Richmond 2017

cracka · Post by **cracka** » Wed Oct 11, 2017 5:21 pm

What was Fevolas punishment for the Lara Bingle one. Pretty similar incidents

Magellan · Post by **Magellan** » Wed Oct 11, 2017 5:35 pm

cracka wrote:What was Fevolas punishment for the Lara Bingle one.

Sent up to Brisbane to play for the Lions.

amber_fluid · Post by **amber_fluid** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:30 am

carey wrote:
morell wrote:Yeah that's a crime. No sympathy for whoever distributed it. Ought to face the full force of the law.

This shit has to stop.

I've just been sent the uncensored photo from a bloke at work!

The internet certainly reaches world wide.

When will blokes realise this is not acceptable behaviour.
Ive seen the uncensored photos as well and.........

Nice rack!

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:31 am

carey wrote:
morell wrote:Yeah that's a crime. No sympathy for whoever distributed it. Ought to face the full force of the law.

This shit has to stop.

I've just been sent the uncensored photo from a bloke at work!

The internet certainly reaches world wide.

Well you have my number!

MW · Post by MW » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:32 am

amber_fluid wrote:
carey wrote:
morell wrote:Yeah that's a crime. No sympathy for whoever distributed it. Ought to face the full force of the law.

This shit has to stop.

I've just been sent the uncensored photo from a bloke at work!

The internet certainly reaches world wide.

When will blokes realise this is not acceptable behaviour.
Ive seen the uncensored photos as well and.........

Nice rack!

PM me it!

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:33 am

I have my doubts here, seeing the photo of her in front of the Richmond logo suggests that it wasn't a private photo.

I smell money to be made.

amber_fluid · Post by **amber_fluid** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:34 am

We’re all a bunch of hypocrites!!!!

We don’t condone the players actions and think it’s unacceptable behaviour..........
But still want to see the photos :lol:

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:34 am

MW wrote:
PM me it!

Please don't mis-spell MW with Lightning McQueen

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:35 am

amber_fluid wrote:We’re all a bunch of hypocrites!!!!

We don’t condone the players actions and think it’s unacceptable behaviour..........
But still want to see the photos

I'm only wanting to see it to make my own judgement.................................well I'm running with that.

amber_fluid · Post by **amber_fluid** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:45 am

Lightning McQueen wrote:
amber_fluid wrote:We’re all a bunch of hypocrites!!!!

We don’t condone the players actions and think it’s unacceptable behaviour..........
But still want to see the photos

I'm only wanting to see it to make my own judgement.................................well I'm running with that.

A mate text me and said I’ve got the photos, did you want to see them.

What sort of question is that :lol:

Magellan · Post by **Magellan** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:49 am

Lightning McQueen wrote:I have my doubts here, seeing the photo of her in front of the Richmond logo suggests that it wasn't a private photo.

I smell money to be made.

The lass in front of the logo is different to the one showing her knockers, and willingly uploaded the pic to her Instagram account apparently.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/sports-life/richmond-player-faces-police-probe-over-topless-woman-photos/news-story/ca02313e8c1f03847dcd984b972b63b1

morell · Post by **morell** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:56 am

amber_fluid wrote:We’re all a bunch of hypocrites!!!!

We don’t condone the players actions and think it’s unacceptable behaviour..........
But still want to see the photos

There is a difference between enjoying the female form and actively and criminally distributing revenge Porn.

But I do agree. If she has expressed a want for the distribution of her photo to stop, people should not be sending it around.

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:01 am

Magellan wrote:
Lightning McQueen wrote:I have my doubts here, seeing the photo of her in front of the Richmond logo suggests that it wasn't a private photo.

I smell money to be made.

The lass in front of the logo is different to the one showing her knockers, and willingly uploaded the pic to her Instagram account apparently.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/sports-life/richmond-player-faces-police-probe-over-topless-woman-photos/news-story/ca02313e8c1f03847dcd984b972b63b1

They seem to wearing the same knickers.

Perhaps she has similar features, with longer hair.

Lightning McQueen · Post by **Lightning McQueen** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:04 am

amber_fluid wrote:
A mate text me and said I’ve got the photos, did you want to see them.

What sort of question is that

A very silly one, surely he knows you have no morals.

LMA · Post by **LMA** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:16 am

morell wrote:
amber_fluid wrote:We’re all a bunch of hypocrites!!!!

We don’t condone the players actions and think it’s unacceptable behaviour..........
But still want to see the photos

There is a difference between enjoying the female form and actively and criminally distributing revenge Porn.

But I do agree. If she has expressed a want for the distribution of her photo to stop, people should not be sending it around.

Do you have to know the person or have past history for it to be considered Revenge Porn, seems like lawyers could exploit the terminology.

amber_fluid · Post by **amber_fluid** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:31 am

LMA wrote:
morell wrote:
amber_fluid wrote:We’re all a bunch of hypocrites!!!!

We don’t condone the players actions and think it’s unacceptable behaviour..........
But still want to see the photos

There is a difference between enjoying the female form and actively and criminally distributing revenge Porn.

But I do agree. If she has expressed a want for the distribution of her photo to stop, people should not be sending it around.

Do you have to know the person or have past history for it to be considered Revenge Porn, seems like lawyers could exploit the terminology.

You asking for personal reasons?
Or genuinely want too know?

morell · Post by **morell** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:35 am

LMA wrote:
morell wrote:
amber_fluid wrote:We’re all a bunch of hypocrites!!!!

We don’t condone the players actions and think it’s unacceptable behaviour..........
But still want to see the photos

There is a difference between enjoying the female form and actively and criminally distributing revenge Porn.

But I do agree. If she has expressed a want for the distribution of her photo to stop, people should not be sending it around.

Do you have to know the person or have past history for it to be considered Revenge Porn, seems like lawyers could exploit the terminology.

Not sure tbh.

Regardless of the law, its just a shitty thing to do.

LMA · Post by **LMA** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:17 am

amber_fluid wrote:
LMA wrote:
morell wrote:
amber_fluid wrote:We’re all a bunch of hypocrites!!!!

We don’t condone the players actions and think it’s unacceptable behaviour..........
But still want to see the photos

There is a difference between enjoying the female form and actively and criminally distributing revenge Porn.

But I do agree. If she has expressed a want for the distribution of her photo to stop, people should not be sending it around.

Do you have to know the person or have past history for it to be considered Revenge Porn, seems like lawyers could exploit the terminology.

You asking for personal reasons?
Or genuinely want too know?

Nah just curious mate, besides it's a bit hard to take photos with a Nokia 5110

Dogwatcher · Post by **Dogwatcher** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:37 am

Lightning McQueen wrote:
Magellan wrote:
Lightning McQueen wrote:I have my doubts here, seeing the photo of her in front of the Richmond logo suggests that it wasn't a private photo.

I smell money to be made.

The lass in front of the logo is different to the one showing her knockers, and willingly uploaded the pic to her Instagram account apparently.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/sports-life/richmond-player-faces-police-probe-over-topless-woman-photos/news-story/ca02313e8c1f03847dcd984b972b63b1

They seem to wearing the same knickers.

Perhaps she has similar features, with longer hair.

It shouldn't bother you.

Magellan · Post by **Magellan** » Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:55 am

Dogwatcher wrote:
Lightning McQueen wrote:
Magellan wrote:
Lightning McQueen wrote:I have my doubts here, seeing the photo of her in front of the Richmond logo suggests that it wasn't a private photo.

I smell money to be made.

The lass in front of the logo is different to the one showing her knockers, and willingly uploaded the pic to her Instagram account apparently.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/sports-life/richmond-player-faces-police-probe-over-topless-woman-photos/news-story/ca02313e8c1f03847dcd984b972b63b1

They seem to wearing the same knickers.

Perhaps she has similar features, with longer hair.

It shouldn't bother you.

Does she stimulate you, attract and captivate you?

Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Re: Richmond 2017

Who is online