Hacking scandal just keeps giving

[Smiler.]

CommanderJameson said:

.......I think that Mosley has been been surprisingly dignified for a man who has had pictures of him being spanked in a national newspaper......

Eh??

I have heard him numerous time blaming everyone else for the fallout from his activities.

According to him, it's all down to the NoTW that his son committed suicide, & nothing to do with his bizarre bedroom activities.

He got found out & he can't bring himself to take responsibility for his own actions, something that is a major ill in society today. The mouth-breathing types a la Jeremy Kyle are regularly lambasted for this attitude on here & rightly so.

I hold the attitude & antics of the gutter press in equal contempt but this man represents many things wrong in the world today.

[Derek Smith]

CommanderJameson said:

On the one hand, it ill-behoves someone in a position of moral authority to behave in the way Mosley did.

On the other, what consenting adults do behind closed doors is no-one's business but their own.

On the gripping hand, I think that Mosley has been been surprisingly dignified for a man who has had pictures of him being spanked in a national newspaper. I think in his position, and given his financial and other resources, I'd have been engaging the services of "risk control consultants" to "advise" the journalists concerned that publishing such private material might be bad for one's fingernails and testicles.

This is not a case of consenting adults. The man bought women to beat and humiliate. I don't think this is part of a closed door scenario. Consent implies he picked up Jill and Tracy from a pub and they decided to come back to his place for a bit of fun. This not not what happened.

He bought prostitutes. This puts it in the realm of public.

But, and it is a big but, he should not put himself in a position where he is open to blackmail. What would you do if you felt revelations of your conduct would cause your son to kill himself, devestate the rest of your family and cause you to lose your job?

The bloke had a choice: do some job where high moral standards are not required or else close the dungeon and stop buying women.

There is a great deal of argument about whether a prostitute is a consenting adult. The norm is that consent is not really given freely. That's a legal argument.

I would also suggest that dignity would include accepting that he could not really perform his role as head of the FIA and resigning. It cost him his job anyway of course, but there was a long delay. I would have thought that if he had any loyalty to the FIA he would have moved out of the public view as far as he could to protect the international company.

I did have a laugh about him suggesting that he had been fitted up.

Back to hacking though: we now have the ICO suggesting that the newspapers were 'too big' to take on. Surely, that was their main function.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/30/leveso...

[CommanderJameson]

Consent is consent.

[Regiment]

Derek Smith said:

This is not a case of consenting adults. The man bought women to beat and humiliate. I don't think this is part of a closed door scenario. Consent implies he picked up Jill and Tracy from a pub and they decided to come back to his place for a bit of fun. This not not what happened.

He bought prostitutes. This puts it in the realm of public.

But, and it is a big but, he should not put himself in a position where he is open to blackmail. What would you do if you felt revelations of your conduct would cause your son to kill himself, devestate the rest of your family and cause you to lose your job?

The bloke had a choice: do some job where high moral standards are not required or else close the dungeon and stop buying women.

There is a great deal of argument about whether a prostitute is a consenting adult. The norm is that consent is not really given freely. That's a legal argument.

I would also suggest that dignity would include accepting that he could not really perform his role as head of the FIA and resigning. It cost him his job anyway of course, but there was a long delay. I would have thought that if he had any loyalty to the FIA he would have moved out of the public view as far as he could to protect the international company.

I did have a laugh about him suggesting that he had been fitted up.

Back to hacking though: we now have the ICO suggesting that the newspapers were 'too big' to take on. Surely, that was their main function.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/30/leveso...

Why exactly is an adult who has paid their own money to another adult(s) for the purpose of sexual intercourse in the public interest, you sound like a journalist trying to justify his actions?

[Oakey]

Smiler. said:

Eh??

I have heard him numerous time blaming everyone else for the fallout from his activities.

According to him, it's all down to the NoTW that his son committed suicide, & nothing to do with his bizarre bedroom activities.

He got found out & he can't bring himself to take responsibility for his own actions, something that is a major ill in society today. The mouth-breathing types a la Jeremy Kyle are regularly lambasted for this attitude on here & rightly so.

I hold the attitude & antics of the gutter press in equal contempt but this man represents many things wrong in the world today.

So because he's a little deviant in the bedroom that somehow makes it all his fault? Why don't you tell us all about your sex life so we can judge if you're a weirdo or not?

[Smiler.]

Oakey said:

So because he's a little deviant in the bedroom that somehow makes it all his fault? Why don't you tell us all about your sex life so we can judge if you're a weirdo or not?

Er, he was the one who engaged in these acts. So, who would be responsible if his son had found this out on his own accord?

[Oakey]

Smiler. said:

Er, he was the one who engaged in these acts. So, who would be responsible if his son had found this out on his own accord?

If he'd found out on his own accord maybe he wouldn't have killed himself? Have you stopped to consider it's the public humiliation that's the issue? The guy who lived over the road from me was married with three kids, he even had a vasectomy reversed so they could have the third child. Then one Christmas he announced he liked botty sex with a bloke from work and that he was leaving his family for said colleague. None of his kids killed themselves. Of course, had it been splashed all acrossd the national papers that might be different.

ETA: Is it also Mosleys fault his son was a smackhead?

Edited by Oakey on Thursday 1st December 13:01

[MX7]

Derek Smith said:

He bought prostitutes. This puts it in the realm of public.

Prostitution in England isn't illegal, so what's it got to do with the public?

[5705]

MX7 said:

Derek Smith said:

He bought prostitutes. This puts it in the realm of public.

Prostitution in England isn't illegal, so what's it got to do with the public?

+1 It's revealing what you find out when you dig into this public interest idea. As Derek shows, you find out that everyone wants to skew it in the direction of their own personal morality (which often bears little semblance to the law).

And that's exactly what the odious hacks have been doing.

[Smiler.]

Oakey said:

Smiler. said:

Er, he was the one who engaged in these acts. So, who would be responsible if his son had found this out on his own accord?

If he'd found out on his own accord maybe he wouldn't have killed himself? Have you stopped to consider it's the public humiliation that's the issue? The guy who lived over the road from me was married with three kids, he even had a vasectomy reversed so they could have the third child. Then one Christmas he announced he liked botty sex with a bloke from work and that he was leaving his family for said colleague. None of his kids killed themselves. Of course, had it been splashed all acrossd the national papers that might be different.

ETA: Is it also Mosleys fault his son was a smackhead?

Edited by Oakey on Thursday 1st December 13:01

Ok then

You are entitled to your opinion, as I am mine.

[Derek Smith]

5705 said:

MX7 said:

Derek Smith said:

He bought prostitutes. This puts it in the realm of public.

Prostitution in England isn't illegal, so what's it got to do with the public?

+1 It's revealing what you find out when you dig into this public interest idea. As Derek shows, you find out that everyone wants to skew it in the direction of their own personal morality (which often bears little semblance to the law).

And that's exactly what the odious hacks have been doing.

I think your ignorance of the reality of prostitution does you credit.

I've dealt with prostitutes. I've seen, thankfully on a limited scale, the realities. There is no doubt in my mind that the norm is that payment for sex is not consent. Those prostitutes without someone on their back are few and far between.

One poster said consent is consent. This is of course rather simplistic.

Consent is a matter of fact. That is the law. If a pimp tells the woman to perform an act with a man, is that consent? If a husband tells his wife to perform a sex act with a man for money then is that consent? If the woman has a drugs habit and needs to score, is that consent?

Further, the point is of course that Mosley put himself at risk despite having a very responsible job where being blackmailed could lead to all sorts of problems for the public. That is the public interest.

Prostitution is not illegal in this country. Living off immoral earnings is. Running a brothel is, pimping is. The reason for this is that prostitutes are, in general, seen as the victim in the matter. For the vast majority, this is only too true.

This isn't 'twisting'. It is reality. If you haven't seen it then think yourself lucky.

[CommanderJameson]

I'm still wondering in what way the legal activities of consenting adults, irrespective of whether Derek thinks they're depraved or consenting or what, are the business of anyone else at all, let alone being "in the public interest".

[Derek Smith]

CommanderJameson said:

I'm still wondering in what way the legal activities of consenting adults, irrespective of whether Derek thinks they're depraved or consenting or what, are the business of anyone else at all, let alone being "in the public interest".

First of all it is extremely unlikely that the prostitutes are consenting in any real meaning of the word.

I've not suggested that prostitutes are in any way depraved, it being your word.

And finally, if he, with power and authority to effect my life and that of others totally unconnected with him, puts himself in the frame for blackmail then he is unfit for the post.

Whether his acts were legal or illegal is immaterial. He had responsibilities that went with the post which he did not fulfil.

[CommanderJameson]

Blame the victim, eh, Derek?

That's what you're doing.

Was he asking for it?

[5705]

Derek Smith said:

I've dealt with prostitutes. I've seen, thankfully on a limited scale, the realities. There is no doubt in my mind that the norm is that payment for sex is not consent. Those prostitutes without someone on their back are few and far between.

There's your causation: you and your kind persecute prostitutes and their tricks until you create the worst possible conditions for those prostitutes to work. Look in the mirror if you want someone to blame for those stty conditions. You could do something about it, if only you'd let go of your Harriett-Harmann-meets-Daily-Mail morals. I won't hold my breath; for hundreds (maybe thousands) of years you've been trying to deny human nature.

And FYI:

Derek Smith said:

payment for sex is not consent

Vacuous argument. Here's some news: payment for any work is not consent.

There's probably a thread somewhere here about legal status of prostitution if you want to argue away for a law change. But as you say, right now, prostitution is not illegal; your public interest claim is bogus.

[New POD]

Fort Jefferson said:

He is bothered by the things his newspaper tells him to be bothered about.

He's been bribed and blackmailed into submission, by Iphone's on a contract , wide screen TV's on HP from Brighthouse, and costa coffee. I think.

[Derek Smith]

5705 said:

Derek Smith said:

I've dealt with prostitutes. I've seen, thankfully on a limited scale, the realities. There is no doubt in my mind that the norm is that payment for sex is not consent. Those prostitutes without someone on their back are few and far between.

There's your causation: you and your kind persecute prostitutes and their tricks until you create the worst possible conditions for those prostitutes to work. Look in the mirror if you want someone to blame for those stty conditions. You could do something about it, if only you'd let go of your Harriett-Harmann-meets-Daily-Mail morals. I won't hold my breath; for hundreds (maybe thousands) of years you've been trying to deny human nature.

And FYI:

Derek Smith said:

payment for sex is not consent

Vacuous argument. Here's some news: payment for any work is not consent.

There's probably a thread somewhere here about legal status of prostitution if you want to argue away for a law change. But as you say, right now, prostitution is not illegal; your public interest claim is bogus.

A rather silly argument against prostitutes being victims.

However, I won't argue on here as the thread has gone off hacking. You'll not convince me Mosley was not party to his exposure and you won't open your mind to variations in consent.

I'm back to hacking.

[Oakey]

NotW cleared by the police of deleting Milly Dowlers voicemails. Guess they deleted themselves.

[5705]

Oakey said:

NotW cleared by the police of deleting Milly Dowlers voicemails. Guess they deleted themselves.

Yes, AIUI, the evidence from Mulcaire's notes does not match with the timing of the deletions. So, while NewsGroup has admitted to listening to the voicemails, there is no evidence of intentional deletion. A small technical point that NewsInt is desperate to promote (see yesterday's Sunday Times, for example).

(Derek, my background was psychology. I'm well aware that in the real world, consent is not a black/white issue. However, in law, it is. There are similar arguments that sex with drunk women is non-consensual. However, for now, the law says that a combination of self intoxication and post-coital remorse is not evidence of rape. Nor is prostitution. It's the law, that's all.)

[Oakey]

Derek Smith said:

I think your ignorance of the reality of prostitution does you credit.

I've dealt with prostitutes. I've seen, thankfully on a limited scale, the realities. There is no doubt in my mind that the norm is that payment for sex is not consent. Those prostitutes without someone on their back are few and far between.

One poster said consent is consent. This is of course rather simplistic.

Consent is a matter of fact. That is the law. If a pimp tells the woman to perform an act with a man, is that consent? If a husband tells his wife to perform a sex act with a man for money then is that consent? If the woman has a drugs habit and needs to score, is that consent?

Further, the point is of course that Mosley put himself at risk despite having a very responsible job where being blackmailed could lead to all sorts of problems for the public. That is the public interest.

Prostitution is not illegal in this country. Living off immoral earnings is. Running a brothel is, pimping is. The reason for this is that prostitutes are, in general, seen as the victim in the matter. For the vast majority, this is only too true.

This isn't 'twisting'. It is reality. If you haven't seen it then think yourself lucky.

Not according to this recent article/advertisement/contradeal in our local rag!!!

http://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/news/local/black...

Local Rag said:

ABBEY Veasey knows more then most the dangers of working in Blackpool’s sex industry.


She started out as a prostitute five years ago after getting divorced and found herself bringing up five children on her own.

Abbey found work as a receptionist at a sauna on Cookson Street, but soon discovered she could earn a lot more by selling herself.

But it was while out “providing a service” that Abbey was brutally attacked.

Her throat was slashed by a client who launched a frenzied attack while they were in bed together at his Cleveleys home in July last year.

Despite the horrific ordeal, Abbey has stayed in the industry. Not only that, she has now opened her own massage parlour – Dolly Babes, on Cookson Street. She says more girls than ever before are turning to prostitution.