man arrested after asking teen girls about their feet

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=795505

 

ahahahahhahaha that's brilliant.

 

Seems like there is more to the story than this man simply asking girls questions about their feet. he seems a bit suspicious to me. I doubt he was really working for a fashion company or that being the reason he approached those girls.

 

Sounds like this would fall under "contributing to the delinqency of a minor", escpecially when an adult male offers money for a sort of unusual act. If an adult even asks a minor out on a date, that could put them in the clink. As a cautionary measure I would insist any young male say in his early 20's to insist on seeing an ID before asking any young females out on a date.

I'm not sure if it's better nutrition, the way they dress, or what's in the water nowadays or a combination of things but 15 year old females sure look a heck of a lot more maturer than when I was in high school. That was a while back for me, longer than I'd like to remember.

This guy obliviously likes teen girls feet, so do I. The rule regarding regarding this is you can look at them, enjoy their beauty, but do nothing else!!

 

The government has far too much power. Parents and adults need to take more responsibility. It's silly that someone can be thrown in jail for smoking flowers, looking at pictures, or such.

The guy is obviously a pervert, but there are better ways to handle such things rather than placing every pervert in a cage to cost everyone $20,000 a year.

I think protective measures can be established without such knee-jerk conservative "lock'em" medieval bullshit mentality.

JAIL: The conservative answer to everything.

 

Did she allow it? Or was she forced? That's the "line crossing".
The girl wasn't 5, she was 15. I am sorry, but if she had brutally murdered someone some of these same people would be ready to try her as an adult.

So a 15 year old has the brilliance to plan and plot a murder, but is stupid and ignorant of the fact that some dude is massaging her feet to get in her pants??

C'mon...teenagers aren't as dumb, ignorant or innocent as people let on.

Had this been a 5 year old, ok...THAT WOULD BE CROSSING THE LINE.

 

Stopping underage girls on the street, and making what are CLEARLY advances is pretty much not allowable, even if they have allowed it. And, if they both did, then how did the police come to know of it?

 

What do you reckon then? Hang them to save money? Alternatively you could take all that money out of the military particularly the large expense going towards murdering muslims in the middle east, or on stupid schemes like ID cards which don't solve any problems, but just exacerbate things by making people more afraid of muslims, and making muslims feel more persecuted. The government should stop trying to control the symptom and have a go at tackling the problem instead, by improving race relations, and then they can go and put the money into the famous "Education Education Education", the NHS (well at least we've got one unlike the yanks) and Public Transport and Locking up Nutters.

 

Ok...

1) Are the girls IGNORANT?
2) If not, DID THEY ALLOW IT?
3) If so, IT IS PHYSICAL COERCION.
4) If they knew and allowed it, it is still illegal--the law needs to change.
5) If they were physically forced--it is rape. The man needs to be arrested.

 

No hangings. No ID cards. No murdering in foreign wars.

The government should stop controlling altogether and minimize itself to the protect of individuals' rights to life, liberty and property against INITIAL COERCION.

There are several alternatives to medieval mentality of prison for NON-VIOLENT offenders. Murderers? Rapists? We need to seek out the causes of these problems. In the meantime, keep prisons around, but reform them to make them more humane to keep people who are menaces and threats to others.

Punishment should be rehabiliatory, educational and security to the outsiders. Things such as prison rape should be held just as accountable as rape on the outside too.

 

You people are all nuts, and so are the cops on Long Island, apparently.

Yes, it is inappropriate for an adult guy to be approaching teenaged girls that way, but
based on what the story says, there is nothing criminal in what he did. PERIOD.

Massaging the feet, assuming he did not force himself on these girls, is NOT A SEX CRIME. Offering them money to model is not a crime. Asking to see and/or touch their feet is not a sex crime. I doubt even if he had sucked on their toes that it would be a sex crime.

While the feet may provide some men (myself included) with sexual arousal, the law does not recognize them as "sex parts" and so touching, admiring, kissing them etc. is not a sexual act!

Grow up, people. Just because some people do bad things does not mean we have to use a cannon to kill a fly and way overreact in every single instance. This situation is overkill. This guy should be let go with no charges, and a stern rebuke saying, "Dude, get a grip, and find a girlfriend your own age. Lots of girls will enjoy you massaging their feet!"

Blue skies,
-Jeffrey

 

Arms and shoulders are not sexual organs either, but if a guy stopped 15 year old girls on the street, told them he could make them models, and started running his hands over them, most people would agree he should be stopped. Why do you suppose he told them he could make them models first? Ever heard of the Casting Couch? That's a pretty low way to get girls at the best of times, but if they're under 16, it's unnacceptable. Getting off on touching someone who's only letting you cos you told them you can make them rich and famous is pretty reprehensible.

 

Hey man, I take offense to being grouped in with the lynch mob.

 

ha!! I had a bit of a giggle when I read this thread title wondering if it was peaceful Jeffery but I am glad to see that you are only into legal feet!!!

 

"legal feet"...

Ha ha ha.... jesus christ....

 

Been Thinking bout the same...

*Wondering what's mucked up to allow agreement w/pj...*

 

It doesn't have to be a sex crime to be considered child endangerment. Looking at it solely in the context of sex is a flawed argument. Even so, I doubt they will be able to nail him for endangerment, unless they could show he damaged them psychologically in some way. They stand a better chance at a stalking charge. Even then, he apparently only approached each one only once. If he was deriving sexual pleasure from what he did then there are legal matters involved in that, even if he didn't do anything outright sexual to the minors. It could be argued that he abused them by giving them misleading statements and using them as a tool to derive sexual pleasure.

The way law enforcement reacts is partly a matter of what people don't know. He could have been trying to lure them to kidnap or rape them for all anyone knows. It's unusual for a 42 year old to be luring 14 year olds the way he did. Anyone here who has kids wouldn't feel good about someone like that luring their own kids the way he did. Single people without kids may be oblivious to that.

 

Can't agree with that. Once you break the law you give up your rights. It's SUPPOSED to be a punishment. Being stuck in there with a load of other criminals is the whole point. Why should taxpayers' money be wasted on defending the rights of those who've already caused us enough trouble?

 

So, in your opinion the "law" is the be-all, end-all of ethics? If you break the law, you deserve to be buttfucked by a prison gang? Taxpayers money is wasted by keeping non-violent offenders in a cage ($20,000 a year, per prisoner here in the U.S.) anyhow. And EVERYONE deserves the right to a fair trial and appeal.

Do you think all "offenders" of the law should be placed back in the Tower of London??

The law at one time was favorable toward slavery, but when someone challenged the law it changed. The law, in Tennessee, at one time said that teaching evolution was illegal. But, the one who BROKE THAT DAMNED LAW and stood up for progress changed the system.

Just because something is the "law" doesn't make it right, and SURE doesn't mean people should be treated inhumanely because of it. You may give up some rights, but you don't give up your humanity.