TOPIC:

Which Richmond reprobate took the naughty photo of the Premiership Medal, and thought to post it on the interwebs?

And can it be "revenge porn" if the subject of the photo is not identified, and does a pair of substantial naked breasts constitute "porn" in 2017 (or 1967 for that matter)?

35

Oh dear! ...... for the sake of forum stability, I hope you are not correct.

terror wrote: 35

Spot on, terror.

www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-30/richmond-...opless-photo/9098712

Comment awaited from BH, 42, et al

Typical bloody Richmond Tigers taking a good decent Swans lad and leading him down the path of decadence and debauchery. What is the world coming to?

jackspratt wrote:

terror wrote: 35

Spot on, terror.

www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-30/richmond-...opless-photo/9098712

Comment awaited from BH, 42, et al

My only comment on this JS is half his luck!

jackspratt wrote:

terror wrote: 35

Spot on, terror.

www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-30/richmond-...opless-photo/9098712

Comment awaited from BH, 42, et al

Broads behaviour was disgraceful and he got a slap over the face with a wet fish from Richmond and the AFL. Their "respect for women" policy is not worth the paper it is written on. Broad is lucky that the woman didn't press charges or he could have found himself in the slammer.

What a load of BS

You can call it BS as much as you like. The facts are that it is a criminal offence in Victoria to circulate sexualised images on the internet without the other persons consent. The maximum penalty for this is 2 years jail. I doubt whether Broad would have been sent to jail if charged because this was the first time he had been caught doing it and as revenge porn goes it was probably on the lower end of the scale.
I note with interest that the WA government are also looking at introducing similar legislation into the parliament here.