Note: Please bear in mind that whilst this topic does canvass opinions, it is not a fight club. You may disagree with other posters but we do ask you please to stick to our Talk Guidelines and to be civil. We don't allow personal attacks or troll-hunting. Do please report any. Thanks, MNHQ.

To think this man was somewhat justified in what he did?

(165 Posts)
Loeri Thu 05-Sep-13 07:02:21

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10286653/Man-takes-dates-Blackberry-mobile-phone-after-she-refuses-to-pay-half-the-bill.html

It's 2013. A woman is taking the piss in going out on a date with no money, especially to a swanky place where two rounds of drinks cost £54! I really can't blame the man for being extremely pissed off with her and holding her phone as collateral.

SomethingOnce Mon 09-Sep-13 23:46:58

YABU.

This story is depressing on so many levels.

cumfy Mon 09-Sep-13 22:28:29

So did CPS enjoy their 1st date with Kishore ?

Runningchick123 Mon 09-Sep-13 20:08:38

He was found not guilty - jury took a whole 53 minutes to reach the verdict which is very quick or a 3 day trial. What an utter waste of public money.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2416114/Man-took-dates-phone-refused-pay-half-drinks-cleared-theft-said-intended-device.html

redshifter Fri 06-Sep-13 18:24:59

YANBU

Pendeen Fri 06-Sep-13 11:40:31

dahville

Your comment: "at best you sound a bit intolerant asking if the names are real" is not at all fair. I'm not at all intolerant. How would I know it is a 'common' name?

OctopusPete8 Fri 06-Sep-13 10:48:02

Hmmm, I could never go out with no money whatsoever, I'd feel too cheeky.

But his response was insane, harassment and theft is not an appropriate response, could she not just have owed him.

EmmelineGoulden Fri 06-Sep-13 10:47:49

I can see that if someone has offered you a drink, it's reasonable to assume they will pay for it. But going out on a date without the means to buy anything indicates an intent to ensure the other person pays for everything. She didn't just decide she didn't like him (though she may not have), she went out intending to have a drink (at least) without paying. That's an entitled attitude, and one I find distasteful, but it's also got its roots in a history of sexist attitudes, social conventions and laws that did not and do not favour women.

Mia4 Fri 06-Sep-13 10:37:17

He was being VVU to take her phone, he (as anyone else hould have) should have written off the loss, never contacted her again and if this was through a dating site he should have asked the moderators to add the 'tag' to her name that she believes men should always pay and won't offer to on the first date.

From the article it shows that the evening was't cut short until he asked her to buy a round and she refused to buy a round on the grounds it was the man's job. She was being VVU to refuse to buy a drinks round, preteend not to have any money (seriously, who believes that?) and be quite happy to sit there being brought them. He got two rounds in, it was certainly her turn. She should have gone out with the attitude that she may have had to buy a round and if she did she would have got one in and then cut the evening short, knowing never to contact him again.

She was selfish, he was aggressive. I hope the dating site tags both of them as such to warn other unsuspecting people.

CuChullain Fri 06-Sep-13 09:42:13

^On the question of who pays I am totally at all the people who conveniently assume the other party pays.
I not only expect to pay my share i actually would mother go out with someone who insisted they paid. i am not a piece of property and i value my financial independence.

on a date is important for any future rs for me to set myself up as an equal from the start and that means equal share of the bill too.
Not in a niggly every penny way but keeping things reasonable square.^

Spot on, another vote for common sense!!

MrsMinkBernardLundy Fri 06-Sep-13 09:39:32

Doh phone typo i would mother i would not.

MrsMinkBernardLundy Fri 06-Sep-13 09:38:25

I think the point of the case is he is saying as runigchick points out that he did not steal her phone as he did other intend to keep it. it is a weird quirk of the law tat if you don't intend to permanently deprive some of the item it is not theft.

However,what he did was actually worse which was to harass intimidate and put a woman in a vulnerable position in a state of fear.

On the question of who pays I am totally shock at all the people who conveniently assume the other party pays.
I not only expect to pay my share i actually would mother go out with someone who insisted they paid. i am not a piece of property and i value my financial independence.

that said my parents often still pay if we go for dinner

on a date is important for any future rs for me to set myself up as an equal from the start and that means equal share of the bill too.
Not in a niggly every penny way but keeping things reasonable square.

CuChullain Fri 06-Sep-13 09:19:52

It would seem still that some women are all about "equality" until it's inconvenient.

oldgrandmama Netherlands Fri 06-Sep-13 09:15:17

Well, he was hardly behaving like a gentleman, but she was silly to come out without any money. To have snatched her phone, though, was bad and extreme over-reaction.

hardboiledpossum Fri 06-Sep-13 09:09:16

I dont think she is at fault at all here. If someone buys you something they can't then demand you pay them for it after. I would see it as a gift at that point. If he didn't want to pay then he should have asked her for money before he went to get the drinks.

Fwiw i have never paid for anything on a first, second or third date. I do always bring money though.

VelvetSpoon Fri 06-Sep-13 07:22:18

Stealing someone's phone is not justified under any circumstances, and certainly not in this case.

I have been on far too many dates. For the most part men have paid, for a coffee, or a couple of rounds of drinks. Sometimes I have offered to buy a round, usually that offer has been declined. I wouldn't be impressed if a date offered me a drink or two, then said 'your share of the bar bill is x' or whatever. If you buy a drink for someone that's it. If you only want to buy one drink, next time you say 'your round'.

£54 really isn't a huge sum (I know plenty of people who go for dinner on the first date which can cost maybe double that). It saddens me people think the woman is at fault here, simply for not offering to pay.

That sits ill with me; those of you who consider he was entitled to take her phone because she didn't pay her share, what would you say if instead of taking her phone, he'd forced a kiss on her, or groped/ assaulted her as 'payment'? If that would be unjustified (which it def would in my book) so is taking her phone.

dahville Fri 06-Sep-13 06:59:16

Pendeen Nimmala is a common enough Indian name; at best you sound a bit intolerant asking if the names are real.

OP - YABVU. Both their behaviour was questionable on the date but only his behaviour was criminal after she ended the date.

MidniteScribbler Fri 06-Sep-13 06:58:48

Runningchick - Oh I think she should have definitely offered to buy a round, I'm not disputing that at all. I was just answering the general comment about people expecting men to pay on the first date.

BoneyBackJefferson - It's not about the actual amount spent. I'd be just as happy with a drink at a local pub, as I would dinner at the best restaurant in town. I want to meet the person, not have some flashy display of wealth. But just the same, I don't want them to be a cheapskate either and expect the entire cost split down the middle. A round each, or one person buying dinner and the other buying movie tickets is fine by me, as long as someone isn't counting the pennies and demanding it.

BoneyBackJefferson Fri 06-Sep-13 06:52:20

MidniteScribbler
"It's not about expecting a man to pay for the first date. It's about someone's general attitude toward money"

If its about attitude to money

Then the woman has a bad attitude about men spending money on her.

AND if its truly not about the money where could someone have a first date that is not expensive without being seen as cheap?

Runningchick123 Fri 06-Sep-13 06:49:51

Cumfy - the man was probably offered a caution, but accepting a caution means accepting guilt and being saddled with a criminal record. To be guilty of theft there as to be some certainty that he intended to permanently deprive her of the phone and I think his argument is that he was just going to hold onto it until she paid for half of the bill. It Also isn't criminal damage unless the phone was actually damaged.
I think the cps should be reprimanded for going ahead with this as a trial and wasting public money.

Midnite- I too hate it when people want to calculate spliting the bill down to what they ate / drank and prefer to just split it equally but I think in this case they agreed to meet mutually through a dating website and she had no intention of paying anything. I would be pissed off if I mutually agreed to meet friends for dinner / drinks and they refused to pay any of the bill and wanted to leave as soon as it was their turn to buy a round (fortunately, I don't have any freeloading mates).

Retroformica Fri 06-Sep-13 06:01:28

He should have paid half the tab and then told the pub/date she was responsible for her own half

daisychain01 Italy Fri 06-Sep-13 05:46:46

Havent read all the posts on here, but I got the gist.

Just urgh on many levels! The thought of a man even worrying about 25 quid or whatever half the bill was - well he would be history in my book. What a petty cheap skate arse. Lacking in style and grace. And then nicking his date's mobile phone. What's wrong with the old fashioned approach of boy asks girl out on a date, boy pays for girl, everyone's happy

Maybe the bloke should have got the girl to pay a deposit in advance direct into his bank account, just to be on the safeside.

CharityFunDay Fri 06-Sep-13 02:58:56

She's a cheapskate skank, he's a fucking idiot.

They ought to stay together, it would be a shame to ruin two homes.

LadyBeagleEyes Fri 06-Sep-13 02:44:09

I bet the problem wouldn't have arisen at all if she'd shagged him..
Then he'd have got value for his money.
And 54 quid for 2 rounds?
I must live in another universe

cumfy Fri 06-Sep-13 01:36:55

And how much is the CPS charging the taxpayer for this ?

Several grand all told. More than a one day trial.

No doubt he is a knob of the highest order, but why not just caution him with assault and or criminal damage from when he threw the phone ?

But theft ? Really ?

megsmouse Fri 06-Sep-13 00:37:29

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now