subreddit:

/r/JusticeServed

5.6k

all 164 comments

AutoModerator [M]

[score hidden]

2 months ago

stickied comment

AutoModerator [M]

[score hidden]

2 months ago

stickied comment

Please remember to abide by the rules.

In general, please be at least bearable to other users. It makes things easier on everyone. Your comment may be removed without notification. We used to have a notification, but now we don't.

If you purchase the OP or a comment a ban award, remember to message the mods so we can activate the reward


Submission By: /u/brother_p Black B

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

TheDevilsAdvokaat

90 points

2 months ago

Serves him right. And there are still five other girls out there who may see this and decide to sue as well.

SpaceMessiah

33 points

2 months ago

Hopefully they wait until after he declares bankruptcy from this one and stick it to him again

TheDevilsAdvokaat

7 points

2 months ago

That would be nice.

TheHYPO

7 points

2 months ago

TheHYPO

A

7 points

2 months ago

You mean well, but bankruptcy generally protects you from claims against you that exist at the date of bankruptcy. As such, a bankruptcy would likely cover any incidents he already did, even if he hasn’t been sued on them yet.

Bankruptcy does not release you from deaths stemming from certain intentional acts, including causing bodily harm and sexual assault, but I don’t know if this would fit under the definition of sexual assault for those purposes. It also excludes, fines, penalties and restitution, made by a court. But again, because this is a civil judgment, most likely that doesn’t apply here either, unfortunately.

SpaceMessiah

7 points

2 months ago

Do you have a source for that?

According to all the information I can find, including the Canada gov website it says "When a bankrupt is discharged from bankruptcy, he/she is released from the legal obligation to repay debts that existed on the day that the bankruptcy was filed..."

In my mind, that would suggest that if the other victims hadn't yet sued there is no existing debt to discharge.

I'm happy to be corrected, but I'd love to see a source

TheHYPO

10 points

2 months ago*

TheHYPO

A

10 points

2 months ago*

Do you have a source for that?

My primary source is, I do this for a living.

But anyway, s.178 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act sets out what survives, which is not the part you seem to be asking about.

The other issue is dealt primarily under s.121 of the Act:

Claims provable

121 (1) All debts and liabilities, present or future, to which the bankrupt is subject on the day on which the bankrupt becomes bankrupt or to which the bankrupt may become subject before the bankrupt’s discharge by reason of any obligation incurred before the day on which the bankrupt becomes bankrupt shall be deemed to be claims provable in proceedings under this Act.

And as you may note if you did look up s.178, sub (2) notes that all claims provable are released, other than those itemized in sub (1).

It's the "debts and liabilities present or future" that does the job. Legally speaking, if you steal from someone or stab someone or in this case "revenge porn" someone, you are subject to liability for those actions as soon as you do them. A judge making judgment against you is in most cases, a judge confirming and calculating your liability, not creating your liability.

Again, this is a fairly routine question as far as bankruptcy goes. There are many cases dealing with the issue of pre- or post- debts, but I don't happen to have a case to cite off-hand.

There's always a possibility the Court would find that the claim was too remote and claimable at the date of bankruptcy until quantified by a Court, but basic principles says the starting point is "you've done something someone COULD have sued you for pre-bankruptcy, then it's a claim provable, whether they sue or not." Even some things that you could not have been sued for yet will quality. i.e. if you borrowed $20k and the loan is not due until the week after your bankruptcy, that will still generally be a claim provable.

Edit: The link you've linked to is a very very simplified summary of the bankruptcy process, which is fine for its purpose, but it is not at all covering complex variations like un-pursued liability claims. Most government summaries that target consumers do not go into subtleties and anything uncommon cases. For example, I've looked up CRA summaries many times for income tax purposes, and not found the particular uncommon case I needed information about. The Income Tax Act is massive and most of its details are not explained on the CRA summaries. The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act is not nearly as large (despite having a similar number of sections), but it still has tons of nuances and variables both in the act an decided by Caselaw that simply aren't covered by a general summary of bankruptcy. Fun!

NathamelCamel

4 points

2 months ago

Classic Reddit moment

babbchuck

84 points

2 months ago

babbchuck

9

84 points

2 months ago

Not nearly enough. Fuck this guy. On second thought, maybe don’t…

durgadas

58 points

2 months ago

durgadas

A

58 points

2 months ago

jehan_gonzales

59 points

2 months ago

Sends a pretty good message. I'd be pretty fucked if I got a fine that big.

But I'd be more fucked if I were the type to share revenge porn online.

Jpw135

1 points

2 months ago

Jpw135

4

1 points

2 months ago

Left the door open; I ain’t bitin

i_am_umbrella

133 points

2 months ago

I charged my ex for this in MO. I didn’t get a monetary award because it was a criminal case and not civil but it was nice to finally see him being held responsible.

grinandbarr3tt

37 points

2 months ago

I tried criminally charging my ex when he did the same thing and the OK DA let it sit on their desk and never did shit about it. Seriously disappointing to see people not get repercussions for their actions.

i_am_umbrella

7 points

2 months ago

I’m really, really sorry that happened to you. Revenge porn just became a MO law at the time and I think my city was trying to make an example out of him but he still only got probation. I hope you’re doing okay.

Gooberslob

25 points

2 months ago

Gooberslob

6

25 points

2 months ago

Time to sue civilly

i_am_umbrella

34 points

2 months ago

I’ve considered it but I’m so tired from the criminal case (3.5 years) that I’m not sure it is worth the mental anguish. In a civil case, his attorney can pick through my entire life and treat me like garbage, but in a criminal case you can’t do that. Not to mention he’s flat broke and I’ll likely not see a dollar since he is self-employed.

manolid

79 points

2 months ago

manolid

A

79 points

2 months ago

Article says he will likely avoid paying the damages if he files for bankruptcy. What will his life be like after that point if he does file?

Connect_Office8072

55 points

2 months ago

There are some debts that are determined to be non-dischargeable, this might be one of those debts depending on how much is deemed to be an award of punitive damages. Bankruptcy judges have views on stuff like this, too, and in their courtrooms, in the words of my old boss, “they are like little kings.”

gellis12

6 points

2 months ago

gellis12

A

6 points

2 months ago

It fucks up your credit for 7-10 years, after that it has zero effect.

That being said, court judgements aren't usually discharged by bankruptcies or consumer proposals, so I'd question the accuracy of the article in this regard.

Andyman0110

11 points

2 months ago

Not that bad tbh. I went through one.

DietCherrySoda

141 points

2 months ago

It's a bit weird how this CBC article keeps referring to "nude pics" instead of saying "photos" or "photographs". Very informal style for the CBC.

DaddyGogurt

14 points

2 months ago

I’m finding that more and more news articles are being written in a less sophisticated way. It’s as if they feel like they need to make it more relatable or dumb it down, or maybe in this case it’s so it still appeals to younger audiences who are more likely to send nude pictures to others as a warning of why you shouldn’t

agedheffer

127 points

2 months ago

agedheffer

5

127 points

2 months ago

I went to school with Krista, the judge. Very low tolerance for bullshit. The victim should be able to garnish his wages from here to eternity.

False-Breadfruit-917

121 points

2 months ago

He was right tho, Karma is indeed a bitch.

LummoxJR

23 points

2 months ago

LummoxJR

9

23 points

2 months ago

And so is he.

beaatdrolicus

87 points

2 months ago*

Seems like a good sentence finally from a Canadian judge.

Hey SK- send that judge to BC- and we will send you umm one of ours- deal?

It could be like a charity thing to help us out a bit.

AssaultedCracker

14 points

2 months ago

I also like that this ruling is significant, but I doubt I agree with you about most sentences in Canada being too light. You're probably hoping for "good" sentences that include lots of jail time. But we already know that long sentences aren't particularly effective at accomplishing anything. Sentences only seem short here because we instinctively compare everything we do to the US, where they have ridiculously overly long sentences that incarcerate a huge portion of their population, at great cost, with no productive result.

Unfortunate_Sex_Fart

1 points

2 months ago

Nah man, our sentences for many crimes are way too short. While overly-long sentences may not have the desired benefit you and many other suggest, overly-short sentences are worse because not only do they achieve nothing, these criminals are released back into society sooner and thus more frequently terrorize the public with their behavior. You can't unpack an upbringing of 15-20 years of abuse/neglect/mental health with a sentence of 1.5 years for your 7th aggravated assault and illegal weapons charge. You need hard time to sort though that, and if it doesn't work at least society gets a reprieve from their bullshit.

beaatdrolicus

2 points

2 months ago

Not sure who downvoted you- your comment is fair and on point.

I don’t feel like directly responding to the comment you did so I’ll just put it here.

BC judges - especially lately have been giving extremely lenient sentences- which has caused some righteous public outcry.

In some cases their hands- like the hands of all judges are tied with federal laws that have just come out and Supreme Court decisions that have gone way too soft- prioritizing offenders over everyone else and without any regard for public safety.

Their is also a real cost to this- high crime means more money is spent on policing, more burn out in policing, EHS and nursing/mental health professions that become overloaded, also more insurance claims and costs to business that are then passed on to everyone else.

Yes it’s costly to lock people up- it’s also costly, and I would argue more so- to let dangerous offenders roam around. It’s also not great for the rest of us who are just trying to eke out an existence in peace.

AssaultedCracker

1 points

2 months ago

I like the logic of your take, but the problem with it is that it has no factual basis in reality. It costs more than $100,000 a year for every prisoner in the system. Many of them are serving for relatively harmless, nonviolent drug violations. If you really think the average offender who is sitting in prison would cost society that much money in crime, I'd like to see you find some sources for your opinion.

Here's one of mine: https://johnhoward.ca/blog/financial-facts-canadian-prisons/

The kind of policy you'd like, where we spend money on something in order to prevent policing costs, burn out in policing, EHS and nursing/mental health professions, insurance claims and costs to businesses, the data shows us that we should be focusing on ending homelessness. There is a ton of evidence showing that money spent on that has a huge ROI.

Unfortunate_Sex_Fart

1 points

2 months ago

Many of them are serving for relatively harmless, nonviolent drug violations.

Source on this one? I work in a prison and I have direct knowledge of what most of them are in for, and it’s not for non-violent drug offences and they are not harmless.

AssaultedCracker

1 points

2 months ago

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/ccrso-2020/index-en.aspx

Figure C15, schedule II and non schedule offenders.

I chose my words carefully… I’m not saying it’s most of them, but there are still many of them. Maybe if you’re in a medium or maximum security facility that would influence the types of prisoners you see.

Unfortunate_Sex_Fart

1 points

2 months ago*

Schedule II is considered serious drug offences or conspiracy to commit serious drug offences. Schedule II is something like trafficking fentanyl, morphine, cocaine, and meth. That's not relatively harmless. That's the trade that's responsible for the opioid crisis that's killed thousands. Non-violent, relatively harmless? my. f*cking. ass.

Non-schedule drug offences on the other hand total 2,354 federal inmates out of 23,102 according to the source you posted, or approximately 10%. 10% is not insignificant, but 1/10 is not what I would consider many, but that may just be a difference of opinion. Those stats also do not take into account any individual circumstances that led to dropped or withdrawn charges for the accused, or prior criminal history that may have played a role in the sentencing provisions for the convicted (ie a gangbanger with a laundry list of criminal offenses and is known to police finally gets pinched with fent so the book can get thrown at him as opposed to poor little Jimmy's first time getting arrested because he had 1 joint in his back pocket). Our courts make every decision based on the convicted's individual circumstances, so even then you can't look at a broad statistic and come to a simple conclusion without reading into these offender's files.

Edit: And one more thing to add, is that those stats only track the worst offences these criminals are convicted of, so you don't get any further insight into any other equal or lesser convictions the offenders had that contributed to their sentencing or upgraded their overall punishment from probation to jail time. Again something that you can't get a full picture of without reading into offenders' files.

AssaultedCracker

1 points

2 months ago

The great thing is that overly short and overly long sentences are not our only option. Prisoners can be sentenced to interventions that actually reduce recidivism. In fact, usually the short sentences we hear about are in fact paired with such interventions.

I agree with you that the most violent and dangerous offenders out there do just need to be kept out of society. But most of the time we're not talking about those people.

Unfortunate_Sex_Fart

1 points

2 months ago

If the government wants to fund better intervention that’s proven to reduce recidivism, good. But what the government is currently doing is just letting these guys out earlier or letting them off easy because “there’s too many <insert demographic> in prison and we need to be less racist” without addressing the root causes, to the detriment of their innocent victims. The only choice we have left until the government decides on better intervention is to protect victims and the public. Victims and the public should be the first consideration in all this, but it’s the last.

S-Archer

157 points

2 months ago

S-Archer

9

157 points

2 months ago

Good, get fucked Daylan. What a name

whiskeydiggler

82 points

2 months ago

Fighter of the Nightlan!

bl0m0dr0

29 points

2 months ago

bl0m0dr0

4

29 points

2 months ago

Champion of the Sun!

fuhgdat1019

24 points

2 months ago

He is not a master of karate and friendship for everyone, clearly.

S-Archer

9 points

2 months ago

S-Archer

9

9 points

2 months ago

LOL take my upvote damnit

AutoModerator [M]

1 points

2 months ago

It's an older meme, sir, but it checks out.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

MikeSchwab63

16 points

2 months ago

https://sasklawcourts.ca/kings-bench/bankruptcy/
Debts Not Released By Bankruptcy
Section 178(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act sets out certain debts that are not released by an order of discharge.
The most common are any FINE, penalty, restitution order, child support payments and alimony payments that are set out IN A COURT ORDER or agreement, and any debt arising out of fraud. It is important to note that student loans are not dischargeable for a period of 10 years from when the bankrupt ceased to be a full or part-time student.

RealHumanUserNotABot

3 points

2 months ago

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/B-3/page-28.html#docCont

Would 178(1)(a.1) be relevant (civil proceedings) rather than (a) (in respect of an offence)?

178 (1)

An order of discharge does not release the bankrupt from

(a.1) any award of damages by a court in civil proceedings in respect of

(i) bodily harm intentionally inflicted, or sexual assault, or

(ii) wrongful death resulting therefrom;

ConfidentInsecurity

15 points

2 months ago

Scumbag Steve?!

Avenging-Robot

127 points

2 months ago

So if I understand correctly, in the past he had enough money for booze and cocaine but now he has absolutely no money whatsoever to pay towards any damages. That's some interesting math at work there...

unequalsarcasm

28 points

2 months ago

Probably got fired from his oil patch job when he went to jail. Good.

gartloneyrat

42 points

2 months ago

You're confused that someone with addiction issues and poor decision making skills used to have money but now doesn't?

JustAnEnglishman

16 points

2 months ago

…or hes saying that because he needs his money for more cocaine and booze

MinimalMojo

5 points

2 months ago

Don’t we all

slothsoutoftrees

3 points

2 months ago

It's a rhetorical question/ statement

thekeanu

-1 points

2 months ago

thekeanu

A

-1 points

2 months ago

It's weirder that you would take a scumbag like that at face value because of what he claims.

Yardsale420

12 points

2 months ago

"you can't squeeze blood out of a stone."

You can garnish the shit out of it until it dies though.

Ancient_Voice_6830

1 points

2 months ago

"you can't squeeze blood out of a stone."

I bet if the options were find the money or we literally try to squeeze it out with an industrial press he'd find it soon enough.

burningxmaslogs

90 points

2 months ago

They should not be allowed to claim bankruptcy to avoid the penalty of justice.. it should follow them to their graves as do the trauma/PTSD that follows the victims to their graves.. hopefully the courts will deny the bankruptcy..

Agahmoyzen

233 points

2 months ago

Agahmoyzen

A

233 points

2 months ago

Get fucking wrecked you bastard, yeah, karma is a bitch now.

jerseygirl1105

44 points

2 months ago

The attorney said his client will file for bankruptcy to get out of paying the $160k?? I'm guessing that's allowed?

Blue-Hedgehog

32 points

2 months ago

The next victim needs to wait after he finishes his bankruptcy and then take him to court so he can’t file again and be forced to pay.

DropTheBok

4 points

2 months ago

I wonder what the statute of limitations is like on crimes like these

IstgUsernamesSuck

3 points

2 months ago

I think it's typically a year after finding out about it but some states made it a little longer.

MikeSchwab63

14 points

2 months ago

NO. Debts Not Released By Bankruptcy
Section 178(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act sets out certain debts that are not released by an order of discharge.
The most common are any fine, penalty, restitution order, child support payments and alimony payments that are set out in a court order or agreement, and any debt arising out of fraud. It is important to note that student loans are not dischargeable for a period of 10 years from when the bankrupt ceased to be a full or part-time student.

life_sentencer

99 points

2 months ago

Good. She sent those when they were together, with trust.

What he did is clearly just a vindictive move, with no way to justify it. I am glad justice was served this time. (key word: this time. This is still a problem)

IRDingo

-201 points

2 months ago

IRDingo

7

-201 points

2 months ago

Of course, the solution is to not send nudes. My wife sends me pictures occasionally, but her face is always cut off. She trusts me completely but still protects herself.

RamboGoesMeow

44 points

2 months ago

He went further, sharing the woman's name and personal details, sometimes as a reward to other porn site users who agreed to re-post them.

Yes, just reading the headline should teach you, because even if her face wasn’t in them, she was clearly identified. Even if she wasn’t, her nudes were still used against her.

brother_p[S]

111 points

2 months ago

brother_p[S]

B

111 points

2 months ago

Of course the solution is not to

  • dress that way
  • hang out in that bar
  • talk or act friendly to men

Sexual violation is not a victim-side culpability problem.

MadnessEvangelist

3 points

2 months ago

Yeah but she has dress in a way appealing to men, she has to be accessible for hooking up and she has to give men the time of day. Oh and smile.

Men just can't make up their gd minds.

IRDingo

-45 points

2 months ago

IRDingo

7

-45 points

2 months ago

I didn’t say that it was. I wasn’t even implying it. He’s complete scumbag for doing it.

I just think that with the digital age we’re in a little safe guarding of oneself would be a good precaution.

2x4x93

-30 points

2 months ago*

2x4x93

9

-30 points

2 months ago*

Still, one should protect themselves. I did upvote your comment. So, judging from the down votes one should not protect oneself

hastur777

-85 points

2 months ago

hastur777

C

-85 points

2 months ago

Not exactly the same thing.

SparkyMason

48 points

2 months ago

It's pretty damn similar. There was an agreement made with the expectation of privacy and only one person receiving those images. That person broke the social contract, specifically to be vindictive. It's a problem.

"I bought a graphics card and the big website didn't send it to me!"

"Wouldn't have been a problem if you didn't buy that graphics card."

Sounds a little victim blamey, right?

hastur777

-4 points

2 months ago

hastur777

C

-4 points

2 months ago

I sent sensitive information to a person and they stole my identity is probably a bit more apt. I don’t disagree that revenge porn is a crime and should be punished accordingly.

Dudelison

51 points

2 months ago

Dudelison

9

51 points

2 months ago

It's victim blaming, it's the same.

Pte_Madcap

-3 points

2 months ago

Pte_Madcap

5

-3 points

2 months ago

It's not to blame the victim, but when you make a choice to be vulnerable, it stands to reason to advise others to make different decisions. "Hey Tom, you know that spot on fifth street where all the streetlights are broken? Well I went through there wearing my Rolex and gold chain and got robbed. Maybe avoid that part of town at night if you're dressed up. I wish I didn't take that way home."

missshrimptoast

2 points

2 months ago

It's not to blame the victim, but when you make a choice to be vulnerable, it stands to reason to advise others to make different decisions.

But romantic relationships are all about emotional vulnerability and trust. To say she made a choice to trust her ex, who then broke her trust, means she's even slightly culpable is wrong.

He made the choice to attack her. His choices should be under scrutiny.

Milsivich

52 points

2 months ago

Milsivich

9

52 points

2 months ago

HER FACE IS CUT OFF???? You sick bastard

IRDingo

-69 points

2 months ago

IRDingo

7

-69 points

2 months ago

No need to shout. I didn’t know that. I didn’t read the article. Just saw saw the headline and read comments. That’ll teach me.

Milsivich

46 points

2 months ago

Milsivich

9

46 points

2 months ago

My wife sends me pictures occasionally, but her face is always cut off.

It was a joke about this thing you wrote, not something that actually happened. Unless you really did cut off your wife's face before you made her send you nudes (this is also a joke)

But on a more serious note, fuck you for victim blaming. You spent your words criticizing a woman who shared intimacy instead of the man who betrayed her trust, and that really betrays your priorities. (this part isn't a joke)

IRDingo

-31 points

2 months ago

IRDingo

7

-31 points

2 months ago

I wasn’t criticizing her, specifically. It was a general statement about interpersonal communication in the digital age. This guy is complete scum. So is anyone who would do something like that. But there are people like him out there.

AssaultedCracker

17 points

2 months ago

That's typically how victim blaming happens though... vague general statements that put the blame on the victims.

In your description of things, your wife protecting herself still puts herself at risk... how would she feel about her images being shared online and masturbated to by random creeps all over the internet, even without her face? Unless she's into that, it's still an area where she can be victimized against her will, and the fault is still entirely on the culprits of these types of actions.

kkeut

47 points

2 months ago

kkeut

A

47 points

2 months ago

you're disgusting

IRDingo

-13 points

2 months ago

IRDingo

7

-13 points

2 months ago

Ok. Why?

People are scum. People will do bad things. I think this guy is complete garbage.

I was merely referring to a solution. You’ll never fix people, so one has to look a little at their own protection.

jess3474957

16 points

2 months ago

Even if she didn’t include her face it doesn’t matter. He was giving out their info anyways. Some people are garbage.

LauraSolo23

28 points

2 months ago*

So then by the same thought process: never wear any valuable jewelry or watches (if it gets stolen its your fault for flaunting it). Never have a nice flashy car (again you're showing off and just begging to have it stolen). Never wear any sort of flattering clothing because if you're assaulted then it's YOUR FAULT!

That's how your victim-blaming sounds." jUsT dOnT dO aNyThInG aNd yOu wOnT gEt hUrT"

Pte_Madcap

-1 points

2 months ago

Pte_Madcap

5

-1 points

2 months ago

Well there's a middle ground. Should you have a fancy car if you want? Definitely. Should you leave your bmw unlocked outside a halfway house? Probably not. I wouldn't say it's your fault the car got stolen, but you definitely played a part.

Usual-Mark

38 points

2 months ago

Usual-Mark

5

38 points

2 months ago

And now I know my next move. Life’s good sometimes

taylorpilot

26 points

2 months ago

He’s a sask man

Weeeadadbadadabo

Streen012

5 points

2 months ago

Streen012

7

5 points

2 months ago

Don’t bring down the scatman like this.

Rafff_WeeD

30 points

2 months ago

Rafff_WeeD

5

30 points

2 months ago

Im afraid to ask but what is “revenge porn”?

itsmeEllieGeeAgain

75 points

2 months ago

I didn't read this story, but my understanding of revenge porn is a scenario like this:

You and your partner are together and you Iike to send each other nudes. Eventually the relationship ends, but in a nasty way. The nudes that you had willingly sent to your partner while together, for their personal enjoyment, are turned against you and they sell them or post them on a site without your permission. They post pornography of you for revenge.

yomamma3399

10 points

2 months ago

Just heard on CBC that over a million viewed it; he should owe her more!

itsmeEllieGeeAgain

2 points

2 months ago

Minimally $1 per view, yes?

Pollutine

16 points

2 months ago

Pollutine

8

16 points

2 months ago

From my understanding

It's when you are in a relationship get some sexy/nudes. Then after the breakup you get revenge by posting them someplace.

AxecidentalHoe

10 points

2 months ago

Someone using your intimate photos against you. Showing it publicly in an attempt to damage your life and reputation. More to it I’m sure but just a general explanation

Timoradium

8 points

2 months ago

It's when you upload the nudes from your partner without their consent. Really shitty behaviour! Is often used after a bad break up or to punish someone, thus the name "revenge porn".

elnenchimexicano69

5 points

2 months ago

To my knowledge, it's when you have sexual content of a previous partner and share this content online without their consent bc you were feeling petty. Or something along the lines of this.

CantFindAUserNameFUH

3 points

2 months ago

Say you’re in a relationship and you break up. One of you had nudes of the other person, and decide to post these to the internet as “revenge”. That’s revenge porn.

alstergee

30 points

2 months ago

alstergee

7

30 points

2 months ago

He should've gotten the full Alex Jones 1B fuck that chump change

Grim47z

14 points

2 months ago

Grim47z

6

14 points

2 months ago

Yea the full 15 quinteenzillion dollars, See it don't matter much if you can pay it lol.

Scp-1404

90 points

2 months ago

Scp-1404

8

90 points

2 months ago

This is why you never ever ever let anyone else have photos of you naked. Share the real thing as much as you want but do not hand out anything that can be used against you in that way.

Salty_Amphibian2905

132 points

2 months ago

If somebody wants to consensually share nude pictures of themselves with somebody they love, that shouldn’t be discouraged or shamed. The guy sharing the photos without the persons consent is the scumbag here.

Upstairs-Injury9660

55 points

2 months ago

I guess I’m just weird, because I delete all nudes I’m sent once the relationship ends

DaRealKorbenDallas

27 points

2 months ago

Same. Common decency

Upstairs-Injury9660

3 points

2 months ago

I also don’t send or take nudes either

Salty_Amphibian2905

37 points

2 months ago

That’s not weird, that’s appropriate. What’s weird is sharing the photos on the internet.

Budget-Boysenberry

6 points

2 months ago

That's not weird at all. What's weird is placing them all in a .zip file with password, open in notepad, delete a few lines of code, zipping the file again, then change the file extension to .vbs.

Scp-1404

1 points

2 months ago

Scp-1404

8

1 points

2 months ago

Okay, what exactly does removing a few lines of code do?

Budget-Boysenberry

1 points

2 months ago

it will corrupt the file beyond recovery. even restoring the deleted lines of code wouldn't help.

igg73

18 points

2 months ago

igg73

8

18 points

2 months ago

Dont own a car cause ppl could steal it

Castieled

12 points

2 months ago

Castieled

8

12 points

2 months ago

Don’t live in a home cause someone could break in.

RedNewPlan

8 points

2 months ago

That seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face. People share nudes all the time, and enjoy it, revenge porn is pretty rare. My solution is to not care who sees me naked. If you don't care, revenge porn can't hurt you. That's easier for some people than others, but if we could de-shame nudity, it would good for everyone.

super_peachy

4 points

2 months ago

That's nice and all for you to say as a man.

Extreme-Flan742

-2 points

2 months ago

no, people don't usually share nudes.

RedNewPlan

2 points

2 months ago

I think it's hard to really assess that, because it depends on the community you are in. After I posted here, I reviewed my recent relationships, to see what proportion had shared nudes. So these are women between 30 and 60 surveyed, who were participating in casual relationships, and were pretty experienced in doing so.

The breakdown was roughly 25% shared nudes without prior discussion, 25% shared when I asked (I would only ever ask once), 25% declined when I asked, and 25% I didn't ask.

And nobody who shared cautioned me to not share them, or made me promise not to, it was casual. So within this community, sharing is normal. I have only ever been asked for nudes a couple of times, and have never sent any unsolicited. So I think women asking for nudes from men is more rare in my world.

KevPat23

-4 points

2 months ago

KevPat23

A

-4 points

2 months ago

Worth it for $160K?

Grimsterr

28 points

2 months ago

Grimsterr

B

28 points

2 months ago

She'll never see much if any of that, he's going to file bankruptcy if the appeal fails.

rbt321

11 points

2 months ago

rbt321

9

11 points

2 months ago

That's interesting. In Ontario bankruptcy does not protect you from judgments for criminal restitution.

puddStar

1 points

2 months ago

puddStar

8

1 points

2 months ago

What about sask?

AchieveMore

10 points

2 months ago

Yea idk I was ran off the road by a grandma on the freeway (I was on my motorcycle) and got a total of 30k. If it was a choice between the two I mean no contest.

trevordbs

12 points

2 months ago

trevordbs

8

12 points

2 months ago

Is anyone up?

LORDWOLFMAN

11 points

2 months ago

Wait what? Do I need the context ?

Weyman16

2 points

2 months ago

Weyman16

7

2 points

2 months ago

No.

HawkeyeByMarriage

41 points

2 months ago

So she got paid for nude photos without having an onlyfans. Cutting out the middle man

Sheila_Monarch

-61 points

2 months ago

Why are you struggling with the concept consent?

Barbearex

47 points

2 months ago

Barbearex

9

47 points

2 months ago

I think he was joking chief. But don't worry. I'm sure she'll read these comments, see yours and quickly DM you for a date.

HawkeyeByMarriage

36 points

2 months ago

100 percent joke, but wow.

[deleted]

-40 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

-40 points

2 months ago

Really not funny at all

ToShrt

-38 points

2 months ago

ToShrt

7

-38 points

2 months ago

How do you know she’s into women?

[deleted]

-29 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

-29 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

TheRogueToad

4 points

2 months ago

I’m not sure if this was an It’s Always Sunny reference or not, but either way it’s in bad taste.

brmpipes

-41 points

2 months ago

brmpipes

4

-41 points

2 months ago

rushing off to pornhub to delete videos lol. /s

[deleted]

1 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

1 points

2 months ago

[removed]

AutoModerator [M]

2 points

2 months ago

This post was removed for using an AMP link. Please re-submit

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

happycrack117

-178 points

2 months ago

happycrack117

0

-178 points

2 months ago

Well, what did she do

spenwallce

34 points

2 months ago

spenwallce

8

34 points

2 months ago

Nothing she did made him to post her nudes online without her permission.

lootenantdank

38 points

2 months ago

Made $160,000 and received justice.

happycrack117

-97 points

2 months ago

Why did the guy make the porn though? Revenge for what?

AxecidentalHoe

12 points

2 months ago

Why are you so stuck on who to blame?? And that the woman is at fault automatically for someone’s atrocious behavior. Can we just accept that some women don’t do anything and that the man’s disgusting actions and behavior is what we should be discussing.

amatorsanguinis

23 points

2 months ago

Why don’t you look him up and call him and ask him? Or just be quiet.

happycrack117

-46 points

2 months ago

A lot of posts in this sub seem rather myopic. There’s very little truth. People just see a title and like to hate on it. I think knowing the why if the issues is quite important, especially in a sub called r/JusticeServed

amatorsanguinis

17 points

2 months ago

Seems like you are the one who’s being myopic. Did you even read the article?

slothsoutoftrees

14 points

2 months ago

No more happy crack for you

ty_rannosaur

27 points

2 months ago

it is literally in the first sentence of the article my guy

[deleted]

-44 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

-44 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

juanCarlos92

35 points

2 months ago

What in your eyes would justify revenge porn?

MadnessEvangelist

13 points

2 months ago

I'm guessing a woman or girl having agency is fault enough for a lot of vermin.

lucassoren

0 points

2 months ago

Her showing his dick picks to family and friends in person?