Nude Premiership Medal Photo

[🏅Dooks]

You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO

Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?

and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?

http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/

[Owl]

So, moral of the story, much like wanking, keep your tit pics to yourself. 

[WilliamPowell]

Hey, she posed for a pic on a smart phone, ISDOW?

That's not the issue here. The issue is not that she posed and agreed for the photo to be taken but that it has been alleged she didn't consent for it to be distributed.

As it stands under the law the photo could and should not have been distributed unless she consented. They are 2 very separate issues. You can't use the excuse that because she allowed the photo to be taken so it's OK for it to end up on the internet. the law says you cannot do that.

You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO

Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?

and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?

http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/

Hmmm ....this chestnut which has been doing the rounds of discussion on twitter BTW

There is one massive difference - the Pies players didn't go to the cops and lodge a complaint

they had the choice to and the chose not to - why? Ask them. But it is the choice they made

If they had of gone to the cops same thing that is happening now would have happened eg investigation and what comes next depending on the outcome

The only reason this medal photo is with the cops is because the woman in the photo made a complaint, that's the only reason

I get people don't want to accept that but it is what it is

[🏅Dooks]

Hey, she posed for a pic on a smart phone, ISDOW?

That's not the issue here. The issue is not that she posed and agreed for the photo to be taken but that it has been alleged she didn't consent for it to be distributed.

As it stands under the law the photo could and should not have been distributed unless she consented. They are 2 very separate issues. You can't use the excuse that because she allowed the photo to be taken so it's OK for it to end up on the internet. the law says you cannot do that.

You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO

Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?

and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?

http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/

Hmmm ....this chestnut which has been doing the rounds of discussion on twitter BTW

There is one massive difference - the Pies players didn't go to the cops and lodge a complaint

they had the choice to and the chose not to - why? Ask them. But it is the choice they made

If they had of gone to the cops same thing that is happening now would have happened eg investigation and what comes next depending on the outcome

The only reason this medal photo is with the cops is because the woman in the photo made a complaint, that's the only reason

I get people don't want to accept that but it is what it is

i accept she has made a complaint - obviously its factual that she has.

as i said in an earlier post.....

......obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.

[WilliamPowell]

i accept she has made a complaint - obviously its factual that she has.

as i said in an earlier post.....

......obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.

Sorry Dooks, I don't get you point here? I really don't. You've acknowledge she's made a complaint. It's being investigated but as yet no one (say for a couple of people in the media) has announced any one as being guilty.

I don't understand why you making it a gender issue (apologies if I've got that wrong but that's what you appear to be doing)?

What if the roles were reversed would you be calling the bloke a victim and the woman a predator? Would you be applauding or ridiculing him for making a stand?

Just going by some of the comments made in response to Tigeritis' post when the scenario was raised it's obvious what the answer would be for some on here

And why bring up the pies players & the Woman's Day thing? As I said they could have done something but chose not to? That is the biggest and clear difference. Why they didn't only they can answer.

[MintOnLamb]

Hey, she posed for a pic on a smart phone, ISDOW?

That's not the issue here. The issue is not that she posed and agreed for the photo to be taken but that it has been alleged she didn't consent for it to be distributed.

As it stands under the law the photo could and should not have been distributed unless she consented. They are 2 very separate issues. You can't use the excuse that because she allowed the photo to be taken so it's OK for it to end up on the internet. the law says you cannot do that.

You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO

Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?

and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?

http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/

Hmmm ....this chestnut which has been doing the rounds of discussion on twitter BTW

There is one massive difference - the Pies players didn't go to the cops and lodge a complaint

they had the choice to and the chose not to - why? Ask them. But it is the choice they made

If they had of gone to the cops same thing that is happening now would have happened eg investigation and what comes next depending on the outcome

The only reason this medal photo is with the cops is because the woman in the photo made a complaint, that's the only reason

I get people don't want to accept that but it is what it is

Thanks for the elucidation. The law is the law.

The pics that are circulation do not have her face shown, is that the case??

If it identified her that is another matter. Gee we have all seen pics of famous people in compromising situations as a matter of press/paparazzi reporting.

If Jo Blo had taken her pic and distributed it, instead of a Tiger Premiership Player, would it get this far??

Could their be a sniff of opportunism here??

[(•))(©™]

i accept she has made a complaint - obviously its factual that she has.

as i said in an earlier post.....

......obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.

Sorry Dooks, I don't get you point here? I really don't. You've acknowledge she's made a complaint. It's being investigated but as yet no one (say for a couple of people in the media) has announced any one as being guilty.

I don't understand why you making it a gender issue (apologies if I've got that wrong but that's what you appear to be doing)?

What if the roles were reversed would you be calling the bloke a victim and the woman a predator? Would you be applauding or ridiculing him for making a stand?

Just going by some of the comments made in response to Tigeritis' post when the scenario was raised it's obvious what the answer would be for some on here

And why bring up the pies players & the Woman's Day thing? As I said they could have done something but chose not to? That is the biggest and clear difference. Why they didn't only they can answer.

If the roles were reversed, we wouldn't have heard a thing about it .

Is it his girlfriend or just some chick who rooted hi. Because he played in a premiership.

All these things paint the character of the woman and expose her agenda.

[🏅Dooks]

i accept she has made a complaint - obviously its factual that she has.

as i said in an earlier post.....

......obviously in today's PC culture the woman is the victim and the man is the predator with an assumption of guilty until proven innocent.

Sorry Dooks, I don't get you point here? I really don't. You've acknowledge she's made a complaint. It's being investigated but as yet no one (say for a couple of people in the media) has announced any one as being guilty.

I don't understand why you making it a gender issue (apologies if I've got that wrong but that's what you appear to be doing)?

What if the roles were reversed would you be calling the bloke a victim and the woman a predator? Would you be applauding or ridiculing him for making a stand?

Just going by some of the comments made in response to Tigeritis' post when the scenario was raised it's obvious what the answer would be for some on here

And why bring up the pies players & the Woman's Day thing? As I said they could have done something but chose not to? That is the biggest and clear difference. Why they didn't only they can answer.

If the roles were reversed, we wouldn't have heard a thing about it .

Is it his girlfriend or just some chick who rooted hi. Because he played in a premiership.

All these things paint the character of the woman and expose her agenda.

yes re roles reversed.

Just because your the man in these alleged circumstances doesnt mean you are automatically a poo human being and the woman is the gold standard of integrity and a damsel in distress. This is the automatic assumption in the absence of information for many.

if the guy is found guilty then fair enough and cop his whack but if he is not, and theres evidence of funny business on her part then she should cop her medicine.

cant have it both ways.

[Slipper]

cant have it both ways.

No, you can't. And I am sure you don't in the eyes of the law.

But as WP pointed out, there is a massive difference in this situation. Swan and Cloke did not make it a formal complaint to the Police.

If the woman in this situation hadn't, then apart from the fringe lunatics like Ford, this story would not have existed. Let's face it, plenty of people had seen the photo and did not apparently find the need to comment until the woman went to the Police. Now it is viral.

[Yeahright]

You put yourself in that position, you should expect something like this to happen. Wasnt a stkilda players 2 inches shown all over the net. Did he go to the police or did the abc make a big deal about it? NO

Good point. What happened to the person who shared it?

and what about who distributed the nude collingwood photos?

http://www.northweststar.com.au/story/3669711/womans-day-publishes-nude-photos-of-collingwood-footballers-dane-swan-and-travis-cloke/

I hope Marissa and Jon got sacked

[Yeahright]

And why bring up the pies players & the Woman's Day thing? As I said they could have done something but chose not to? That is the biggest and clear difference. Why they didn't only they can answer.

It's all well and good to say there was no police investigation into that matter because the players didn't make a complaint but surely you're missing the bigger picture here. Where was the public outcry of these people committing a crime and engaging in image-based abuse? Where was the calls for prison time, despite the fact of anyone outside the inner circle knowing what truly conspired. Don't give me the "they didn't complain to police" because yes that would limit the possibility of prison time, or at least a charge made, but these people are still calling for it DESPITE not knowing any of the facts. I thought the whole purpose of the police investigation was to get the facts, charge or clear the individual then allow people to make judgement/comments. Seems people have jumped straight to making judgements/comments. It's a one way street and complaining to police does not justify it.

[Dougeytherichmondfan]

Actually YR there was a lot of public outcry and disgust when those images were published. Even Dios girl Clem wrote an article lambasting WD and the perpetrators that shared the images against the subjects will. I poo you not.

As for it being a crime, well as I understand the new Revenge Porn laws were only enacted recently. Different story back then.

[Yeahright]

Actually YR there was a lot of public outcry and disgust when those images were published. Even Dios girl Clem wrote an article lambasting WD and the perpetrators that shared the images against the subjects will. I poo you not.

As for it being a crime, well as I understand the new Revenge Porn laws were only enacted recently. Different story back then.

Interesting, must have missed that one but I'm positive that that isn't the only example of unfair treatment.

On a side note, and I'm not giving an opinion or hinting at an opinion with this, have a look at this article. It just popped up for me and the relevance of it is all too amusing

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4969900/Doctor-s-indecent-assault-conviction-CONSENSUAL-sex.html

Strong disclaimer: this is an article from the dailymail

[WilliamPowell]

Thanks for the elucidation. The law is the law.

The pics that are circulation do not have her face shown, is that the case??

If it identified her that is another matter. Gee we have all seen pics of famous people in compromising situations as a matter of press/paparazzi reporting.

If Jo Blo had taken her pic and distributed it, instead of a Tiger Premiership Player, would it get this far??

Could their be a sniff of opportunism here??

No her face is not shown, her face doesn't need to be shown 

It has absolutely no relevance regarding the police investigation and law pertaining to the investigation

If the photo had been taken by someone else would it have got this far? Who knows?

Would she have made a complaint who knows? If she had made a complaint against "Joe Blo" would we know about it? Absolutely not. Just like we don't know of the cases that have been successfully prosecuted under these laws since there introduction.

Clearly if it didn't involve a footballer it wouldn't' be in the news

Opportunism at play? Possibly

But more than anything else this "mess' has been caused by the absolute stupidity by 2 people 

[🏅Dooks]

Can I ask what degree of speculation will be tolerated on this thread - that is, I'd like to take things up a notch or two with some inferences.