Discussion

Main Board| Accommodation Wanted| Accommodation Offered
Start a new discussion on this board

Let your next career move come to you.

Peter Boner

Peter Bone: Tory MP facing suspension after bullying probe https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67122669
 

ewwwww

Lol max. TBH this is all great for the future of Britain as it proves the Tories have invented time travel and brought their greatest embarassments back from the 1990s. Next week: cash for questions and tanking the £, no wait...

I SUPPORT CONSERVATIVE MP AND BREXIT HERO PETER BONE!!

Parliament's Independent Expert Panel (IEP) found Mr Bone broke Parliament's sexual misconduct rules by indecently exposing himself to the staffer during an overseas trip.

It also upheld five allegations of bullying, including "instructing, or physically forcing, the complainant to put his hands in his lap when Mr Bone was unhappy with him or his work".

It also found he "verbally belittled, ridiculed, abused and humiliated" him, and "repeatedly physically struck and threw things" at him, including hitting him with his hand or an object such as a pencil or a rolled-up document.

It also upheld an allegation Mr Bone "repeatedly pressurised" the staffer to give him a massage in the office. It found this was bullying, but not sexual misconduct.

I HONESTLY DON’T SEE A PROBLEM WITH ANY OF THIS!!

From beeb article:

”The investigation was triggered following a complaint made in October 2021 with a prior complaint to the Conservative Party - made in 2017 - unresolved.”

Complaint to party - unresolved so surprised.

From the report:

In the first place it is remarkable that a senior MP in his 60s should think it appropriate that he should be sharing a bedroom and bathroom with his employee, and an employee in his early 20s. That in itself rings alarm bells. But from an objective standpoint, the respondent’s conduct in exposing himself in this way, with his genitals close to this young employee’s face, in an unwanted intimate context in a confined space, was not mere nudity. It was indecent exposure. There can be no doubt about it. Once the complainant’s account was believed, which it was, the outcome was inevitable. Objectively, this was sexual misconduct: it was conduct of a sexual nature which was non-consensual; it was unwanted behaviour which was perceived by the complainant as sexual, and rightly so, and it was intimidating. 2.96 This case is all about the exercise of power and control over a young employee, both in the bullying and sexual misconduct. The investigator described the respondent’s position as a ‘significant position of power’. In our view, there was a complete imbalance of power between them which the respondent deliberately exploited over months. It is said that the respondent disliked the complainant and believed him to be weak. That was no excuse for targeting him with a concerted campaign of bullying and an incident of sexual misconduct.

Proper grim.

Although many of this parish think that if he says he's a woman, he should be allowed to do exactly the same thing in a changing room with my wife or daughter.

Have they lined up his Telegraph "struggles with my sexuality" article to excuse criminal conduct? 

*at Tory HQ*

"We've had a complaint about Bone again. No no erotic asphyxiation or oranges in the mouth. It's just that it's starting to look like we tolerate sexual predators and criminal behaviour... Okay okay. Yes I know - "no to nonces [unless significant donors or friends with the PM], everything else goes. Bye."

*stamps "case dismissed"*

"Although many of this parish think that if he says he's a woman, he should be allowed to do exactly the same thing in a changing room with my wife or daughter."

This is (1) monomania (2) nonsense. HTH.

You quoted the entire description of his behaviour and then said [some think] he should be allowed to do exactly the same thing in a changing room with your wife or daughter. But doing exactly the same thing would require a setting like a bedroom with no-one else present and in any case:

"This case is all about the exercise of power and control over a young employee, both in the bullying and sexual misconduct. The investigator described the respondent’s position as a ‘significant position of power’. In our view, there was a complete imbalance of power between them which the respondent deliberately exploited over months."

It's not exactly the same thing, is it ?

But doing exactly the same thing would require a setting like a bedroom with no-one else present and in any case.

A setting like a changing room, with only two people present for example?  With countless examples of men using this setting and the power inbalance to expose themselves to and intimidate women?  Fvcks sake.

The whole point is that there is always an imbalance of power between a man and woman, particularly a man who is exposing their penis to a woman. 

But it's OK if they feel like a woman, eh? 

the respondent’s conduct in exposing himself in this way, with his genitals close to this young employee’s face, in an unwanted intimate context in a confined space

I'm quite sure you can't get away with that in any changing room, no matter what gender you think you are.

I'm quite sure you can't get away with that in any changing room, no matter what gender you think you are.

There are lots of examples of complaints of indecent exposure in changing rooms being made by women which are dismissed by Police on the basis of gender identity (self-ID, not even by men with a GRC).  Including some with men with erections.

To be fair apart from when I'm not working on litigation involving them or on ROF and confronted with the usual smug centrist dads talking about them, I don't think about them at all.  Mrs Face, on the other hand, is obsessed, but mainly because she worked with sex offenders and their victims for many years and has seen first hand what happens when safeguarding doesn't work properly.

Interesting the victim has now gone more public with this. Could that be because Workie & Co think they’ve kicked it off the news schedules? Excellent to get it back on. Are you the party of rampant sex pests, Prime Minister?

Join the discussion

Login Register