[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by lostalex

I wasn't offended at all joey, and i don't think you should shut up. yur entitled to yur opinion bro. nothing wrong with disagreeing.

Thank you Lostalex, I appreciate that, it has been good conversing with you,all my very best to you.

[WozMan]

And what would your Solicitor friend say about Conor's threats towards Deana or his man-handling of Scott after the football table got taken away?

[rinkydinkpanther]

Originally Posted by Munchkins

Pot meet Kettle Arron...
You can dish it out and bully females, but as soon as a male stands up to you,
you can't take it
..

i thought adam took it too far tbh ....arron deserved the boot he lost the plot, but adam did go ott imho....also becky laughing and cakcling all the time was disgusting....i dont like anyone in there tbh

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by WozMan

And what would your Solicitor friend say about Conor's threats towards Deana or his man-handling of Scott after the football table got taken away?

At the risk of opening up some more criticism for myself, I can tell you after I have now consulted authority on the subject as I am only a student.
I thought this mostly myself but have checked to make sure.Thank you for the question as I have learned sonmething from this.

Outside the house, Conor's offensive words and threats about Deana if reported would have had Conor likely spoken to, much as it did by BB in the house.
He got, we are told a formal warning from BB and if he did it again or threatened to, he would be out.
Outside too,he would have been interviewed more formally by the police for the second comments/threats if made and if the incident was reported.He could have been in trouble,yes.

As for the manhandling as to Scott you mention, Scott made no complaint,therefore nothing could be done,BB,and clearly this was an issue for them and they saw no reason to act either, with no objection formally to the incident by Scott or anyone else, there would be no legitimate reason to act on it.

Since in neither instance, the comments or perceived threats as to Deana or any 'manhandling 'of Scott,(if Scott sees it that way,) has been repeated or threatened to be repeated,therefore there is again no legitimate reason at this time for further action as to Conor by BB or outside authority.

It is not as I pointed out, that Adam committed the initial act on Arron that would be the problem in the main, it is when Arron asked it to stop and said he was going to move beds.
That then, with Adam saying he would do it again and again no matter which beds he moved to, that is when the prank became more harrassment and intimidation.
In the UK we do not have intimidation as an offence, it is under coercion, in that if someone tries to force someone else to do something they don't want to repeatedly,that can be an offence under harrassment law guidelines in the UK.

I may have gone on too much on this to a degree but law fascinates me as I am studying law, Adam and this incident has helped me actually to learn some vital facts I will need next year.

I am sorry in advance to have such a long post to answer you, but there is masses of detail I have had to leave out just to say the above, the law is extremely comeprehensive and intricate too.

[rinkydinkpanther]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

At the risk of opening up some more criticism for myself, I can tell you after I have now consulted authority on the subject as I am only a student.
I thought this mostly myself but have checked to make sure.Thank you for the question as I have learned sonmething from this.

Outside the house, Conor's offensive words and threats about Deana if reported would have had Conor likely spoken to, much as it did by BB in the house.
He got, we are told a formal warning from BB and if he did it again or threatened to, he would be out.
Outside too,he would have been interviewed more formally by the police for the second comments/threats if made and if the incident was reported.He could have been in trouble,yes.

As for the manhandling as to Scott you mention, Scott made no complaint,therefore nothing could be done,BB,and clearly this was an issue for them and they saw no reason to act either, with no objection formally to the incident by Scott or anyone else, there would be no legitimate reason to act on it.

Since in neither instance, the comments or perceived threats as to Deana or any 'manhandling 'of Scott,(if Scott sees it that way,) has been repeated or threatened to be repeated,therefore there is again no legitimate reason at this time for further action as to Conor by BB or outside authority.

It is not as I pointed out, that Adam committed the initial act on Arron that would be the problem in the main, it is when Arron asked it to stop and said he was going to move beds.
That then, with Adam saying he would do it again and again no matter which beds he moved to, that is when the prank became more harrassment and intimidation.
In the UK we do not have intimidation as an offence, it is under coercion, in that if someone tries to force someone else to do something they don't want to repeatedly,that can be an offence under harrassment law guidelines in the UK.

I may have gone on too much on this to a degree but law fascinates me as I am studying law, Adam and this incident has helped me actually to learn some vital facts I will need next year.

I am sorry in advance to have such a long post to answer you, but there is masses of detail I have had to leave out just to say the above, the law is extremely comeprehensive and intricate too.

great post, have a big thanks...great effort...adam did well at first to at least give some treatment back, but definitely went way too far

[Knitting Nana]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Excuse me, I beg your pardon, I think I was in conversation with Lostalex who I actually have no problem with whatseover as he was also conversing with me.

'Excuse me' but I thought this was a public forum and not a private conversation. If you dont want people to comment on what you say then send a private message.

[Tym]

to which Adam then threatened to do it to him again and again if he moved beds.

Actually, Arron implied he'd do it back to Adam and adam said he'd do it back to him if he did it. It was after the diary room and Arron is going into the bathroom.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Knitting Nana

'Excuse me' but I thought this was a public forum and not a private conversation. If you dont want people to comment on what you say then send a private message.

you obviously missed the point of his post. who are you and why do you think it's any of yur business?

[Johnnyuk123]

Poor Aaron shaved his hoop an all for Conor then got evicted. He will have to wait for his master to leave the house before bedding him and getting satisfaction!

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Knitting Nana

'Excuse me' but I thought this was a public forum and not a private conversation. If you dont want people to comment on what you say then send a private message.

Lostalex and I were responding to each others post and our perspectives of the issue, the person who made the reference to me did so making not a single contribution themselves to the topic in hand, just made a personal comment directed at me,not a very pleasant one either.

I am happy to engage in conversation on all topics on this forum and more deeply with other members who wish also to do that, What I will not take is another member in effect telling me to shut up because they don't agree with what I am saying.

I never do that to anyone else so do not expect it back. I have in the past felt it necessary to say to someone,we are getting nowhere so it is best to avoid each other's posts on the topic from now on but Lostalex and I were having a good discussion on the issue with no problems.
Of course others can make their comments to any discussion 2 other members are having on a topic but not to tell one or the other to in effect shut up simply because I was saying things they didn't like to hear and also I had never said anything previous in response to them too.

[WozMan]

@JoeySteele

TYVM for your reply. Personally I am of the opinion that perception is 9/10ths of the law. I would almost posit it is more important to know who the judge is for the case and how to sell your perspective to him/her. I'm sure some technical knowledge comes in handy too from time to time