|
|
| Re: We Have Another One (130693) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (131255) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Aug 26 14:45:45 2005, in response to Re: We Have Another One, posted by Alex L. on Fri Aug 26 14:27:46 2005. So, no beating of a woman exposing herself, as you said you would do if it was a man? (And to head off the imminent arrival of the moron(s), I'm using "beating" in the sense of 1. To strike repeatedly. 2. To subject to repeated beatings or physical abuse; batter. 3. To punish by hitting or whipping; flog.)Actually, as I stated in another post, the "beating" part is something I would like to do. However the law, of course, does not allow my wish so I simply call or find police. It does not matter man or woman, I will do the same procedure on both incidents the same day. Of course someone else took it off the deep end about my "beatings", but let's you and I not go there to that level. An exhibitionist would not be treated as a sex offender under Megan's Law until she (he) is convicted, serves time and is released. Right and with some evidence like a photgraph, the perp will be convicted or plead guilty to the offense for a lesser charge. Since sex crimes are a serious matter in NY State under Megan's Law, it is doubtful any one of the 5 NYC District Attorneys will offer a plea deal. Actually, I assumed that a conviction will automatically place you under the Sex Offenders Registry, not upon release from incarceration. In the incident I cited, it was 1030 at Pacific St - plenty of people around, very hard to pull that off. Right, one suspect against two dozen or so witnesses will not be able to pass off any bogus stories of rape/sexual assault. But there are instances where a man is alone with a woman in an R68 subway car and the man might take the wrong direction of accepting a sexual advance from the woman and she cries assault even before the man was going to do (sic!) something. |
|
|
| (131257) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Aug 26 14:48:11 2005, in response to Re: We Have Another One, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Aug 26 14:45:45 2005. Sex crimes like public exposure are often plead out. Meagan's Law is intended to warn communities about convicted rapists and pedophiles. A public flasher wouldn't warrant such attention. |
|
|
| (131272) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Fri Aug 26 15:09:53 2005, in response to Re: We Have Another One, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Aug 26 14:45:45 2005. People exposing themselves are not the same as people raping someone or assaulting children.The former although certainly not "good" is way better than the latter criminals. IINM, Megan's law is meant for the latter, not the former. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (131274) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Aug 26 15:18:26 2005, in response to Re: We Have Another One, posted by Alex L. on Thu Aug 25 17:35:23 2005. Just out of curiousity, what would you do if you saw a woman exposing herself to someone? I ask only because I ran into this problem earlier this week at Pacific St - C/R calling Control for NYPD, after passenger complaints, to remove woman exposing herself.Top or bottom? |
|
|
| (131279) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Aug 26 15:24:29 2005, in response to Re: We Have Another One, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Aug 26 14:45:45 2005. Since sex crimes are a serious matter in NY State under Megan's Law...As others have pointed out, Megan's Law, which provides for the notification to a community when a convicted and released sex offender moves in, doesn't even come close to applying here. According to NYS Penal Code §245.00, "Public lewdness": A person is guilty of public lewdness when he intentionally exposes the private or intimate parts of his body in a lewd manner or commits any other lewd act (a) in a public place, or (b) in private premises under circumstances in which he may readily be observed from either a public place or from other private premises, and with intent that he be so observed. Public lewdness is a class B misdemeanor. |
|
|
| (131283) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by Tea Biscuit 18th Avenue Dude on Fri Aug 26 15:34:23 2005, in response to Re: We Have Another One, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Aug 26 15:24:29 2005. Under 3 months imprisonment for a B misdemeanor, per NYS Penal Law § 70.15(2) |
|
|
| (131284) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by Alex L. on Fri Aug 26 15:43:03 2005, in response to Re: We Have Another One, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Fri Aug 26 15:18:26 2005. Bottom, front and rear. |
|
|
| (131285) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Aug 26 15:51:27 2005, in response to Re: We Have Another One, posted by Alex L. on Fri Aug 26 15:43:03 2005. Damm!Several months ago, I saw a crackhead outside the homless entrance at 7th Ave/33rd Street/IRT station. She was buck naked, save for newspapers covering her private parts and mumbling to herself. I got the officers stationed downstairs near McDonalds in Penn so fast, that she still was faster, somehow disappeared into the crowd outside on street (or probably a good hiding place inside the entrance that I don't know about). I said to myself before finding the police, "screw my camera phone, just get someone." But if anyone was running naked like that into a crowd, people would have said something. |
|
|
| (131288) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by vengence on Fri Aug 26 16:02:26 2005, in response to Re: We Have Another One, posted by Broadway Lion on Fri Aug 26 11:08:27 2005. LOL...EXACTLY RIGHT. |
|
|
| (131365) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Fri Aug 26 19:24:40 2005, in response to Re: We Have Another One, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Thu Aug 25 23:19:32 2005. any photos? |
|
|
| (131688) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Aug 27 11:02:14 2005, in response to UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Aug 26 12:23:08 2005. This thing is legit. Story in todays Daily Snooze. http://nydailynews.com/front/story/340923p-291030c.html |
|
|
| (131709) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Sat Aug 27 13:57:12 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Aug 27 11:02:14 2005. Yeah very sick bastards out there the article is in the Daily News i did a double take when i seen that pic beacuse i knew i seen it here. You did the right thing Julie i hope they catch that pervert. |
|
|
| (131721) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Sat Aug 27 14:33:49 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Aug 27 11:02:14 2005. AND it is marquee news on the 1010WINS site - front page, as a matter of fact. KUDOS to Julie for catching this guy in the act and doing the right thing.wayne |
|
|
| (131727) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Sat Aug 27 14:54:57 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Aug 27 11:02:14 2005. Of course it was legit. The woman takes action, but i alerted someone else at the NYDN about Julie's link as well and the reporter called me back to say he was surprised at the magnitude of this travesty. i still congrate Julie on informing us. |
|
|
| (131728) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by julie_profumo on Sat Aug 27 15:00:40 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Sat Aug 27 14:33:49 2005. Thank you for the kind words Wayne. However Julie cannot take credit for catching this deviant. Had this man been foolish enough to engage in this behavior in front of Julie, being reported to the police would have been the least of his problems. She saw this photo posted on a blog and was reminded of an earlier thread. As she mentioned above, Julie wondered why perverts were attracted to the R44/46 cars. Julie likes faux woodgrain as much as the next person but this is taking it too far. s.to.she.who.am.the.only.one@gmail.com |
|
|
| (131732) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Aug 27 15:37:47 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Sat Aug 27 14:54:57 2005. Here is what I meant by legit: when I saw the original photo of this guy exposing himself, I was not convinced if he really did it or if it was photoshopped. I do not take everything I read and see on this messageboard as absolute fact. On another board, I read the account of the accuser. While I applaud her in what she did, the guy could have easily have attacked her when he saw her take the picture of him. She also said the guy was leering at her beforehand and that the car wasn't crowded. Therefore, she could have avoided the whole situation by simply sitting elsewhere when the "alarm" started going off in her head. |
|
|
| (131737) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Aug 27 15:46:31 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Aug 27 11:02:14 2005. Good find. It sort of proves the photo was legit. At first too thought it "may" have been photoshopped.See, and if they outlawed photography on the subway....she would have been the criminal! |
|
|
| (131739) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat Aug 27 15:48:37 2005, in response to UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Aug 26 12:23:08 2005. Thanks for your help David.I took the liberty of sharing the information with Transit District 1 and mailed them photos. It's only a matter of time before these individuals will be arrested. |
|
|
| (131751) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by Richard Rabinowitz on Sat Aug 27 16:21:52 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by julie_profumo on Sat Aug 27 15:00:40 2005. Julie Profumo is right.It was a Mystical Chick who bagged the bum on her cell phone, not Julie Profumo. The Mystical Chick goes by the name of Nguyen. Thao Nguyen. It's front page news on the Daily News, and Julie Profumo did indeed scoop the News. Way to go, Thao and Julie! :-) |
|
|
| (131752) | |
In the mystical chick's own words |
|
|
Posted by Richard Rabinowitz on Sat Aug 27 16:32:40 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Richard Rabinowitz on Sat Aug 27 16:21:52 2005. According to the Daily News' writer Tracy Connor, this is what Thao Nguyen had to say about the whole incident: "He kept staring at me. I could feel his eyes on me. I wanted to avoid eye contact so I looked away, but I could see his reflection in the window. I saw him massaging himself and then he unzipped and pulled it out. I thought, "I can't believe he's doing this in the middle of the day!" ...I turned on the camera. He was still masturbating. I aimed it and quickly took the shot. As soon as I took it, he zipped up and got off the train." She added that he was disgusted at what this passenger was doing, and she immediately reported it to a 34th St. station cop. After filling out forms, Thao posted it to Craigslist and Flickr, and the bloggers began linking to it. The incident occurred in a "mostly empty subway car" and Thao felt nervous, so, snap went her Samsung phone. |
|
|
| (131757) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by julie_profumo on Sat Aug 27 16:39:11 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Richard Rabinowitz on Sat Aug 27 16:21:52 2005. Yes indeed. Credit where credit is due. Julie's real name is not even close to Thao Nguyen. Julie's family is actually from Spain via Idaho. s.to.she.who.am.the.only.one@gmail.com |
|
|
| (131758) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by Richard Rabinowitz on Sat Aug 27 16:43:03 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by julie_profumo on Sat Aug 27 16:39:11 2005. Idaho? That's a long way to go to NYC from Spain... I'd thought your family had been from Italy. (Spanish and Italian are related languages.)Richard Rabinowitz <----Hungarian and Russian great-grandparents; 3 NYC grandparents and one Philadelphia-raised grandparent, 2 New York City parents, born in NYC, grew up in Joisey. :) |
|
|
| (131763) | |
Re: In the mystical chick's own words |
|
|
Posted by mr_brian on Sat Aug 27 17:17:14 2005, in response to In the mystical chick's own words, posted by Richard Rabinowitz on Sat Aug 27 16:32:40 2005. Can we not refer to Asian women as "mystical chicks?" To bluntly put it, I'm fucking getting sick of it. |
|
|
| (131764) | |
Re: In the mystical chick's own words |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Sat Aug 27 17:19:56 2005, in response to Re: In the mystical chick's own words, posted by mr_brian on Sat Aug 27 17:17:14 2005. you have every right to get sick of itas well as any other slang description of a person based on race, color, religion, etc...... |
|
|
| (131767) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Sat Aug 27 17:25:21 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by julie_profumo on Sat Aug 27 15:00:40 2005. Julie, how could you have scooped a story with the NYDN when the woman (who also concealed her face with her Samsung phone.) was the one who told the story to the news itself? |
|
|
| (131769) | |
Re: In the mystical chick's own words |
|
|
Posted by Richard Rabinowitz on Sat Aug 27 17:29:12 2005, in response to Re: In the mystical chick's own words, posted by mr_brian on Sat Aug 27 17:17:14 2005. Fine. Vietnamese... ummm... chick. |
|
|
| (131775) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat Aug 27 17:45:31 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by julie_profumo on Sat Aug 27 16:39:11 2005. Are you Castillian, Catalonian, Basque what? |
|
|
| (131782) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Aug 27 17:54:00 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Sat Aug 27 17:25:21 2005. "Julie" never claimed to be the person who took the photo. "Julie" found said links online, and posted the links here. |
|
|
| (131803) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Sat Aug 27 19:10:30 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by RonInBayside on Sat Aug 27 15:48:37 2005. Actually since the charge of public lewdness does not get any jail time for a first offender, what counts is that picture is in a place where millions of people can see him. Imagine ppl at his job reading todays paper. Imagine his family, his friends. |
|
|
| (131826) | |
Re: In the Vietnamese chick's own words |
|
|
Posted by mr_brian on Sat Aug 27 20:11:33 2005, in response to Re: In the mystical chick's own words, posted by monorail on Sat Aug 27 17:19:56 2005. Yes, the usage of this term is starting to get to the point where it's becoming derogatory.And thank you, Richard, for being somewhat understanding. I even fixed the title for you so you don't have to. ;) har har |
|
|
| (131864) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by egis semaly on Sat Aug 27 21:08:06 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Sat Aug 27 19:10:30 2005. Imagine he's from out of town and no one is going to see it. He was lame. The best thing is to get into the background of tourists' photos. When they get home and develop the film, they'll wonder who is that man in the background and what is he doing! |
|
|
| (131955) | |
Re: In the Vietnamese chick's own words |
|
|
Posted by Richard Rabinowitz on Sun Aug 28 01:01:30 2005, in response to Re: In the Vietnamese chick's own words, posted by mr_brian on Sat Aug 27 20:11:33 2005. w00000t :) |
|
|
| (132027) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by rushhoursardine on Sun Aug 28 04:21:57 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Aug 27 15:37:47 2005. Bill: you're off-line on this one. You and I are men. We do not endure the constant nonsense women endure on the trains, in terms of flashers, ass-squeezers, and other girly-men who get off doing this sort of stuff.I'd shoot the first bastard who ever did this to my sister, girlfriend or niece. Or chop his ----- off. |
|
|
| (132029) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by monorail on Sun Aug 28 04:47:46 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by rushhoursardine on Sun Aug 28 04:21:57 2005. 'I'd shoot the first bastard who ever did this to my sister, girlfriend or niece. Or chop his ----- off.' your into murder and disfigurement? do you get off on that? |
|
|
| (132142) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Aug 28 14:06:06 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by rushhoursardine on Sun Aug 28 04:21:57 2005. We should all know when a situation calls for us to walk away, male or female. When she saw him leering, she should have moved. |
|
|
| (132306) | |
Re: We Have Another One |
|
|
Posted by the joe on Sun Aug 28 20:10:31 2005, in response to We Have Another One, posted by julie_profumo on Thu Aug 25 08:51:24 2005. Fox 5 just had this story on their news tonight.looks like the little brooklyn revolt has begun. death to the perverts. |
|
|
| (132409) | |
Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One) |
|
|
Posted by South Ferry on Mon Aug 29 01:08:25 2005, in response to Re: UPDATE (Re: We Have Another One), posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sun Aug 28 14:06:06 2005. & if she moved, then she wouldnt have SHOT the shot..... which might come 2 be the difference maker. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
