Is this mob justice, or fair justice?

Soldato
Joined
28 Nov 2002
Posts
11,202
Location
Cumbria
Fair.

I know a few sailors and the generally accepted way of dealing with theft is to slam one of the vertical closing hatches on their hands. These hatches take two people to open and close, being so heavy. Their hands literally pop/explode.

I know a few lads in the army and the generally accepted way of dealing with theft is to force them to stand on a landmine. These landmines are full of explosives. Their bodys literally pop/explode.




honest guv
 
Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
90,821
Fair, as said, he had no explanation and tried to hide the fact. If he wasn't touching lockers because he was trying to break in, he'd simply have leant on a locker or something and asked someone what the **** was going on with the paint on it.

The guilty hide things, the innocent get help, as said though proof someone touched the outside of a locker isn't proof they stole everything. Proof he stole from ONE locker wouldn't be proof he stole all the stuff.

LIkewise, an innocent person would have explained himself to anyone that asked, wouldn't have gotten so upset and would have likely filed LOTS of complaints, this is the EXACT type of thing people sue and get millions for, for essentially wrongful termination and bullying in a government service job. THe fact he didn't again to me means he was hiding something. LIke if there was a proper long term investigation into the treatment, and a lawsuit, it probably opens him up to being investigated, for things like odd payments into his account, tracking down his bank accounts, finding payments from paypal, on an account that was selling stolen stuff on ebay, that kind of thing.

If I was in that situation, wrongfully having my career ruined, WITH NOTHING TO HIDE, I'd have sued them all, if I was in the wrong, and didn't want any legal charges, I would have dissappeared quietly.

Thats naive at best - a mob aren't interested in whether you have anything to hide or not... they are convinced your guilty by their measure... no amount of holding your hand up and saying "honestly it happened by accident" is going to convince them... a more timid, completely innoncent, person isn't even going to want to confront that kinda situation once they realise whats going on and will try to hide it.

"The guilty hide things, the innocent get help" has absolutely no merit in reality as a benchmark of anything - its a pipedream of an idealistic world.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
22 Sep 2008
Posts
822
Fair.

I know a few sailors and the generally accepted way of dealing with theft is to slam one of the vertical closing hatches on their hands. These hatches take two people to open and close, being so heavy. Their hands literally pop/explode.

And you can tell because you have seen a few sailors in your time, haven't you? ;)

lol twoblacklines
 

4T5

4T5

Man of Honour
Joined
30 Aug 2004
Posts
27,739
Location
Middle of England
It's not ideal but better than him getting a beating.
Why is it ?
A beating only effects him where as loss of job might make his wife & kids homeless.

I think the whole story is BS anyway as if it was Blatantly obvious he was a thief then the officers would have sorted him.
 
Associate
Joined
10 Jul 2007
Posts
933
OP, this sounds like a plot from a movie rather than real life? To get 300 people co-ordinated in a workplace environment? Mysterious non-removeable black paint (all paint dries)? Why the guy didn't scrub his hands hard instead of walking around in gloves? Lots of people wear gloves on Navy ships? Why didn't the guy burst out laughing or make a sarcastic comment at the finger pointing (only the silence is non-comedic)?
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Jan 2006
Posts
4,663
Location
Newcastle
Depends if he was guilty or not...

Could very well have accidently touched one of the lockers, realised/knew why people had put black paint on the lockers and realised he was in the **** (hence the nervousness). Thus the guys have hounded out an innocent person.

Problem is unless the thief is an idiot (if the original person is innocent) you will never know as he wouldn't steal again...

or tripped up against a locker but I like the logic in the punishment, just proves abuse in physical or word form isn't needed :)

kudos too them in that sense
 
Soldato
Joined
4 Mar 2003
Posts
12,449
Location
Chatteris
I haven't read all of the replaies - I'm sure there is the usual mix of good and bad.
However the way I see it is there wasn't proof that this guy was a thief.
All it would have taken was for him to simply touch a locker and he would have paint on him.
No way indicative of potential theft.

Secondly, if I'd been the guy I would have sued for constructive dismissal (I believe it would come under that).
Those in charge did not prevent or even attempt to prevent the bullying that was taking place.
That alone is a nice payout via the courts.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
39,267
Location
Ireland
Thats naive at best - a mob aren't interested in whether you have anything to hide or not... they are convinced your guilty by their measure... no amount of holding your hand up and saying "honestly it happened by accident" is going to convince them... a more timid, completely innoncent, person isn't even going to want to confront that kinda situation once they realise whats going on and will try to hide it.

"The guilty hide things, the innocent get help" has absolutely no merit in reality as a benchmark of anything - its a pipedream of an idealistic world.

Ah so its not just the graphics forum you two lovers lock lips. :eek:
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Aug 2004
Posts
6,739
Location
The Toilet
I haven't read all of the replaies - I'm sure there is the usual mix of good and bad.
However the way I see it is there wasn't proof that this guy was a thief.
All it would have taken was for him to simply touch a locker and he would have paint on him.
No way indicative of potential theft.

Secondly, if I'd been the guy I would have sued for constructive dismissal (I believe it would come under that).
Those in charge did not prevent or even attempt to prevent the bullying that was taking place.
That alone is a nice payout via the courts.

How could they make people talk to him etc?
Sounds like the actions of a guilty man.
Why would he have leaned onto lockers with his hands? Why would he even be leaning on them, surely if he was leaning on them he must have been stood around talking to someone, which could have been an aliby.
Theres no reason to be leaning on lockers, if he had time to loaf about he would have been down the mess or in his bunk.

The guy didnt have to request to leave, which im dubious as to whether he was allowed to do anyway... theres plenty more warships and plenty more units he could have been sent to.
 
Back
Top Bottom