Pervert videotapes a girl's butt in Time Square

[Don Vito Corleone]

Who said anything about being actionable? I just think it's reprehensible that you think the guy shouldn't be defended. If I can quote you:

You are insinuating that his actions should not be defended. Critiquing someone for telling him to stop is a separate issue. As I said, your tune would probably change if there was a payday involved.

"Reprehensible"? Give me a friggin' break. If he'd been charged with a crime, I'd agree with you - he's entitled to a defense. I don't see how his creepy behavior deserves to be defended against legitimate criticism by private citizens, however. If I were a peeping tom and looked in the window at your sister while she was getting ready for bed, would you also say it was "reprehensible" for you to say I'm being a creep and that my behavior shouldn't be defended?

Why would anyone pay a lawyer to do anything regarding this case? What possible service could a lawyer provide? It seems to me you're just using this non-event to criticize me for being a lawyer, without giving any thought to the fact that one has nothing to do with the other.

 

[moshquerade]

And I don't want people staring at me as I walk to work, which is why I don't dress in a batman costume.

I might still stare. It's my right.

 

[eits]

girl acting like a slut in public? What does she expect?

she wasn't acting like a slut at all. she was having a photoshoot. they could have been her senior pictures. she did nothing wrong.

:thumbsup: to "goober"... he did what any real man should have done, which was get in that dude's camera lens so he couldn't take shots of her crotch to potentially post all over the internet.

 

[7window]

I wonder what kick-ass would do if he saw this?

 

[SandInMyShoes]

she wasn't acting like a slut at all. she was having a photoshoot. they could have been her senior pictures. she did nothing wrong.

:thumbsup: to "goober"... he did what any real man should have done, which was get in that dude's camera lens so he couldn't take shots of her crotch to potentially post all over the internet.

Who cares if it was a photoshoot? If you don't want people to see your crotch, don't parade your crotch in public, simple as that. The fact it could be posted all over the internet is irrelevant.

 

[BoberFett]

For an attorney, you're pretty fucking stupid.

"Reprehensible"? Give me a friggin' break. If he'd been charged with a crime, I'd agree with you - he's entitled to a defense. I don't see how his creepy behavior deserves to be defended against legitimate criticism by private citizens, however. If I were a peeping tom and looked in the window at your sister while she was getting ready for bed, would you also say it was "reprehensible" for you to say I'm being a creep and that my behavior shouldn't be defended?

Why shouldn't he be defended? Even creeps deserve to be defended. So he's creepy. Big deal. The girl and her family can bitch at him, that's certainly their right, but ultimately he has the right to be there so they should just get over it. Creepy isn't against the law.

And are you really going to try to draw a parallel between a photo shoot in the middle of Times Square and my sister changing in her bedroom? If my sister were pissed about her neighbor spying on her in her bedroom I'd tell her to close the damn curtains. Problem solved.

Why would anyone pay a lawyer to do anything regarding this case? What possible service could a lawyer provide? It seems to me you're just using this non-event to criticize me for being a lawyer, without giving any thought to the fact that one has nothing to do with the other.

Did I just step into the Morons Only section? I said there's no money to be made. Of course there's no action to be taken. Isn't that why I said you're not interested in defending him? If you could find a paycheck I'm sure you'd be happy to defend him. I'm not sure how much clearer I need to be.

 

[Tristicus]

LET GO MAH CAMERA GOOBER NICE OUTFIT TOO GOOBA




lolorly

 

[HumblePie]

I'd bang it.

 

[moshquerade]

Joey Boots, makes his living trying to annoy people and getting the clips sold to people like Howard Stern.

Here's the "goober" yelling "Bababooey!" while a guy is trying to report the news.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SiVzzri5Mo

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

For an attorney, you're pretty fucking stupid.

Why shouldn't he be defended? Even creeps deserve to be defended. So he's creepy. Big deal. The girl and her family can bitch at him, that's certainly their right, but ultimately he has the right to be there so they should just get over it. Creepy isn't against the law.

And are you really going to try to draw a parallel between a photo shoot in the middle of Times Square and my sister changing in her bedroom? If my sister were pissed about her neighbor spying on her in her bedroom I'd tell her to close the damn curtains. Problem solved.

Did I just step into the Morons Only section? I said there's no money to be made. Of course there's no action to be taken. Isn't that why I said you're not interested in defending him? If you could find a paycheck I'm sure you'd be happy to defend him. I'm not sure how much clearer I need to be.

I'll say it again - I don't think his behavior is defensible. I never said people don't have the right to defend him, just that I find it surprising and disappointing that anyone would feel a desire to. To me defending his behavior as appropriate (which many posters here have done) is just ridiculous.

I am still at a loss to understand what money, or lawyers, have to do with this incident. I don't think you've even approached making that case (unsurprising, because your "argument" is totally nonsensical). As I said, I often do pro bono work, and in fact am currently defending an accused first-degree murderer for free. Your posts are just gratuitous anti-lawyer nonsense, and your profanity is simply more of the same: internet-raging idiocy.

 

[Gooberlx2]

I don't think his behavior is defensible

It seems to me you guys aren't connecting on this word. defense (principle, DVC) vs defense (court of law, BoberFett). Or maybe I just skimmed to conversation too much.

 

[mugs]

I'll say it again - I don't think his behavior is defensible. I never said people don't have the right to defend him, just that I find it surprising and disappointing that anyone would feel a desire to. To me defending his behavior as appropriate (which many posters here have done) is just ridiculous.

I think a lot of people here are missing the difference between defending his right to do something and defending his choice to do it. Most people here are either defending his right to do it OR criticizing his choice to do it.

The people who criticize his choice to take the video make no mention of his rights, because they aren't relevant to the propriety of his choice.

The people who defend his rights make no mention of whether the agree with his choice to take the video. The reasons for this vary:
1. They deem it irrelevant to the discussion
2. They don't care
3. They don't understand (or don't believe) that having the right to do something does not necessarily mean it is right to do it.

That last one is a troubling attitude that I see here a lot. They even take it to the point of believing that it is wrong to criticize someone for doing something that is within their rights, even though the right to criticize is one of our most important rights.

Edit: Pretty much what Goober said, I just used a lot more words.

 

[Perknose]

Wow, watching that video was like watching an ATOT troll fest suddenly break out into real life right in the middle of Times Square!

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

It seems to me you guys aren't connecting on this word. defense (principle, DVC) vs defense (court of law, BoberFett). Or maybe I just skimmed to conversation too much.

To be clear, I am certainly not saying there is no legal defense for his behavior, or that he should be prosecuted for acting like a creep. I don't think the morality of his behavior or his attitude when challenged can be defended, however.

 

[BoberFett]

To be clear, I am certainly not saying there is no legal defense for his behavior, or that he should be prosecuted for acting like a creep.

Well then at least there's hope for you...

I don't think the morality of his behavior or his attitude when challenged can be defended, however.

... or not.

The reason his actions need defense is because of people like you. The concept of morality is a farce.

 

[duragezic]

LOLOL.

"Don't worry about who the fuck I am I'm right in the middle of your shit so what the fuck"

"Yeah you wish you could work as fucking hard as I can"
??

GOOBER!
wtf?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

The concept of morality is a farce.

Well, I guess that settles it . . .

 

[BoberFett]

Well, I guess that settles it . . .

Yes, the age old philosophical debate on morality is settled because you said so.

 

[Saint Nick]

The guys in the video "insulting" each other are both fucking stupid.

 

[erikistired]

hilarious.

 

[Anghang]

marked for later

 

[Jeeebus]

It's a long thread so let me summarize:

1. Chick is hot, though too old to be true pedobear material.
2. People generally agree guy is creepy.
3. People generally agree guy has legal right to be creepy.
4. People generally agree goober is a douchebag.
5. BoberFett was likely molested by an attorney at some point in his life.

I think that about covers this thread.

 

[BoberFett]

BoberFett was likely molested by an attorney at some point in his life.

Haven't we all?

 

[Glitchny]

It's a long thread so let me summarize:

1. Chick is hot, though too old to be true pedobear material.
2. People generally agree guy is creepy.
3. People generally agree guy has legal right to be creepy.
4. People generally agree goober is a douchebag.
5. BoberFett was likely molested by an attorney at some point in his life.

I think that about covers this thread.

Yea this is pretty much what I got out of it as well.

 

[DrPizza]

wtf? Seriously, wtf are you guys talking about? What a non-issue. I watched during the first minute, waiting to see someone in the background videotaping her. At about the one minute point, there's a guy on the sidewalk doing just that (else taking a picture, but he holds the camera steady for a bit.) The majority of the time, it seemed he had her entire body framed, or almost her entire body. Interestingly, the angle he was shooting at toward the end was the *same* angle the photographer was shooting at in the beginning - actually, the photographer was even closer, and shooting from toward the ground upward.

Granted, at one point, he did start zooming in for about 10 seconds or so, but - how the hell was someone supposed to know he was zoomed in on her butt vs. knowing whether or not the photographer did the same thing for a couple of frames?

*shrug*


(Edit: before the "seems like a perv" - the guy is a professional asshole, and apparently, out of the closet gay - i.e. not interested in her. But, it took multiple people being asses before it was apparent that he's an ass too. )