I’m sure there are a lot more human beings with similar skeletons in their closet. What this isn’t, on any level, is anything to do with paedophelia, though the press love linking the two. It’s just another example of a person allowing their sex drive to over rule any sense or appreciation of risk.
I’m failing to be shocked or outraged, much as it’s always amusing when politicians get caught with their trousers down, and much as I’m glad he’s not my bloke.
Hardly “unfortunate”, BBB. Pics like that are chosen for a reason.
I prefer my porn old school.
I know Danczuk hasn’t broken any laws with regard to paedophila, etc. My earlier point just refers to the fact that such behaviour from a middle aged man is unseemly, and erodes his case when he’s talking about other politicians committing genuine crime.
As it turns out, it won’t matter anyway. He got bored with looking into the establishment paedophilie problem as soon as it looked like it might attract some political flak.
Oh dear. You may get yourself in trouble.
It is illegal to take, posses or distribute indecent images of under 18 year olds. That’s topless, naked, sex act pics. Even if you are 16 or 17 and you are the person in the pic and took it. Then your boyfriend who is same age shares it. He will also get in trouble.
Originally posted by @Intiniki
Originally posted by @Fatso
17 is legal. You are allowed to send 17yr olds photos of your cock. And that works the other way as well, girls can send photos of their fannies.
Oh dear. You may get yourself in trouble.
It is illegal to take, posses or distribute indecent images of under 18 year olds. That’s topless, naked, sex act pics. Even if you are 16 or 17 and you are the person in the pic and took it. Then your boyfriend who is same age shares it. He will also get in trouble.
Seriously? So if you’re 17 you’re not even allowed to take a naked selfie and send it to your boyfriend? Or is it the boyfriends sharing it that’s the illegal part?
Unseemly, maybe. But I don’t think erodes his case combatting people who commit real crimes. Or at least it shouldn’t. If she were unhappy with the exchange it would be a whole different matter, but she’s clearly not.
Originally posted by @Coxford_lou
Originally posted by @Intiniki
Originally posted by @Fatso
17 is legal. You are allowed to send 17yr olds photos of your cock. And that works the other way as well, girls can send photos of their fannies.
Oh dear. You may get yourself in trouble.
It is illegal to take, posses or distribute indecent images of under 18 year olds. That’s topless, naked, sex act pics. Even if you are 16 or 17 and you are the person in the pic and took it. Then your boyfriend who is same age shares it. He will also get in trouble.
Seriously? So if you’re 17 you’re not even allowed to take a naked selfie and send it to your boyfriend? Or is it the boyfriends sharing it that’s the illegal part?
Seriously yes. Aged 16 or 17 and take a nude self you are taking an indecent pic. That’s illegal. Then you share it. That’s distribution. That’s also illegal.
The thinkuknow.co.uk site is useful for young people. And maybe some old ones too re what is an isn’t ok.
Originally posted by @Coxford_lou
Originally posted by @Intiniki
Seriously? So if you’re 17 you’re not even allowed to take a naked selfie and send it to your boyfriend? Or is it the boyfriends sharing it that’s the illegal part?
The person shring it would be in trouble. You can now get in trouble for sharing these sort of photos without permission of any age, revenge porn in other words.
I imagine in your scenario that sharing a photo of an u18 may well carry extra weight? However, I doubt a 17 year sending a nude to their partner would get in trouble, nor would the partner if it was just kept between the 2. Not really in the ‘public interest’.
Edit: Reading Intiki’s post, maybe I’m wrong.
You are talking to a lonely laptop. Fatso is in the garden burning his phone.
Well we all know that a lot of teenagers are sexting and sending indecent photos. Whether it is in the public interest to prosecute them all is debatable. I think it would be case by case. I’ve not heard about any cases myself that have gone forward. As they’re under 18 it’s less likely to be in the news as they cannot be named.
Anyway that Simon eh. What an idiot.
Well, I’m sure you’ve seen a whole range of cases that are informing your judgement on this, and perhaps I’m being naive, but I can’t imagine any circumstance where it would be appropriate or beneficial to prosecute a teenager for taking a photo of their own body on their own phone.
But anyway, since internet snooping became a thing, I’m suddenly very uncomfortable discussing this topic on an Internet forum.
So yes, anyway…
Well, that’s not true if you put a black rectangle across the persons face.
A Tory MP reckons that Danczuk has been stitched up by the Corbyn mafia. In a previous post, I enumerated many of the reasons that he’s perfectly capable of stitching himself up.
I forgot to mention that after the floods, he basically parroted UKIP policy, talking about diverting foreign aid to flooded areas, as if that’s the way these things work.
I couldn’t believe he said that. But then I thought “no that seems about right from him”.
Sshh Pap, we’re talking about Fatso plucking his pickle to under-age nudes! Gosh…
Yipe.
Simon Danczuk’s first wife has threatened to change their daughter’s name following claims he bombarded a 17-year-old girl with sexually explicit messages.
…
Speaking to Rochdale Online, she said: "My God, what is he doing? He has a daughter not much younger than the girl he wants to ‘spank’, and his 18-year-old son has enough problems at university due to sharing the Danczuk name.
“Why can he not think of his children and the devastating effect his selfish antics have on them? It has been one thing after another after another, will it ever end?
“Will he ever stop and think about the damage he is doing to his children?”
In her text to Mr Danczuk, Ms Rossington wrote: “Can you please stop embarrassing them, they are children growing up with your surname. If you resort to stripping yourself of any further dignity, I will change your daughter’s surname, if only to protect her against your stupidity.”
Haha wow. That is pretty scathing.
Hard to disagree with much of it though. Dude clearly loves himself, that seems to be his sole driver for everything he does. As long as he is front and centre.
Anyone know where I can buy black rectangles?*
*asking for a (fat) friend
Danczuk is now demonstrating extreme cowardice and blaming his inappropriate behaviour on a drink problem and a weakness for young women.
Baring in mind this is a man that ousted his predecessor for being a paedophile, that is a strange ‘excuse’ to fall back on.
“Younger women are my achilles heel,” Danczuk told the paper on Sunday. “My first wife was 10 years younger than me, my second wife was 17 years younger, my last girlfriend is 17 years younger. Some men like older women, some like younger women, some like brunettes, some like blondes.
“I have a drink problem, and that is a major contributory reason why I sent the messages. I’ve seen a psychiatrist about it and he’s told me to stop drinking for six months. I feel awful about what happened. I don’t know what came over me.
Pathetic, grubby little man.
Also, thanks to the Tories, and their intervention to protect the corrupt/immoral/child molesting against their ranks, it’s nigh on impossible for bad MPs like this to be recalled. Not that they’d want him gone, he’s a big asset to them.
If he had any moral fortitude, he’d resign. But clearly he doesn’t, so he won’t and we’ll carry on paying this lowlife’s wages for the next few years.