nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Man squeezes woman's boobs too hard - it ends up in court - should it have?

Outlaw Pete

Be interested to hear people's views on the following recent case in the UK.

Full (very long) article can be read here but the crux of it is below:

Junior doctor's career is in ruins after he indecently assaulted his Tinder date by grabbing and bruising her breasts during CONSENSUAL sex

A junior doctor convicted of indecent assault after grabbing a woman's breasts during consensual sex despite her asking him not to claimed he was 'pretty passionate' because it was their 'first time'.

Philip Queree, 37, was taken to court for repeatedly grabbing the woman's breasts and pulling her hair while the couple had intercourse after meeting on Tinder.

Despite consenting to having sex with Queree, the victim told him she did not want her breasts touched and accused him of using 'excessive force'.

Queree has now been placed on the Sex Offender's Register for five years - ruining his dream of becoming a doctor, according to his barrister.

The defendant, then 36, was a mature student in the third year of study at a London medical school who was staying with his parents in Jersey in the summer holidays when he met the female healthcare worker.

Mrs Shaw said after meeting via Tinder and getting on well during their first date they agreed to meet again two days later.

She said on Friday, August 19 they went for a walk on the beach and had a surprise dinner at a harbour side restaurant.

She said they agreed to stop using Tinder and to date exclusively.

'Later that evening they went to her flat where they engaged in sexual intercourse.

'The woman's evidence was that during intercourse he grabbed her breasts very forcibly.

'She was in pain. At first she said nothing but moved position to avoid her breasts being touched. Again he grabbed her breasts.

'She wanted to continue sexual intercourse but was in pain and did not want her breasts to be touched again.

'She was crying and told him that he had been rough. She told him not to grab her breasts.

'He apologised and agreed, after which they recommenced sexual intercourse.

'However he grabbed her breasts again twice more in the same manner as before, causing her severe pain.'

She said the victim was very shaken and went to the bathroom where she noticed red marks on her breasts which had developed into significant bruising.

Queree told the court he agreed that the encounter took place but insisted that all acts were consensual.

In his defence, Queree claimed that at no time did she tell him not to touch her breasts although he said she did at one stage ask him, in non specific terms, to be more gentle and he complied.

The court was told: 'She had given consent to sexual intercourse and therefore had implicitly given consent to her breasts being touched in a sexual manner.

'By her account she later specifically withdrew consent for her breasts being touched even though she continued otherwise to consent to sexual intercourse.

'She said that he had continued to grab her breasts despite the withdrawal of consent and in the knowledge that consent had been withdrawn.'

'After she showed him the bruise he responded that he had had rougher sex than that.

'She did not want him to leave and did not want to believe what had happened.

'She wanted him to stay and discuss it. His demeanour then changed. He had tears in his eyes and said he needed to go and think about what he had done to her.

'He then stormed out the door. She was in complete and utter shock and texted him, imploring him to return.

'She wanted him to come back and give an explanation and just could not equate his behaviour in the bedroom with his previous charming behaviour.

In police interview Queree agreed that he had touched her breasts during sexual intercourse but felt that that was reasonable behaviour.

Queree said the intercourse was 'pretty passionate as befits two people engaging in their first sexual encounter.'

But Mrs Shaw rejected his version of events and found him guilty of indecent assault.

In conclusion, she said: 'I am sure that she withdrew her consent for him to grab her breasts; but he knew this and continued to do so forcefully, causing her severe pain.

'This was an assault. He touched a sexual and intimate part of her body in a sexual manner without her consent.

'Irrespective of her consent to other sexual conduct, I am sure that the touching was in circumstances of indecency and thus he is guilty of indecent assault.

'I find it credible that she wanted to continue sexual intercourse but that she tried to put a limit on his conduct and asked him not to grab her painful breasts again.

In deciding to put Queree on the Sex Offenders Register, she said: 'I am concerned that you pose a risk of sexual harm to others.'

Advocate David Steenson, defending, said that the case had ruined the defendant's life.

On a personal level: I've had women scratch my back (so bad it's drawn blood after having told them to quit) and also once had a woman bite my feckin tongue so bad it swelled up. So, simply decided not to see either nut job again. Unless I was drunk. But, do I feel that either of them should have been charged and placed on the sexual offenders register? No, of course I bloody well don't.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that if some woman went full Catherine Tramell on me that I'd feel it okay for her to have done so given that I'd consented to have sexual intercourse with her, but surely there is a level of personal responsibility that people need to take for what happens them when engaged in sexual hi-jinks and I don't see that line was really crossed here. If he whipped out some metal nipple clamps and started dragging her round the room, resulting in her ending up in casualty.... course the guy (or girl) should be charged, and conceivably for some things not so violent to (just using that as a an example).

Imo, this girl should just have asked this guy to leave once it became apparent that he had no consideration for how she felt.

So, what says you...................

Should this have ended up in court? Or did this fall within the boundaries of personal responsibility?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Estrellita

First off there are two wrongs here. He should have just reigned it in when she asked the first time. Secondly, and far worse, she reported him for using excessive force when she could have just said 'Its not my thing, so can you please leave'. The punishment does not fit the crime here, and I do wonder is there more to this than meets the eye.

It may be a case that she felt jilted by him and wanted to get him into some kind of trouble. Did she mean for it to go this far? As far as ruining his career?

She felt she was falling in love with him. She thought they were at the beginning of a relationship; a relationship she wanted to continue

Did the doctor stop returning her calls and texts? If a man hurt you so badly, why would you try to get him to return?

He then stormed out the door. She was in complete and utter shock and texted him, imploring him to return

That doesn't make sense to me. Nor does the severity of his punishment.

beertons

His surname made me laugh.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

philstar

it happened to Frank Drebin as well

up for anything

Ridiculous poll options so I didn't vote.

The_Valeyard

What happened to the kicked in the balls thread?

9or10

Bowlardo wrote: »

Considering ireland is short of doctors , i think we should employee a moneyball strategy to hiring doctors that are shafted for something minor like.
We'd save a fortune, doctor is greatful for a job, we gain a doctor to our hse register...everyone's a winner

Hardly a loss to the profession, if he doesn't know how hard is too hard.

They're not apples ffs.

Nabber

Fair play to her. Consenting to sex is not an open invitation to do what you want

RandomName2

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No.

He repeatedly injured her after he was asked to stop, ie consent was withdrawn.

I can only hope that anyone who thinks it's appropriate to injure a woman during sex, against her wishes, is some virgin who's been spending too much time on adult video sites.

It's assault, sure, but it's not sexual assault.

Sex was consensual, the physicality was not. To put a label of sexual predator on a person who had consensual sex but didn't give a damn about causing physical pain is stupid.

Cina

razorblunt

With a set of gnashers like that, she's lucky he didn't bite them.

Grayson

Estrellita wrote: »

First off there are two wrongs here. He should have just reigned it in when she asked the first time. Secondly, and far worse, she reported him for using excessive force when she could have just said 'Its not my thing, so can you please leave'. The punishment does not fit the crime here, and I do wonder is there more to this than meets the eye.

Here's the thing though. If someone grabs your arm and squeezes, you tell them to stop and they squeeze harder, then it's a type of assault.
The OP mentioned a woman scratching him on the back, something similar happened to me. I didn't like it, I told her to stop but I put up with it because i was drunk and horny and having sex at the time.
Now if a woman came up to me on the street or in the pub and scratched me, then did it again after I told her to stop, then it's definitely assault.

Different actions become acceptable during sex but there's still a line that can be crossed. Even people who are into BDSM and inflict/receive pain have a safe word and they take it seriously.
In this case the woman told him not to, was in pain and was crying. He did it again and even caused bruising. He was obviously repeatedly using excessive force and doing something against her will. I'm definitely on her side with this.

I will say one thing though, I don't know if this guy belongs on a sex offenders list. A conviction alone would have been enough.

Grayson

9or10 wrote: »

Hardly a loss to the profession, if he doesn't know how hard is too hard.

They're not apples ffs.

melons?

FCIM

RandomName2 wrote: »

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

No.

He repeatedly injured her after he was asked to stop, ie consent was withdrawn.

I can only hope that anyone who thinks it's appropriate to injure a woman during sex, against her wishes, is some virgin who's been spending too much time on adult video sites.

It's assault, sure, but it's not sexual assault.

Sex was consensual, the physicality was not. To put a label of sexual predator on a person who had consensual sex but didn't give a damn about causing physical pain is stupid.

Your argument makes a lot of sense. He's obviously not a rapist and quite likely not a predator. The only counterargument to him being treated as a common assailant rather than a sexual one would be it was her breasts he did the damage too. Had he just pulled her hair and left it at that then charge him with affray, hair, at least on the head, not being a sexual body part. The sexual assault is present though because of where on the body it was. If he randomly attacked a woman's breasts in the street, he would be charged along sexual assault lines.

Grayson

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Well, if the complaint the degree of force used (which it is here) then yes I do. How else can we measure if someone has been too forceful otherwise.

I've mentioned the time I was jumped by scumbags. Knocked to the ground and had the **** kicked out of me. Only one thing needed medical attention and that's where they smashed a bottle over the back of my head.
According to your standards my bruised and swollen face wouldn't have counted as assault.

Outlaw Pete

Grayson wrote: »

I've mentioned the time I was jumped by scumbags. Knocked to the ground and had the **** kicked out of me. Only one thing needed medical attention and that's where they smashed a bottle over the back of my head.
According to your standards my bruised and swollen face wouldn't have counted as assault.

Poor comprehension there, Grayson, to say the least.

How the hell could your complaint be the "degree of force used" (which is what I specified).

Did you consent to a lighter beating from them or something?

No, you didn't and so therefore your analogy is a poor one.

Grayditch

He sounds and looks like an absolute weirdo. He also acted mad aggressively by the sounds of it. Sex offender's list is some rough going, all the same.

hatrickpatrick

100%. Delighted it went to court and is getting publicity.

I'm into BDSM and ironically enough, people who are into BDSM seem to be far better at understanding this than vanilla folk - people have what we call hard limits - things they 100% do not want to experience as part of sexual activity - and the number one most important thing is to never, ever breach those limits, unless the person in question specifically states that they've had a change of heart about it and would like to try it. Vanilla sex should be no different - if there are specific things which people don't like for one reason or another and they're very clear about communicating that (which it sounds like the alleged victim here was) then violating that is a massive breach of trust, and not something anyone should be ok with.

You can analogise this fairly easily to be honest. If you consent to sex with a woman and you tell her in no uncertain terms that you have no interest in - indeed, you have a serious aversion to - being pegged, only to suddenly feel the slimy, slippery head of a lubed up strap on dildo sliding its way between your butt cheeks while you're lying face down on her bed thinking she was just going to give you a blowjob, would you not be fairly appalled?

LadyMacBeth_

The more I think about it the more I wonder if she did feel scorned because he didn't get in touch with her again and that's why she pressed charges. She may have let if go if they'd continued to see each other. Now either way what he did was sh1tty (if he did indeed do it and I'd be inclined to think he did). She probably asked him to come back to talk about why he did it but also to sort things out, I think it could have been adding insult to injury that he did assault her and then after he got what he wanted he fecked off and she realised that he didn't want anything exclusive. I am just speculating though and I assume the judge had a lot more to go on.

sbsquarepants

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

while you're lying face down on her bed thinking she was just going to give you a blowjob,?

Is your mickey at the back?

Mine is just a regular front mounted!:D

Estrellita

"Grayson wrote:

In this case the woman told him not to, was in pain and was crying. He did it again and even caused bruising. He was obviously repeatedly using excessive force and doing something against her will. I'm definitely on her side with this.

The first time she said she felt pain, she didn't tell him. She moved position and carried on. He's not a mind reader. If she had gotten to the point of crying, why did I she still want him there?

They carried on and then she told him he was being rough. So, why is it that despite being hurt several times she never asked him to leave. In fact, she asked him to return? More curiously, decide make a report to the police later? The doctor wasn't coming back, assumably.

I will say one thing though, I don't know if this guy belongs on a sex offenders list. A conviction alone would have been enough.

We can agree on this point.

Estrellita

LadyMacBeth_ wrote: »

The more I think about it the more I wonder if she did feel scorned because he didn't get in touch with her again and that's why she pressed charges. She may have let if go if they'd continued to see each other.

At the risk of a little detail, the first time myself and Mr Est got together... we were wankered drunk. A lot of pent up frustration I can tell you. Now being a boob man he went to town on the melons, they didn't look right for over a week. I told him to chill a little, and he did. As things got more heated he appeared to have forgotten somewhat... Like I said, we were hot to go for each other and totally trollied. I knew he probably wouldn't have been quite as rough (or forgetful) if he'd a little less to drink and if it wasn't our first time. We were both nervous. I wasn't wrong. As we got to know each other and our bodies better, things adjusted. Still very much so a boob man, but thankfully far less toothy while giving them attention..

I didn't call the feds on him, I'm marrying him ffs

Roger Hassenforder

"She felt she was falling in love with him. She thought they were at the beginning of a relationship; a relationship she wanted to continue."

I wonder if they'd continued a relationship, would she have filed a complaint...

Outlaw Pete

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

100%. Delighted it went to court and is getting publicity.

I'm into BDSM and ironically enough, people who are into BDSM seem to be far better at understanding this than vanilla folk - people have what we call hard limits - things they 100% do not want to experience as part of sexual activity - and the number one most important thing is to never, ever breach those limits, unless the person in question specifically states that they've had a change of heart about it and would like to try it. Vanilla sex should be no different - if there are specific things which people don't like for one reason or another and they're very clear about communicating that (which it sounds like the alleged victim here was) then violating that is a massive breach of trust, and not something anyone should be ok with.

You can analogise this fairly easily to be honest. If you consent to sex with a woman and you tell her in no uncertain terms that you have no interest in - indeed, you have a serious aversion to - being pegged, only to suddenly feel the slimy, slippery head of a lubed up strap on dildo sliding its way between your butt cheeks while you're lying face down on her bed thinking she was just going to give you a blowjob, would you not be fairly appalled?

Ah here, you position yourself as someone who has more knowledge about such matters, compared to regular folk, and then you compare a man squeezing a woman's boobs harder than she'd have liked...... to being raped?? (which it would be if the guy had refused consent to such a sex act beforehand). Laughable.

DrPhilG

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

only to suddenly feel the slimy, slippery head of a lubed up strap on dildo sliding its way between your butt cheeks while you're lying face down on her bed thinking she was just going to give you a blowjob, would you not be fairly appalled?

1 - how am I going to get a blowjob while lying face down on the bed?

2 - in your example, would it not be a bit daft if I receive this unexpected anal violation, object strenuously, put an end to said entry, continue on and have regular sex with this woman and then once she leaves, report her for assault?

Once sex changes to assault, you don't go back and finish the sex before you report the assault. It's ludicrous.

Roger Hassenforder

DrPhilG wrote: »

1 - how am I going to get a blowjob while lying face down on the bed?

Your mind is limited by just vanilla sex
I myself prefer pistachio, you should see what we get up to!
Let's just say there's a frog, unicycle and a sombrero involved

9or10

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Is your mickey at the back?

Mine is just a regular front mounted!:D

Tsssk Vanilla

[Deleted User]

Mellor wrote: »

You can't with draw consent after the fact/

'Consent' isn't a unitary 'carte blanche' that permits anything that might enter your head to do in the bedroom.

She consented to sex, she expressly withdrew consent for other things. What separates man from the rest of the animal kingdom, is consciousness over our own actions, our place in the world, and the consequent capacity for self-control.

It isn't rocket science.

DrPhilG wrote: »

1 - how am I going to get a blowjob while lying face down on the bed?

Use your imagination...

Hatrickpatrick's point illustrates the issue perfectly well. It doesn't take a great deal of concentration to grasp it. Consent was given in this case, with clear, expressed limits as to where it did not extend, i.e. the infliction of pain to the woman's breasts. Obtaining consent does not give you the right to do whatever the hell you want, going beyond the other partner's limits.

If that's too 'legalistic' for some people, then don't have sex with that partner at all. But you can't just choose to go further than was permitted.

up for anything wrote: »

Ridiculous poll options so I didn't vote.

For Jesus' sake lads. This shit grinds my gears. It's called "a democracy"

Was it for this, the son's of Roisín died...?

hatrickpatrick

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Is your mickey at the back?

Mine is just a regular front mounted!:D

Generally they can be moved in different directions... Is mine more flexible than most?

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Ah here, you position yourself as someone who has more knowledge about such matters, compared to regular folk, and then you compare a man squeezing a woman's boobs harder than she'd have liked...... to being raped?? (which it would be if the guy had refused consent to such a sex act beforehand). Laughable.

So let me get this straight: The sex act in my example, when performed without consent, constitutes sexual assault - but the sex act in the article, when performed without consent, does not?

EVERY sex act is sexual assault in the absence of consent. There are certain sex acts which are considered part and parcel of consensual sexual activity, sure - unless one of the parties specifically states that they are not comfortable with that particular act, at which point it becomes non-consensual if the other party(s) ignores this and performs it anyway.

Since the pegging thing is obviously considered in a different category to everything else for whatever reason, let's go again. Supposing you've only consented to a vanilla sexual encounter, you explicitly told the other person that you wern't comfortable with facesitting, and they climb onto your face regardless. Is that legitimate sexual assault in your view?

Where do you draw the line, and why? It's so much simpler to just agree that any sex act which a person has explicitly stated they are not comfortable with is non-consensual if somebody ignores that statement and performs it anyway. The woman in this article told the guy she didn't want her breasts touched. Touching them after this fact constitutes a non-consensual sex act - no two ways about it.

valoren

Fair enough he got a charge of indecent assault and must do 180 hours of community service. That's where it should have ended. To me that's justice given their testimony. He was being a prat and he will likely think twice about acting the same again hopefully. Isn't that the point? To be placed on the register list is an extreme punishment given the details provided by both parties and the consequences for him personally. He was treating her roughly and she wasn't having it.

I've been slapped across the head by one particular loon who after being told to cut it out thought it was hilarious when she tried it twice more until I got up to leave, I've had two women bite me in the 'throes of passion' on separate occasions leaving marks which weren't welcome, I've had one woman forcibly stick her thumb up my hole and after being told to stop then tried to do it again. These were all first time occasions too, so while the consent was there my consent to getting slapped, bitten and bum thumbed wasn't.

I could have reported all of them in the same manner as the woman in that article but I didn't. I just moved on with my life.