court this week that Alexander "did not try to hide what he was doing as most prisoners do".' Yet seven others were also charged... Do they really need cameras in every cell? That seems overly intrusive in my book. The inmates seriously have no expectation of privacy? Have they cameras in the bathroom, and if so, why don't they charge the inmates for indecent exposure there? Don't quite understand...By Rob
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 12:03 GMT
.... did she sit there and wait for him to finish (in which case she should be done for voyeurism) and if she sat that watching him do it but it was against the law, could she have not pressed the tanoy button and announced that prisoner x should stop exercising in his cell (or put on a husky voice, talk dirty and get him there faster). Re:Or are you saying all techies are wankers?By Hooch181
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 12:12 GMT
98% of males admit to it, 2% lie about it! Who cares about the IT angle, it was funny! Can we get any more infantile?By Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 12:14 GMT
Hang on a second: in prison you get violence, drugs, sexual assault, rape, brutality and all the rest of it and we're worried that a guy has a wank? I think all men like having a J Arthur now and then and given that no one was hurt other than the silly girl watching via CCTV (who needs a much more grown up view of what sexually deprived men get up to) where was the public interest in prosecution? CriminalsBy Bill Smith
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 12:20 GMT
So he was wanking, didnt you know that all criminals are wankers, I thought it was common knowledge Clearly, she is not suitable for the job.By Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 12:20 GMT
After all, can you imagine the outcry if it was a male prison guard spying on a female inmate masturbating? Dump please?By Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 12:25 GMT
If she realised what he was doing, why not move onto checking another inmate. Do you have to ask the screw not to look while you take a dump or fart? Only in America !!! reality of that remarkBy Rob
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 12:35 GMT
"After all, can you imagine the outcry if it was a male prison guard spying on a female inmate masturbating?" Sorry it just wouldn't happen, the aforementioned male guard would make sure no-one was around and beat one off himself, not mention it to anyone and next time make sure the VCR is ready to go at a moments notice. A month later = Jailbirds.com Suitable area requiredBy Chris Collins
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 12:54 GMT
Perhaps the inmates should be provided with a suitable area or trailer for whacking off. For good behaviour you can go and have a Sherman in the masturbatorium. I would suggest the shower but that's aready the buggery/stabbing room. Both of which are clearly more acceptable in the eyes of the screws. Kinda obvious...By Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 13:06 GMT
The 7 prisoners were probably putting on a show for the guard. She'd be about as close as many of them would get to a real woman for a long time. Depends?By Craig Leeds
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 13:10 GMT
Cells are often motored by (male) guards on rounds in prisons over here through the night. If they catch you wanking they just call you a dirty £*$&er and move on. All blokes know we do it and it’s a none issue. I am just not sure it's appropriate for a female to be monitoring male inmates. I guess it depends if he/they knew she was on duty and would be keeping an eye on there cells. It's asking for trouble cracking one off when you know a female screw is watching. Sex offenderBy Dillon Pyron
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 13:41 GMT
Okay, here's the good news for him. I think indecent exposure gets you labeled as a sex offender, which leads to mandatory registration and eventually living under a bridge because the requirements are so strict that some men can't find a real place to live. It's a jargon error!By Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 13:44 GMT
Look, he's just an end user. He had not quite worked out that cells are to be used handsfree so he naturally ended up doing a George Michael.. Ok but...By Will Leamon
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 14:20 GMT
'prudish, puritanical mindset' You have obviously never been to an American college campus. I see all these brits complaining about our prudish behavior but then all British men here in my town refuse to leave as 'The chicks are just so damn easy'. A point that I cannot refute. Plus American women will do things to you that would make a British broad puke in disgust. But hey, we're open minded like that. Murdoch?By John A Blackley
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 14:22 GMT
So, one op-ed piece about American politics, one piece about a psychic pussy and one piece about a jail-bound J. Arthur. Trying to make yourself a takeover target for Rupert? PuritansBy Ben Ruset
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 14:27 GMT
Re: Cameron Colley Just be glad that England kicked the Puritans out. 200+ years later and America is still held by their moral standards. Small typo needs correcting...By Owen Sweeney
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 14:29 GMT
isn't it meant to be "limited access pubic place"? :) ironicBy Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 14:34 GMT
Ironically if he did cover up he would be acting suspiciously and would be charged for contempt to commit a crime. After all, "if you aren't guilty, what have you got to hide?" The main veinBy Simon Painter
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 15:06 GMT
His one eyed trouser snake was obscured with a blanket so there was no exposure. She was not forced to look at it by him. If it was a requirement of her job that she watch men slap their salami then she clearly has an occupational health and safety issue with her employer. I would suggest that as the gentleman was perfectly within his rights to twiddle with his own joystick under his blanket and the slag screw should be prosecuted for her unlawful voyeurism. If it's such a problem...By Sean Nevin
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 15:07 GMT
...why not just have a designated room? I suggest calling it a 'Masturbatory'. Maybe in the UK you guys could call it 'the moo'. Where was this?By Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 16:16 GMT
Was this a US jail or a house in Elstree? puritanical stupidityBy Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 16:35 GMT
If he was covered then how can they prove that what he was up to was indecent? It could be construed that the female officer was taking a leap of faith that detainee was playing with himself. Thus the question of viability of the prosecutions attack against the detainee is called into question. It could have been a bad itch.... that needed sorting so as to be able to think straight or sleep. If they want to do this job properly then women watch women & men watch men. This way you avoid these silly waists of public money by bringing the new offence in front of a court/board. After all is having a wank illegal? After all how many of us would be guilty of this as a crime if it were illegal? Sounds like the female officer needs to go back to the school of life. What about public urinationBy Chris
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 17:16 GMT
Since a jail cell is a public place, can't an inmate get charged for urinating/defacating in public as well? Maybe loitering too? oh dearBy Sir Cosmo Bonsor
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 19:19 GMT
Simon Painter, puritanical stupidity: Try reading the article? It's kinda what they're there for you know. Re: Ben RusetBy Anonymous Coward
Posted Thursday 26th July 2007 21:48 GMT
What moral standards? I have not seen any evidence of America's morality for a long time. @Will LeamonBy Finnbar
Posted Friday 27th July 2007 00:02 GMT
"all British men here in my town refuse to leave as 'The chicks are just so damn easy'." I'm visiting the US in a couple of months. Which town was that? @Will Leamon (too)By Joe
Posted Friday 27th July 2007 06:48 GMT
Yes, Will, do tell - perhaps a visit to your town would be worth giving my biometrics to your government! Re Which town was that?By Ron Eve
Posted Friday 27th July 2007 08:45 GMT
<"all British men here in my town refuse to leave as 'The chicks are just so damn easy'." I'm visiting the US in a couple of months. Which town was that?> Anytown, USA :-) American PuritansBy Paul Yuratich
Posted Friday 27th July 2007 22:51 GMT
Speaking of American Puritanism, it's pretty common compared to Britain, I'd think. A few years ago, Peyton Manning (our latest Super Bowl champion) decided to moon a fellow player in his college locker room. At that moment, a female staff member happened to walk by, and say Peyton's ass. Never mind that it was probably the healthiest ass she'd ever have the privilege to see, she raised 7 kinds of hell and all sorts of brouhaha was raised at the school, in the athletic department, and in the press. So, this prison incident is not all that surprising - sad and pathetic, yes, surprising, no. role reversalBy Tibb the Cat
Posted Wednesday 8th August 2007 00:07 GMT
what would have happened if the roles had been reversed? A male guard watching a female inmate bashing the beaver? Would he have complained? And if he had, would anyone take the complaint seriously? Would the woman have got 60 days for pushing the pussy? I think not! This chap probably has a valid claim for sexual discrimination. The period for commenting on this story has finished
|
|
Top 20 stories • All The Week’s Headlines • Archive • Search