TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Man gets 22 weeks in jail for staring at someone else in public.

windowpass

April 30, 2022
44 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-61263393
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Man gets 22 weeks in jail for staring at someone else in public.
Author

windowpass

Upvotes 44
Comments 41
Date April 30, 2022 11:48 AM UTC
(4 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/uf9gwk/man_gets_22_weeks_in_jail_for_staring_at_someone/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/man-gets-22-weeks-in-jail-for-staring-at-someone.1113776
https://theredarchive.com/post/1113776
Top posts by windowpass

Man given nearly a month in jail for "intrusive staring"

4 upvotes
April 30, 2022
/r/MensRights

Why is Bill Cosby free, but Harvey Weinstein is in prison for life? Didn't Bill Cosby assault people for a much longer time?

1 upvotes
September 7, 2022
/r/MensRights

A time and place when emasculation was the norm.

1 upvotes
June 23, 2022
/r/MensRights

Father sets himself on fire in front of ex-wife's family. She didn't let him see his kids for years with false violence allegations

1 upvotes
May 21, 2022
/r/MensRights

A reminder that you are your own man.

1 upvotes
May 29, 2022
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]da_corndog 17 points18 points19 points 4 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

How dare he have eyes that collect light which his brain converts to images. Such things should be banned for all men immediately.

[–]UnconventionalXY 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She had no right to emit photons in his direction: that's assault!

[–]Interesting-Bug-6048 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Her photons, her rules. His brain should filter those photons or ask for consent before delivering the cells to his brain. That was rape

[–]UnconventionalXY 18 points19 points20 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I want to feel as safe as men on the train

If they keep up jailing men for looking at women, men aren't going to feel safe at all. Be careful what you wish for women. Just another example of unexpected consequences to knee jerk emotional reactions.

I hope UK men crash the system in opposition.

[–]WingJeezy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Or you could, I dunno, not stare people down and physically prevent them from getting off a train?

[–]UnconventionalXY 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This was one man, probably with a mental illness and physically preventing freedom of movement should be a crime, whereas staring at someone is not preventing their freedom in any way and is a completely different situation.

How women feel about things is not the responsibility of anyone else but them: how women are physically interfered with, or constrained however, is.

[–]WingJeezy 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If that were the case, being a peeping Tom wouldn’t be illegal.

If you’re 3 ft away from someone staring them down and restricting their movement, I think it’s reasonable to be charged.

[–]UnconventionalXY 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) makes peeping or prying a criminal offense if any person is in or near a building, without reasonable cause, with intent to peep or pry upon another person.

I think it was designed to preserve privacy and stop people looking through keyholes or openings in buildings to observe naked people or sexuality. I don't think being near a person in the open in a public space would be considered peeping, plus having a valid ticket would be reasonable cause to be in a train station and it would be necessary to demonstrate an intent to peep, not simply a spur of the moment look or stare at something or someone of interest. I do not think peeping Tom applies to this situation.

In a public space, people should not expect privacy beyond the measures they take to protect themselves from view. Upskirting is a crime because it actively disables the privacy provided by clothing, but simply looking at someone does nothing to invade expectations of privacy and should not be a crime.

People are mesmerised by accidents and items of interest and will stop to stare to gather more information: should we make that a crime as well?

A persons subjective feelings should only be their own responsibility, not that of someone else, because they are a result of subjective interpretation of the meaning of the incident.

You are conflating two separate things into a crime: deprivation of liberty should definitely be a crime, but staring, uh, uh.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points16 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The UK has officially become a feminazi country. Of course as usual, this « rule » is in favor of women, but they refuse to make it explicit lol

[–]windowpass 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'll wait to see a case where a woman gets arrested for staring at a man. Then i'll agree that it's equal. Until then, it sure don't sound like it.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Don’t wait you’ll die before it happens

[–]Arch_Stanton1862 13 points14 points15 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

"He stood, less than a metre away, looking."

I have to admit that's creepy if you're looking at that distance at someone. I mean he wasn't excactly "zoning out" The punishment is ridiculous though.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That wasn't the one that was arrested, the one arrested was around Newbury, which is located at the west of London, what you quoted is an experience from someone who is from:

Bex, from east London, was travelling home on the Tube from a night at the theatre when a man sitting opposite her began staring.

Not even the same city (Newbury is in Berkshire, if i'm not wrong).

The article doesn't mention if that one was arrested.

[–]Arch_Stanton1862 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You're right, my bad.

[–]Angryasfk 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Was the guy who “stared” at “Bex” arrested? It sounds like a tale she’s telling to back up Khan’s posters. She said she wondered if she was “overreacting” but looked up and saw Khan’s poster and felt that she wasn’t.

No indication that she called the police, much less they arrested the guy.

Seriously, this is a policy made to be abused.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Was the guy who “stared” at “Bex” arrested?

The article doesn't mentions it.

[–]Angryasfk 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The article makes it sound like “Bex” did nothing, except “feel that she wasn’t overreacting” when she saw the Khan sign.

[–]windowpass 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. 1 meter = 3.2 feet. It's a little close, but doesn't prevent anyone from moving away from them if they dont feel comfortable. *Yes, that was a different guy, not the one arrested.

[–]LondonDude123 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The dude that got 22 Weeks did more than stare, he intentionally followed her off the train, stalked her for a bit, and actually waved at her at one point. Thats not cool in any way.

Heres the thing, I can see how a court could find that "intentionally cause harassment/alarm/distress" under UK Law. But 22 Weeks in prison? Nearly SIX MONTHS in PRISON.

If you want to make a new law, make a new law. But this dude got 6 months in prison for Section 5, which is usually an 80 quid fine. Do I smell "making an example"?

[–]LettuceBeGrateful 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's a bit confusing, but the guy who followed her and waved wasn't sent to prison, as far as we know. The guy who got 22 weeks was someone else who actually blocked a woman from leaving the train.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 4 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

These are the two arrest described in the article, both seem justified to me.

In recent weeks the staring posters have been put into the spotlight after a man was jailed for staring at a woman on a train between Reading and Newbury, and blocking her exit

Wasn't arrested only for staring, but also for blocking her way out.

On 22 April, British Transport Police tweeted that officers in north London had arrested a man who pressed himself against a woman on a train. They had been following the man because they noticed he was "closely watching" female passengers.

Wasn't arrested only for staring, but also for pressing himself against other passangers.

[–]Marty-the-monkey 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yea but that isn't as fun or provoking of a headline.

[–]EngineeringDry6717 -5 points-4 points-3 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

You believe that is justified?? Dude what is wrong with you.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Yes.

If you stalk someone and intentionally block their way out, you deserve to be arrested.

If you stalk someone and then grope them/press yourself against them, you deserve to be arrested.

[–]EngineeringDry6717 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

What I meant is that the gurl had no proof lol. So: how is that justified to you?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

In the first case there were over a dozen witnesses that presencied the whole thing, including the manager of the train.

She asked Bullock to move as he was blocking her exit, but he refused again and said she would have to climb over him, while spreading his legs.

The victim, who was visibly upset, continued to ask Bullock to move out of her way. Bullock remained emotionless and still refused.

Other passengers in the carriage also started asking Bullock to move while the victim phoned the police, but he continued to refuse. 

The train manager was alerted and removed Bullock from the train at Thatcham.

In the second case, officers caught the guy red handed.

On 22 April, British Transport Police tweeted that officers in north London had arrested a man who pressed himself against a woman on a train. They had been following the man because they noticed he was "closely watching" female passengers.

¿Proof of what do you need?

[–]EngineeringDry6717 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

So, you read that, and you believe it? After everything that happens these days? Ok bro.. good for you

And even if he really did, well.. to me, he hasn't touched her, that doesn't deserve a 22 weeks sentence.

Have you read about those female teachers who raped teenagers boys for months, and received lile 7days of sentence?

If you really believe that 22 weeks is justified, and you believe everything you read about it, well, let's just agree to disagree, there is no point arguing.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Both cases went to trial and both men were found guilty.

¿Did the first woman paid everyone else in the train, including the manager to lie on her behalf? (There were also men amongs the witnesses).

¿Did the officers fake their recordings?

[–]EngineeringDry6717 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Like I said, let's agree to disagree :)

[–]Thread_water 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

“It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself__anything that carried the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime, it was called.” -1984

[–]lovedrspock 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Absolutely maddening that this is a thing! FOH

[–]oafsalot 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

As she got off, he followed, so she decided to wait on the station concourse for five minutes before boarding her bus. He stood, less than a metre away, looking.

After several trains came and left without the man getting on, she "bolted" for the stairs.

"I turned around and he was just waving at me," she says.

He stalked her mate, he got time for that as he should have. He'll be out in 11 if he's a good boy.

We don't deny some men harass women or cause them to fear, we just deny it's every man like women insist it must be.

[–]xsplizzle -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

that one is most likely a fictional story. Seeing as you didnt read the article, that one isnt the one where the person got jail time, thats just another story this woman is telling, which is possibly bullshit but almost definitely exaggerated

[–]oafsalot -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

One assumes the Police checked the CCTV which covers everything in the network.

In any case, the actual conviction isn't just for looking at someone.

[–]xsplizzle 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No dude, that entire exchange in the article wasnt reported to the police, its just a woman telling a story about what she claimed happened to her.

The actual person who got arrested isnt being described in that link. read the link.

[–]The_Great_Sarcasmo 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

https://www.btp.police.uk/news/btp/news/in-the-courts/man-jailed-after-refusing-to-stop-staring-at-a-woman-on-a-train-and-blocking-her-exit---berkshire/

To be fair he does sound like a bit of a creep. He probably has a bunch of priors.

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He physically blocked her from leaving. That’s a bit more than just looking at her.

[–]windowpass 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

"The court heard how at around 1.45pm on Saturday 5 March, Bullock sat next to the victim on the train and began staring at her, very intently. The victim asked him to stop staring several times as it was making her feel uncomfortable, but he refused."

Yeah... he really sounds like he deserved 6 months in prison.

Imagine you're on the subway in any other city and you ask one of those schizos or homeless ppl to stop staring at you? Odds are lot worse things would happen than a guy just ignoring your demands.

As far as mental "creeps" go, this guy is the least of them.

[–]The_Great_Sarcasmo 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I mean.... you seem to be ignoring the part where he wouldn't let her leave even after other passengers intervened.

Claiming that this is just about staring makes the sub look bad.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The parts that you left out:

"She asked Bullock to move as he was blocking her exit, but he refused again and said she would have to climb over him, while spreading his legs."

"The victim, who was visibly upset, continued to ask Bullock to move out of her way. Bullock remained emotionless and still refused."

"Other passengers in the carriage also started asking Bullock to move while the victim phoned the police, but he continued to refuse."

"The train manager was alerted and removed Bullock from the train at Thatcham."

[–]LettuceBeGrateful 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, the "blocking the exit" bit is important. That's dialing the situation way up from unwanted staring.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter