Theme Park Worldwide

[pluk]

It may be an untruth,

Apology accepted.

I can assure you that based on conversations I've had away from this forum that I'm not the only one who believes that either.

I'm not concerned about what people basing their thoughts on untruths think.

You go on to describe things you are doing while claiming not to do those things so it's not worth dissecting.

I really feel that the way this discussion is leading is getting abit much, and not beneficial to either party.

No matter what the opinions are, someone’s friend or family involved may read all of this and cause distress for either the victim or the accused.

I absolutely agree, but I also cannot in good consciousness let the things being said here slide, not necessarily referring to the quoted above. The hounding of people like this is plain wrong, when we're at the point of some level of nudge nudge wink wink glee being taken about them being booted out of somewhere and others decreeing them banned by their own rules from getting on with their lives, something has gone wrong with rational thought. People accused of things may also read all of this.

However wolf whistling could be classed as sexual harassment.

I've personally have never ever wolf whistle anyone and would never ever do so.

Hmmm. In law a harassment has to be a course of conduct (two or more occasions), so they'd have to do it again to commit the offence.

I can't wolf whistle, I think it's because I have a massive tongue, and also because I have no desire to.

 

[rob666]

Here we go again.

There is plenty of proof that this certain individual has behaved abhorrently, regardless of whether it's criminal or not. He should not be knocking around in theme parks at the minute, because it shows he doesn't care whatsoever.

Honestly, I can't make up my mind whether you're ignorant, stupid or a mix of the two.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Bit early to start getting in a flame war on here isnt it?
There is a massive difference between allegations and proof.
Show me your proof.
Do not prejudge justice, dont risk justice with gossip.
Leave the authorities to deal with the allegations, as anything else is a kangaroo court lynching.

 

[Skyscraper]

Only today I was walking down the street when a van full of workmen drove past me and wolf whistled. Illegal? No. Inappropriate? Yes.

I'm sure wolf whistling is illegal and comes under sexual harassment.

 

[hannypanda]

Apology accepted.


I'm not concerned about what people basing their thoughts on untruths think.

You go on to describe things you are doing while claiming not to do those things so it's not worth dissecting.



I absolutely agree, but I also cannot in good consciousness let the things being said here slide, not necessarily referring to the quoted above. The hounding of people like this is plain wrong, when we're at the point of some level of nudge nudge wink wink glee being taken about them being booted out of somewhere and others decreeing them banned by their own rules from getting on with their lives, something has gone wrong with rational thought. People accused of things may also read all of this.


Hmmm. In law a harassment has to be a course of conduct (two or more occasions), so they'd have to do it again to commit the offence.

I can't wolf whistle, I think it's because I have a massive tongue, and also because I have no desire to.

I said it may be an untruth, I didn't say it was. I'm certainly not apologising.

Again, you are totally ignoring the fact that there's a difference between inappropriate and illegal. For someone that clearly believes he's superior to others in this forum you really don't seem to grasp the fact that not everything is black and white.




Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

 

[hannypanda]

Bit early to start getting in a flame war on here isnt it?
There is a massive difference between allegations and proof.
Show me your proof.
Do not prejudge justice, dont risk justice with gossip.
Leave the authorities to deal with the allegations, as anything else is a kangaroo court lynching.

There is plenty of proof of inappropriate behaviour on Twitter, aside from anything drafted into the notes section of people's phones.

There are photos, videos, screenshots of conversations and call logs.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

 

[RoyJess]

Hmmm. In law a harassment has to be a course of conduct (two or more occasions), so they'd have to do it again to commit the offence.

I'm sure wolf whistling is illegal and comes under sexual harassment.

As @pluk correctly say's for something to be classed as harassment, the offence needs to be repetitive. Especially if someone has clearly said "no" or "stop".

There is plenty of proof that this certain individual has behaved abhorrently, regardless of whether it's criminal or not.

What proof? I've seen many examples in my life time of proof in various things, but proof doesn't always means it is true. Take the moon landings conspiracy for example, plenty of photographic and video proof and not just the one example that it was fake, the conspiracy went of for 50 years before an independent probe to the moon debunked the conspiracy once and for all. Seeing is not always believing, is witnessing physics, spoon bender, mind reader, magicians etc.. are all proof that what they do is real?

As humans, when we re-tell stories, we subconsciously alter tiny bits of the story, and over time the story changes (Chinese whispers). There is always two sides to every story. Does this means that one person is telling the truth and the other person is lying? No. Usually there is truth in both sides, but each side is usually telling an exaggeration of the truth. When we make allegations, we only tell the parts of the story that we want to and leave out the parts that we don't want to include. Each side of the story will see things from different perspective, and without proper and full investigations of both sides, there will be missing parts to the story which prejudice the case. I can give you an example of this from my own experience. A good few years ago I had a garage do some work on my car, they did a bad job. They claim not to be responsible because in their defence I had done some high amount of millage in my car since the work was done. They had proof of this as they took down the millage of my car at the time of when the work was done and had since looked up my millage after the time of complaint on the government MOT website. Yes indeed the government website shows that I have done high millage, they had the proof in black and white, or did they? Despite the proof, this only told half of the story, what wasn't taken into account was that my car was a Japanese import and my car was displaying in Kilometres not miles, so despite there so call proof, the reality was that my millage was a lot lower than they claimed, when this was pointed out to them, then they resolved the situation. So proof isn't always as concrete evidence as you put, this is why it is so important that both side of the story gets investigated as not to prejudiced the case.

 

[hannypanda]

As @pluk correctly say's for something to be classed as harassment, the offence needs to be repetitive. Especially if someone has clearly said "no" or "stop".



What proof? I've seen many examples in my life time of proof in various things, but proof doesn't always means it is true. Take the moon landings conspiracy for example, plenty of photographic and video proof and not just the one example that it was fake, the conspiracy went of for 50 years before an independent probe to the moon debunked the conspiracy once and for all. Seeing is not always believing, is witnessing physics, spoon bender, mind reader, magicians etc.. are all proof that what they do is real?

As humans, when we re-tell stories, we subconsciously alter tiny bits of the story, and over time the story changes (Chinese whispers). There is always two sides to every story. Does this means that one person is telling the truth and the other person is lying? No. Usually there is truth in both sides, but each side is usually telling an exaggeration of the truth. When we make allegations, we only tell the parts of the story that we want to and leave out the parts that we don't want to include. Each side of the story will see things from different perspective, and without proper and full investigations of both sides, there will be missing parts to the story which prejudice the case. I can give you an example of this from my own experience. A good few years ago I had a garage do some work on my car, they did a bad job. They claim not to be responsible because in their defence I had done some high amount of millage in my car since the work was done. They had proof of this as they took down the millage of my car at the time of when the work was done and had since looked up my millage after the time of complaint on the government MOT website. Yes indeed the government website shows that I have done high millage, they had the proof in black and white, or did they? Despite the proof, this only told half of the story, what wasn't taken into account was that my car was a Japanese import and my car was displaying in Milometers not miles, so despite there so call proof, the reality was that my millage was a lot lower than they claimed, when this was pointed out to them, then they resolved the situation. So proof isn't always as concrete evidence as you put, this is why it is so important that both side of the story gets investigated as not to prejudiced the case.

Point taken, however I'd say there's a massive difference between a lot of extremely highly paid scientists making it look like they landed on the moon and teenage girls taking screenshots of their messages.

I get that things get exaggerated, and that's why I've said forget all the screenshots of notes. Again, you've got to remember that these are teenage girls and there serves absolutely no benefit to doctor images and/or lie.

As it stands there has been no statement or evidence of the contrary. The individuals accused have not released any statements, so we have no idea if this is being taken seriously or not. Has he saught legal advice? Who knows, but he's not said anything.

On the balance of probability it is likely that one or two of these "statements" have been spun to suit a narrative. I've read through all of them and there are some that don't make complete sense, but I'm not sure whether that's because it's a false accusation or it happened so long ago that their account is a little vague. You have to consider though, that one of these individuals has had around 20 accusations against him directly. If it was a couple then maybe I'd extend him the benefit of the doubt, but twenty is a large number of people to come forward.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

 

[rob666]

Then let the police, social services and courts do their job, and stop putting the chances of a meaningful outcome at risk due to repeated speculation on social media.
Trial by social media is now being used as mitigation in sentencing.
There are other topics on this site, you only ever seem to post on one.

 

[hannypanda]

Then let the police, social services and courts do their job, and stop putting the chances of a meaningful outcome at risk due to repeated speculation on social media.
Trial by social media is now being used as mitigation in sentencing.
There are other topics on this site, you only ever seem to post on one.

I'm not putting the chances of any outcome at risk whatsoever. I'm saying he's behaved inappropriately, not necessarily illegally. That's still wrong, contrary to what some people may think.

Yes, you're right, I have only ever posted on this topic. I've been a keen reader of these forums for a couple of years, still am, but never felt the need to contribute until this subject came up. I've said before, my sister was a victim of similar behaviour from a totally different YouTube channel, so I am extremely passionate about it.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

 

[RoyJess]

I'm not putting the chances of any outcome at risk whatsoever.

Really? I'm no legal expert, but I'm sure if you were to have a word with someone who is, I'm sure that will tell you otherwise. It's not just about interfering with the outcome of a potential conviction, but could also mean a lenient sentence if the defendant can prove that the media stories circulation has already have had a negative impact on his life.

I'm saying he's behaved inappropriately, not necessarily illegally. That's still wrong

The problem with what you have just said, is that morals perception varies from person to person, that why we have the law, which is there to draw a clear line in the sand between what it right and wrong.

Posting allegations on line about someone without being proven in the court of law could also be class as morally inappropriate by some

I've said before, my sister was a victim of similar behaviour from a totally different YouTube channel, so I am extremely passionate about it.

I'm sorry to hear that your sister was a victim and I fully get why you are extremely passionate about it. We shouldn't tarnish everyone with the same brush. Each case needs to be individually investigated for the facts.

 

[monkeyboy]

I'm sure wolf whistling is illegal and comes under sexual harassment.

What about if I legally own a wolf?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Boothy]

Anger being aimed at the wrong people all over the shop

 

[Craig]

This is all getting a bit silly now. Can we stick to the topic of TPWW, if people want to discuss the ins and outs of harassment laws etc in detail then feel free to make a separate topic on the issue. We also seem to be going back round and repeating things that were discussed tens of pages ago.

And finally, I know this is a polarising issue for many, can we just be respectful to each other as well please.

 

[Themeparksandy1981]

This is all getting a bit silly now. Can we stick to the topic of TPWW, if people want to discuss the ins and outs of harassment laws etc in detail then feel free to make a separate topic on the issue. We also seem to be going back round and repeating things that were discussed tens of pages ago.

And finally, I know this is a polarising issue for many, can we just be respectful to each other as well please.

I was thinking the same and there’s nothing else Shawn and Charlotte can do they put a statement, they helping the police and they banned all people who’s featured as a guest on the vlogs to future notice.
If theses guys turn up at any parks that’s got nothing to do with the channel.
I’m really enjoying some of his Europe Road trip as I’m seeing parks I never heard of Before.

 

[rob666]

To put a cap on this.
Case closed, allegedly.
Good source, but I can't say who.

 

[WillPS]

I still think it's mental that people watch this bilge.

 

[rob666]

Each to their own.
Couldnt agree more!

 

[Burbs]

I've just had to delete a few posts as they mention specific names, which was entirely what @Craig has said multiple times not to do.

Thanks.

 

[pj]

I've just had to delete a few posts as they mention specific names, which was entirely what @Craig has said multiple times not to do.

Thanks.

Sorry about that mine wasn’t mentioning allegations so I thought it would be ok it was a general TPW question. But apologies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[delta79]

I've just had to delete a few posts as they mention specific names, which was entirely what @Craig has said multiple times not to do.

Thanks.

Has @Craig got to the point where his head is resting on the keyboard and he is muttering 'no more, please no more'

Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk