alias : pwd :       secure login | forgot pwd? ]
0 members online. 
12 users watching this topic.
[ Watch This Topic ]
Page 4 of 5 | First | < | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | > |

Show Printer Friendly Message Reply To Topic
FRAN_C

Photographer
City: Cannock
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Mar 7, 2007
Posts: 1161
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 8:43am

Its a fucking discrace ..... they've probably only done it because its contraversial and will sell more papers !!

can't believe there are people who actually think this is OK





Send Nm Mail to FRAN_C Add FRAN_C to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
FRAN_C

Photographer
City: Cannock
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Mar 7, 2007
Posts: 1161
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 8:46am

quoting post from Silverdale1971:

who could be arrested for taking pictures of her but not for having sex with her? Or am I wrong?


taking pictures for his own personal collection I believe would be acceptable to the courts .. printing said pictures in a national newspaper is something else

Send Nm Mail to FRAN_C Add FRAN_C to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
FRAN_C

Photographer
City: Cannock
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Mar 7, 2007
Posts: 1161
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 8:49am

quoting post from lovesguitars1:

Here we go again!! Its NOT illegal...unless its "sexually provocative".
Who the hell decides THAT,I have no idea!!!
:-)


its a soddin glamour image for gods sake ... desire, sexuality, come to bed eys !!!!!

Your gonna tell me next that page 3 is "ART"

would you let your 17 years daughter pose topless for every white van man to drool over ??

Send Nm Mail to FRAN_C Add FRAN_C to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
FRAN_C

Photographer
City: Cannock
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Mar 7, 2007
Posts: 1161
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 8:51am

she's getting a tan .. not being provocative !!


Send Nm Mail to FRAN_C Add FRAN_C to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
lovesguitars1

Photographer
City: killingworth
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Mar 24, 2007
Posts: 217
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 8:56am

quoting post from FRAN_C:

its a soddin glamour image for gods sake ... desire, sexuality, come to bed eys !!!!!

Your gonna tell me next that page 3 is "ART"

would you let your 17 years daughter pose topless for every white van man to drool over ??


Bollox---naked does NOT equal sexually provocative.

Send Nm Mail to lovesguitars1 Add lovesguitars1 to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
Silverdale1971

Photographer
City: Llanelli
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Mar 24, 2007
Posts: 125
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 9:09am

quoting post from FRAN_C:

she's getting a tan .. not being provocative !!


YEs but what I think the poster of that comment was saying was that because there will be men or adolescence boys possibly looking at her sunbathing innocently and drooling over her in their heads then should she banned from exposing herself. I think the comment was made tongue in cheek.

We are not saying it's ok or morally right. The question originally asked was how the sun could print the picture. The sun made a mistake about her agie but the ensueing debate was merely about what constitutes indecent.

I think we all have to accept that in some grey areas regarding sex and also pictures, other people's tastes, while to us maybe wrong and disgusting, are not illegal. This is not child porn which we all find disgusting but a grey area in the law. As someone said earlier, one does not wake up on a birthday and is suddenly a more mature person etc.

Send Nm Mail to Silverdale1971 Add Silverdale1971 to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged | Edited by Silverdale1971 at 07-28-2008 9:15 AM Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
Andy_Howard

Photographer
City: Preston
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Aug 30, 2003
Posts: 478
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 9:13am

Before any case would end up in court both the police and the CPS have to make a judgement as to whether an image of an under 18 in their view is (or I suppose, might be) indecent.

What I think is being missed is that, if a case does get to court, it would be the jury (with guidance from the judge) who would decide innocence or guilt i.e. if the image was indecent.

So, while you are all entitled to your opinions (misguided or not), it is highly likely that a real jury (made up of Joe Publics) would reach a very different conclusion to one made up of 12 typical net-modellers.

It might be helpful to think of 12 Daily Mail readers and think what conclusion they might reach

My guess is that 12 Joe Publics are quite likely to regard any topless image of an under 18 as indecent. You might thik they would be wrong to do this - but that's another issue altogether.

Andy

"A sip of wine, a cigarette and then it's time to go ..........."





Send Nm Mail to Andy_Howard Add Andy_Howard to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged | Edited by Andy_Howard at 07-28-2008 9:16 AM Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
darkstudent

Photographer
City: Preston
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Jul 7, 2008
Posts: 894
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 9:19am

This thread seem to be goin over alot of the same stuff now,

way I see it, the newpaper has alot of expensive law people and im pretty sure without many signatures from the model and who ever else needs to be involved and so forth the image would not of been published

Lee

Send Nm Mail to darkstudent Add darkstudent to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
PhoenixAdultModelUK

Model
City: Great Ayton
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Apr 3, 2008
Posts: 216
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 9:57am

You do have to be 18 and over to model topless it is the law - which has been stated in other threads. (Anyone under the age of 18 is classed as a minor, in other words a CHILD!)

Also the SUN newspaper also states that the girl MUST be at least 18 to appear in their newspaper.

You still need to be 18 to get yer kit off - with or without parental consent!

http://www.page3.com/includes/TandC.html

http://www.page3.com/freshers/print_form.html

Send Nm Mail to PhoenixAdultModelUK Add PhoenixAdultModelUK to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
PhoenixAdultModelUK

Model
City: Great Ayton
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Apr 3, 2008
Posts: 216
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 10:28am

Erm and..... you idiot it states on there that you have to be 18 to become a page 3 girl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is laws out there to protect underage girls from paedo's.

Yes i do know a thing or two about the law, as i have family members that work in the police force!

Send Nm Mail to PhoenixAdultModelUK Add PhoenixAdultModelUK to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged | Edited by PhoenixAdultModelUK at 07-28-2008 10:31 AM Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
RoninUK

Photographer
City: Ruislip
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Jul 20, 2006
Posts: 2594
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 10:34am

quoting post from PhoenixAdultModelUK:

Erm and..... you idiot it states on there that you have to be 18 to become a page 3 girl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is laws out there to protect underage girls from paedo's, so would you think about having it away with a 17 year old or spunking over her nice 17 year old boobs knowing she is UNDERAGE!!!!!!

Yes i do know a thing or two about the law, as i have family members that work in the police force!


A 17 year old is NOT underage for sexual activity though - the age of consent for that is 16 so apparently you know less about the law than you think.

It is for posing for indecent photographs that they have to be 18 and , as has been widely discussed already - there is no authority quoted so far which defines topless or nude as indecent of itself - just as being clothed does not mean a shot is not indecent.

edit - more correctly I should have said to take/publish/possess/ indecent photographs you should ensure the model is 18.

Send Nm Mail to RoninUK Add RoninUK to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged | Edited by RoninUK at 07-28-2008 10:37 AM Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
js24

Photographer
City: Cambridge
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Apr 21, 2007
Posts: 41
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 10:34am

quoting post from PhoenixAdultModelUK:

Erm and..... you idiot it states on there that you have to be 18 to become a page 3 girl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is laws out there to protect underage girls from paedo's, so would you think about having it away with a 17 year old or spunking over her nice 17 year old boobs knowing she is UNDERAGE!!!!!!

Yes i do know a thing or two about the law, as i have family members that work in the police force!


[Oh dear...]

I'm very sorry to disappoint you, but The Sun's terms and conditions are not yet the law of the land...

It's fantastic that you're an expert on this. Please tell us which law(s) you're talking about.

If you take a photograph of a topless two-year old child is this against the law?

If you are the *parent* of such a child, is it against the law?


Jim

Send Nm Mail to js24 Add js24 to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
darkstudent

Photographer
City: Preston
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Jul 7, 2008
Posts: 894
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 10:37am

quoting post from PhoenixAdultModelUK:

Erm and..... you idiot it states on there that you have to be 18 to become a page 3 girl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is laws out there to protect underage girls from paedo's.

Yes i do know a thing or two about the law, as i have family members that work in the police force!


That kind of reply with attitude was uncalled for.

the suns website is not a law document and therefore its not law only what they say it is, which we all asume is true and it most likly is. It is really hard to find this subject as law guidlines online come to think of it.

Just because you have family members in the police force this does not mean you instantly know all law there is making you right about everything

Send Nm Mail to darkstudent Add darkstudent to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged | Edited by darkstudent at 07-28-2008 10:39 AM Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
Silverdale1971

Photographer
City: Llanelli
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Mar 24, 2007
Posts: 125
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 10:42am

quoting post from PhoenixAdultModelUK:

Erm and..... you idiot it states on there that you have to be 18 to become a page 3 girl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is laws out there to protect underage girls from paedo's.

Yes i do know a thing or two about the law, as i have family members that work in the police force!


lol

Since when did members of the police force live whiter than white lives then?

We are not trying to sound like we agree with this, wmost of us are trying to play devils advocate but you are very wrong on you statement

Send Nm Mail to Silverdale1971 Add Silverdale1971 to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
lovesguitars1

Photographer
City: killingworth
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Mar 24, 2007
Posts: 217
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 10:45am

quoting post from PhoenixAdultModelUK:

Erm and..... you idiot it states on there that you have to be 18 to become a page 3 girl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is laws out there to protect underage girls from paedo's.

Yes i do know a thing or two about the law, as i have family members that work in the police force!


And of course ALL police know ALL laws...I dont think so!!
:-)

Send Nm Mail to lovesguitars1 Add lovesguitars1 to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
PhoenixAdultModelUK

Model
City: Great Ayton
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Apr 3, 2008
Posts: 216
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 10:50am

quoting post from js24:

[Oh dear...]

I'm very sorry to disappoint you, but The Sun's terms and conditions are not yet the law of the land...

It's fantastic that you're an expert on this. Please tell us which law(s) you're talking about.

If you take a photograph of a topless two-year old child is this against the law?

If you are the *parent* of such a child, is it against the law?


Jim


And when did i say that the tandc were law from the sun were law of the land!!!!

I had said that is states on THEIR site to become a p3 girl that YOU need to be 18 - its on the application form if you take a care to look!

Publish a topless 2 year old on page 3 you tell me!!!!!!

Send Nm Mail to PhoenixAdultModelUK Add PhoenixAdultModelUK to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
FRAN_C

Photographer
City: Cannock
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Mar 7, 2007
Posts: 1161
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 11:04am

quoting post from lovesguitars1:

Bollox---naked does NOT equal sexually provocative.

I never said it did ...The human body is a wonderfull thing and I dont think we would be having this conversation if page 3 were a tastefull art nude feature

Although I wouldn't shoot it myself and the law say "NO" I absolutly have no objection to a 17 year old shooting art nude ...

Page 3 carries no artistic merit and is clearly sexual and uou didn't answer the question .. would you let your 17 year old daughter shoot topless ?



Send Nm Mail to FRAN_C Add FRAN_C to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
lovesguitars1

Photographer
City: killingworth
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Mar 24, 2007
Posts: 217
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 11:12am

Not a cop out but I absolutely cannot answer that question as I dont have a 17 yr old daughter.
I know friends who have 17yr old daughters and I would certainly not be happy if they did...BUT thats because its against the law.I never said it was RIGHT to do it.....my orignal point is that if a guy gets a stiffy looking at page 3(or a girl gets wet) then thats a bit sad...I dont see page 3 as a sexual thing..OR art..its a picture of a (usually) pretty girl with no clothes on...nothing more or less to me.
Jus my opinion.
:-)

Send Nm Mail to lovesguitars1 Add lovesguitars1 to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
LJP

Photographer
City: Esher
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Nov 2, 2005
Posts: 1383
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 28, 2008 1:49pm

As previously stated many times, posessing an indecent image of a person under the age of 18 is an offence. The exception to the rule being where both parties are in an enduring relationship. Thus a professional photographer in a relationship with a 16 year old can have indecent images of them, but logically only whilst the relationship exists. The problem here is that the law has not defined indecent. Would a fuly clothed girl with a smile on her face eating a banana topped with cream be defined as indecent? Would a girl wearing normal gym kit be classed as indecent since Muslim culture prohibits non family members from seeing bare arms, legs or uncovered hair? If the court was in Bradford of other areas with a high proportion of Muslims it could be interesting

I have not seen the image in question however I understand that it is shot "in a garden setting facing the viewer with a smile and the normal sort of eye contact one might associate with carrying on a conversation at a party", Would Daily Mail readers consider this indecent? What about Daily Express readers? How many girls stand topless in the garden just for the fun of it? laying down sunbathing might be different, if we change the scene to a sunny beach or a pool the answer might also be different, many girls go topless in such situations. We could take it to the extreme and discuss naturist images, these are normally nude, but in such context are rarely considered indecent.

The Sun and other papers might be testing the waters, as we all know the legislature react to public opinion, thus if there were a number of complaints the CPS might consider a guilty verdict is probable, therefore it is worth taking up the case, if nobody bothers what is the likelyhood of a conviction especially since newspapers tend to use very expensive solicitors and barristers? They have thie own rules for girls who appear in the paper as they are perfectly entitled to do, to avoid receiving thousands of images from girls who are not really models and just want to impress friends they state over 18's. 18 year olds in theory are old enough to know what they want, and of course sign a contract without referring to a parent. My ultimate fear is that we will follow the American way of life, a puritanical press, a large porn industry, and everyone carrying guns for protection.

Laurence J. Power

PS Thanks to Rick for pointing me in the right direction, although I did not find the posting in question I am happy to quote your email


Send Nm Mail to LJP Add LJP to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged | Edited by LJP at 07-28-2008 2:58 PM Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
lswann

Photographer
City: Bracknell
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Dec 16, 2006
Posts: 58
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 30, 2008 8:54am

Just thought i would add this article from the guardian in 2005

David Hamilton - the photographer whose images hang in the US Library of Congress, Carnegie Hall and the Royal Danish Palace - has had his multi-million-selling images of young, naked women and girls officially branded as indecent in a landmark British ruling.

Anyone owning one of his coffee-table books now risks being "arrested for possession of indecent photographs", following a ruling at Guildford Crown Court.

The case revolves around Stanley Loam, a 49-year-old auditor from Walton on Thames, Surrey, who was charged with being in possession of 19,000 indecent images of children - the biggest ever haul by the county's force. Loam claimed he had a genuine interest in artistic material, and that the images in his collection by Hamilton were freely available in books sold by websites run by WHSmith, Tesco, Waterstones and Amazon. Loam said he thought they were not indecent, but lost his defence.

Prosecutor Simon Connolly told the court that Loam's home was raided as part of Operation Ore, after receiving a tip-off from the US Postal Investigation Service.

He argued that the images, including those by Hamilton, "are plainly indecent. The content cannot be described as artistic and is plainly of a sexual nature." The court heard the images seized were of the lowest indecency rating - category 1.

Speaking after, DC Simon Ledger, of Surrey Police, said: "It is no defence in law to say pictures of naked children are 'artistic'." Whether Hamilton's images are widely available or not, he suggested, they are clearly unlawful.

"The fact he [Loam] has been convicted demonstrates they are not legal." He added: "Anyone who has David Hamilton's books can be arrested for the possession of indecent photographs.

"We are liaising with the publishers of his books to explain this."

Hamilton's photographs have long been at the forefront of the "is it art or pornography?" debate. Glenn Holland, spokesman for the 71-year-old photographer, who lives in St Tropez, said: "We are deeply saddened and disappointed by this, as David is one of the most successful art photographers the world has ever known. His books have sold millions.

"We have known for some time that the law in Britain and the US - our two biggest markets - is becoming tighter each year. But the fact remains that the courts still have to decide on each case."

On Tuesday, WHSmith said it was withdrawing one of Hamilton's books - The Age of Innocence - from sale on its website, following a discussion with London publishers, Aurum Press


Send Nm Mail to lswann Add lswann to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
KISS_motoempty

Photographer
City: Stoke on Trent
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Apr 12, 2008
Posts: 3196
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 30, 2008 8:58am

yet the books are still for sale to the UK now.... so I don't think owning his book can be illegal?

I look to the future because that's where I'm going to spend the rest of my life.
George Burns

Send Nm Mail to KISS_motoempty Add KISS_motoempty to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
Emily_Joy

Model
City: Plymouth
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Jan 18, 2008
Posts: 102
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 30, 2008 3:34pm

OH MY GOD

I saw that and was absolutely discusted. shes not even old enough to drink, but shes on page three with her tits out.

I honestly thoight this was illegal. It should be.

Cannot believe they got away with it.

HAHAHAHA may be im just jealous about the fact she has massive boobs, and i dont have any....????

Emily

Send Nm Mail to Emily_Joy Add Emily_Joy to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged | Edited by Gregory_Mason at 07-30-2008 5:42 PM Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
Kenp

Photographer
City: Weymouth/Portland DT3
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Sep 29, 2007
Posts: 10468
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 30, 2008 4:51pm

quoting post from Emily_Joy:

OH MY GOD

I saw that and was absolutely discusted. shes not even old enough to drink, but shes on page three with her tits out.

I honestly thoight this was illegal. It should be.

Cannot believe they got away with it.


Bit of an overreaction I think. She can legally take part in a gang bang and she is old enough to drink. The legal minimum age to drink alcohol is five!

Send Nm Mail to Kenp Add Kenp to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
Kenp

Photographer
City: Weymouth/Portland DT3
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Sep 29, 2007
Posts: 10468
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 30, 2008 4:54pm

Might appear pedantic, but the onus is on the prosecution to prove that the image is indecent. No requirement for anybody to consider the image 'decent'. There is a middle ground between decent and indecent.

Send Nm Mail to Kenp Add Kenp to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
Emily_Joy

Model
City: Plymouth
Country: United Kingdom
Member Since: Jan 18, 2008
Posts: 102
RE: page 3 topless 17 year old Jul 30, 2008 5:17pm

quoting post from Kenp:

Bit of an overreaction I think. She can legally take part in a gang bang and she is old enough to drink. The legal minimum age to drink alcohol is five!

Its just how I feel. Not an over reaction, the person who started the thread was wondering what people thought of this, I gave my opinion as I did see the paper.

I don't think it was right. And I would imagine alot of professional photographers would be wary about shooting a 17 yr old girl for topless glamour.

This is not fine art, nor art nude... it is an image for the sole purpose of the public to gwap at a pair of boobs, and I do not agree that girls of this age should be used for this purpose by a national newspaper.

Every one seems to be trying to out smart and out wit every one else with sarcastic comments.

She is not old enough to go out to a pub and drink or go clubbing. Thats what I meant.

Emily



Send Nm Mail to Emily_Joy Add Emily_Joy to your favorites list
Top  IP: Logged Report Post Reply Reply w/Quote
< Previous Thread | Next Thread >
Page 4 of 5 | First | < | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | > |

Moderators :

bullet, doctorontop, Gregory_Mason, persistentvision


Forum Settings : [ Open Forum ]

You may post topics
You may post replies
You may post images
You may delete your posts