Guy on the bus this morning

joe316

I THINK I spotted this middle aged dude taking pics of some school girl on the bus this morning. I didnt want to do anything cos tbh I was only suspicious about it, there was a click of the camera on his phone but cant be sure it was in her direction but that was only once (bout 75% sure), I didnt hear it again. If he had of done it again I would def have done summit, didnt want to go accusing some dude of "you know what" without any concrete proof.

What would you have done? I dont know whether I should regret not doing anything now.


oh before anyone mentions, it wasnt synper

6th

Christ do people not realise you can turn off the sound the camera phones makes?

joe316

Not on every phone especially the sony ones, supposedly this was a major issue in japan with dudes taking pics up schoolgirls skirts on the tube.

Nalz

6th wrote: »

Christ do people not realise you can turn off the sound the camera phones makes?

Some of them ya cant!

whiskeyman

6th wrote: »

Christ do people not realise you can turn off the sound the camera phones makes?

not on some cameras afaik.
Sony Ericcson being one of them, althought there's probably downloadable 'fixes'

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

FFS OP - this is the kind of crap that will be in the Sunday World and have every paretn terrified of sending their kids to school on a bus.

You go to the gaurds and the guards are goign to ask you the exact same question I will: What exactrly would you like him to be charged with?

whiskeyman

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

What's he going to be charged with?

a phone charger...


/runs away

kf1920

I'd Have made a big obvious deal of taking his photo then throw him a nice smile and see what he did

AnonoBoy

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

What's he going to be charged with?

Sony Ericcson chargers are hard to find alright. This is a good question.

Oh and for any budding pervs out there - if you put your phone on silent it generally kills the camera click sound. (Even Sony Ericcsons - is that the phone of choice for leering old men?)

Carsinian Thau

6th wrote: »

Christ do people not realise you can turn off the sound the camera phones makes?

Do you know how incriminating this sounds? ;):p

joe316

Thats what i was thinking, is there no infringement to people's privacy or summit? Can go about saying he's a peadophile just cos he took a few pics, was just just a bit uncomfortable bout it all.

6th

joe316 wrote: »

Not on every phone especially the sony ones, supposedly this was a major issue in japan with dudes taking pics up schoolgirls skirts on the tube.

Trilla wrote: »

Some of them ya cant!

whiskeyman wrote: »

not on some cameras afaik.
Sony Ericcson being one of them, althought there's probably downloadable 'fixes'

Nokia, the pervert friendly phones.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

What's he going to be charged with?

Charged? who said anything about the police? Street Justice FTW!

6th

joe316 wrote: »

Thats what i was thinking, is there no infringement to people's privacy or summit? Can go about saying he's a peadophile just cos he took a few pics, was just just a bit uncomfortable bout it all.

Some schoolgirls are 17.

blah

Ban cameraphones. The only solution. Teh Technology is the problem.

kaimera

14 posts in.

I'm disappointed with AH.

Was the girl hawt?

joe316

she LOOKED bout 15 tbh, i know that means that she could be between 12 and 25 but I'd say she was 15 max.

yes kaimera she looked like she'd be a stunner in bout 4 years, i have photos on her on my bebo.................... ooops

AnonoBoy

blah wrote: »

Ban cameraphones. The only solution. Teh Technology is the problem.

Nah - just don't let children out in public. Ever.

Problem solved.

whiskeyman

joe316 wrote: »

she LOOKED bout 15 tbh, i know that means that she could be between 12 and 25 but I'd say she was 15 max.

OMG!!!11 You looked at her long enough to have a guess of her age!!
You were probably saving a mental image of her in your mind for later!!!one11

You're just as bad tbh...


PEADO!!!!






eh, oh yeah... kidding and all like....

Run_to_da_hills

joe316 wrote: »

I THINK I spotted this middle aged dude taking pics of some school girl on the bus this morning. I didnt want to do anything cos tbh I was only suspicious about it, there was a click of the camera on his phone but cant be sure it was in her direction but that was only once (bout 75% sure), I didnt hear it again. If he had of done it again I would def have done summit, didnt want to go accusing some dude of "you know what" without any concrete proof.

What would you have done? I dont know whether I should regret not doing anything now.


oh before anyone mentions, it wasnt synper

All CIE busses are equipped with CCTC, the latest ones have 7 internal cameras and 1 foreword facing. The pervert taking these photos will be on record. Contact CIE with the time and number of the bus and they should have a recording if it and can pursue the matter if necessary.

joe316

Suppose the fact that the dude had a Peado Bear mask on heightened my suspicions

whiskeyman

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Contact CIE with the time and number of the bus and they should have a recording if it and can pursue the matter if necessary.

'Hi. Is that CIE? I want a copy of your CCTV with a busload of young hawt schoolgirls. Thanks'.



yup - that should work ok...

:pac:

_feedback_

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

All CIE busses are equipped with CCTC, the latest ones have 7 internal cameras and 1 foreword facing. The pervert taking these photos will be on record. Contact CIE with the time and number of the bus and they should have a recording if it and can pursue the matter if necessary.

Or better still, let him in to the CIE camera place and perv all he likes.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

kf1920 wrote: »

I'd Have made a big obvious deal of taking his photo then throw him a nice smile and see what he did

Taken one of you to add to the collection

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

All CIE busses are equipped with CCTC, the latest ones have 7 internal cameras and 1 foreword facing. The pervert taking these photos will be on record. Contact CIE with the time and number of the bus and they should have a recording if it and can pursue the matter if necessary.

I thought you were against CCTV and police state crap?

blah

joe316 wrote: »

Suppose the fact that the dude had a Peado Bear mask on heightened my suspicions

Did he smell bad and have a hump? And a weird eye? All those paedos look and smell weird. It's never someone known to the family. Ever.

joe316

He had that tell tell sign of a peado, the full beard.

PurpleBerry

Oh, come on Joe, you're not looking at the most obvious answer. Immediately your mind springs to paedophile (I won't comment on that can 'o' worms) but there could be several legitimate reasons for the scenario which you described.

Perhaps this man is embroiled in a bitter divorce. The child could be either his child or grandchild, it can be hard to tell in these crazy modern times. If he's the grandchild, he could just want a nice picture of his favourite (or only) grandchild and his crazy son in law won't let them see each other because of all the nastiness with the gardener. Now Old Mattie is afraid he'll never see his beloved Susie again so he sneaks a picture, so that he can remember the happier times.

Or, he could be the child's father and is gathering evidence of the poor kids bruises to use in the custody case as proof of his ex as an unfit mother.

Or perhaps this child looks exactly like the child that was snatched from him many years ago. Unable to believe the sight in front of him he sneaks a photo, to show his ailing wife who has never gotten over the terrible loss of thier own beloved child.

Or perhaps he is a casting director, and he has spotted the next Julia Roberts. Knowing that he needs permission but not wanting to risk the child walking out of his life forever, he quickly and swiftly sneaks a snap and we will see this child in 10 years time on the cover of "Cosmopolitian" - You'll so soooo embarrassed!

blah

Neesa wrote: »

Oh, come on Joe, you're not looking at the most obvious answer. Immediately your mind springs to paedophile (I won't comment on that can 'o' worms) but there could be several legitimate reasons for the scenario which you described.

Perhaps this man is embroiled in a bitter divorce. The child could be either his child or grandchild, it can be hard to tell in these crazy modern times. If he's the grandchild, he could just want a nice picture of his favourite (or only) grandchild and his crazy son in law won't let them see each other because of all the nastiness with the gardener. Now Old Mattie is afraid he'll never see his beloved Susie again so he sneaks a picture, so that he can remember the happier times.

Or, he could be the child's father and is gathering evidence of the poor kids bruises to use in the custody case as proof of his ex as an unfit mother.

Or perhaps this child looks exactly like the child that was snatched from him many years ago. Unable to believe the sight in front of him he sneaks a photo, to show his ailing wife who has never gotten over the terrible loss of thier own beloved child.

Or perhaps he is a casting director, and he has spotted the next Julia Roberts. Knowing that he needs permission but not wanting to risk the child walking out of his life forever, he quickly and swiftly sneaks a snap and we will see this child in 10 years time on the cover of "Cosmopolitian" - You'll so soooo embarrassed!

Or maybe he's going to go home and pleasure himself to it.

Fratton Fred

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

What exactrly would you like him to be charged with?

Child trafficking and Pornography act.

It is a serious offence to take pictures of kids wihtout their parents permission.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

blah wrote: »

Did he smell bad and have a hump? And a weird eye? All those paedos look and smell weird. It's never someone known to the family. Ever.

There is no evidence to back this up, but it IS fact.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Child trafficking and Pornography act.

It is a serious offence to take pictures of kids wihtout their parents permission.

Somehow, I don't think pornogrpahy was being filmed on CIE/Dublin Bus this morning. You do know what pornography is, don't you?

Link to legislation sighting the act in the second setence is an offence, please.

stovelid

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

All CIE busses are equipped with CCTC, the latest ones have 7 internal cameras and 1 foreword facing. The pervert taking these photos will be on record.

The pervert buses are filming schoolgirls?

Ban all buses.

/rabble.

blah

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Child trafficking and Pornography act.

It is a serious offence to take pictures of kids wihtout their parents permission.

It's actually illegal. Ask any legaloligist.

joe316

Well I know that in swimming pools, etc.. that parents cant take pics of THEIR kids cos of child laws (not sure which tho) so there has to be some law against it or else the pools are doing it themselves.

would other people have done something this morning

Quazzie

joe316 wrote: »

Well I know that in swimming pools, etc.. that parents cant take pics of THEIR kids cos of child laws (not sure which tho) so there has to be some law against it or else the pools are doing it themselves.

would other people have done something this morning

yea i'd have linked up and got a copy via bluetooth

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

blah wrote: »

It's actually illegal. Ask any legaloligist.

Ask any WHAT? And no, it's not illegal. Frowned upon maybe in paranoia driven tabloid-states like the UK, yes, but not illegal and not in Ireland

Fratton Fred

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Somehow, I don't think pornogrpahy was being filmed on CIE/Dublin Bus this morning. You do know what pornography is, don't you?

Link to legislation sighting the act in the second setence is an offence, please.

Sorry, can't be arsed.

Just going on advice given by two lawyers and two Gaurds though when I had a "Dispute" with the local residents association over car parking.....its a long story.

Silenceisbliss

think she woulda been worth 1.8 million??

hehehehe

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Sorry, can't be arsed.

Just going on advice given by two lawyers and two Gaurds though when I had a "Dispute" with the local residents association over car parking.....its a long story.

Didn't think so.

I'll bet it's long. And completely unrelated. Just one question: were charges brought in the end?

blah

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Ask any WHAT? And no, it's not illegal. Frowned upon maybe in paranoia driven tabloid-states like the UK, yes, but not illegal and not in Ireland

It's true, I was taking a photograph of a traffic light for my traffic light enthusiast website and I accidentally caught a 17 year old boy's finger in the shot. Then I got arrested and chemically castrated. Look it up, it was in all the papers and Traffic Light Enthusiast Monthly.*

*May not be true. I think I've taken this as far as I can go. And I can never have children.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

blah wrote: »

It's true, I was taking a photograph of a traffic light for my traffic light enthusiast website and I accidentally caught a 17 year old boy's finger in the shot. Then I got arrested and chemically castrated. Look it up, it was in all the papers and Traffic Light Enthusiast Monthly.*

*May not be true. I think I've taken this as far as I can go. And I can never have children.

Ah, I see. And how is the 17-year-old? Poor traumatised wee thing will be in psychotherapy for years.

thelordofcheese

6th wrote: »

Christ do people not realise you can turn off the sound the camera phones makes?

Some do require you to have a sound, but then helpfully let you assign *any* sound you like to the camera function.

Ohh, Silence.Mp3 my usefull little friend.......... erm, i mean, ohh jesus.... i've said too much

SV

whiskeyman wrote: »

not on some cameras afaik.
Sony Ericcson being one of them, althought there's probably downloadable 'fixes'

If you put your sony erricson phone on silent..you may take pictures undetected

AnonoBoy

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Somehow, I don't think pornogrpahy was being filmed on CIE/Dublin Bus this morning. You do know what pornography is, don't you?

Link to legislation sighting the act in the second setence is an offence, please.

The Daily Mail Paedo Tabloid Hysteria Legislation of 2006

is_that_so

Maybe he just didn't understand the phone and was trying to make a call.
"Who the hell is that young one on my phone? What's that damned clicking noise?"

whiskeyman

ClioV6 wrote: »

If you put your sony erricson phone on silent..you may take pictures undetected

Just tried that - still get shutter noise on my K800i.
Think it depends on the regional firmware on the phone.

joe316

is_that_so wrote: »

Maybe he just didn't understand the phone and was trying to make a call.
"Who the hell is that young one on my phone? What's that damned clicking noise?"

Even tho that is very possible, i did spot him trying (i think) to take another one. He was hiding the phone and aimed at her, I stared at him he saw me looking at him and quickly put the phone back in his jacket.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

joe316 wrote: »

Even tho that is very possible, i did spot him trying (i think) to take another one. He was hiding the phone and aimed at her, I stared at him he saw me looking at him and quickly put the phone back in his jacket.

Good luck with convincing the Guards to take THAT seriously!

kayos

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

FFS OP - this is the kind of crap that will be in the Sunday World and have every paretn terrified of sending their kids to school on a bus.

You go to the gaurds and the guards are goign to ask you the exact same question I will: What exactrly would you like him to be charged with?

Dont have the time to dig up the link but some guy in Galway got jail time during the week for 3 incidents of taking upskirts with his phone.

Dinter

Actually this reminds me of an incident I saw on a bus.

There were two kids around six or seven sitting together on the bus in front of me when I was heading home. Bus is half empty when I get on and empties more as we head for Rathmines. Anyway as we pull into the Portobello stop this lad comes up the stairs and sits down beside them, i.e. makes them push over so there’s a space for him. At this stage there’s loads of seats available so I found it a bit odd he wanted to sit there.

Anyway as we’re driving up the road he keeps engaging them in conversation even though it’s obvious they’re a bit freaked out. It’s also obvious that he doesn’t know them as he introduces himself with a handshake. The two kids end up squashed together in the corner with him sprawled in beside them. There was nothing more ominous than that.

Still when I was getting off I made a point of telling him to go elsewhere as the seats are only made for two. He was pretty pissed off at my temerity though and I had to tell him (politely) a couple of times.

So what do you think? Friendly chap who likes kids to talk to or something more sinister

Run_to_da_hills

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I thought you were against CCTV and police state crap?

I forgot to mention, if the culprit was using a smart card they could track his movements and see what other busses he was on and where else he was perving