Please tell me what you think of this piece of slut shaming journalism

Feel really sorry for the couple concerned though, putting that much info in the public domain can be massively life changing for the worse.

Maybe they should have thought about that before.

Loving the strike out fail!

The article I read did talk about the mans clothes - it stated that he was wearing trousers that he scrambled to pull up whilst saying " it's not what it looks like"...and then going on to admit to the officers and accept the caution.
The woman refused to accept the caution and stated that she was just there for a walk.
Basically she said- no - I won't accept it- you prove it. It then becomes the prosecutors job to do so...the clothes were relevant- I've never gone for a walk at midnight in January with my bra in my bag and a pair of stilettos whilst my walking partner waddled next to me with his trousers around his ankles.
She was very arrogant and created this mess for herself. I doubt very much that she deserves sympathy - she certainly doesn't have mine. I'll save that for the poor spouses and dc.

I don't particularly think she deserves to be shamed actually. I just don't think she's a victim or that anybody has done anything wrong in respect of her. She did what she did, she tried and failed to get out of it. It got reported, fairly factually from what I can see. It is what it is.

OP, she committed an offence, she was prosecuted for it. A court reporter has reported on it. She probably wishes it would all go away but you have kindly bought it to the attention of MN. Oh, and the only person using the word 'slut' is you.

I read the article and the lights were apparently on inside the car which means they were making No attempt to be discreet.

'Her clothes were mentioned because it would seem she was half out of them and it was part of the evidence against her to show she was lying. Most people keep their clothes on if they are going for a late night walk in January'

To be fair she wasn't half out of her bra, she had a bra in her handbag so I think we can assume it was the whole bra and not one cup in the bag and the other one on her chest.

My friend's husband has regularly her spanx in his jacket pocket after a night out with her - she tends to whip them off in the ladies loo as the wine jollity flows.
I better warn her not to get amorous in the car park go walking on the beach unless she wants her DH banged up for the night

Feel really sorry for the couple concerned though, putting that much info in the public domain can be massively life changing for the worse.

Because women's clothing is more rigorously demarcated between the practical and the formal. A man can normally walk for miles in the cold in his smartest and most attractive clothes - whilst women typically can't. Which is absolutely a feminist issue, but not specific to this story - if he'd claimed that the reason he we wearing only a thong was that he was sunbathing the papers would have been equally delighted to print it - they love nothing more than a "X claims that they were doing innocent activity Y but fact Z makes that a ludicrously transparent lie" - it's a comedy basic.

He wasn't on trial.

Her clothes were mentioned because it would seem she was half out of them and it was part of the evidence against her to show she was lying. Most people keep their clothes on if they are going for a late night walk in January

But then again, he wasn't on trial?

There are any number of reasons why she might forsee the need for DBS checks in the future and hence refuse the caution, especially as she has children. I've had 3 separate DBS checks for different reasons in the last few years - none of them to do with my work, all volunteering /children's school activities. And you have to renew them every 3 years so it's inevitable that it will be revealed eventually. The thought of having to reveal to my DCs' school that the reason why I can't host an exchange student is because I'd been caught dogging chills the blood.

I think her lawyers might have been best advised to go with the "what do you mean "public decency"? She was inside a car in a deserted carpark at midnight in January!" line, rather than the ludicrous denials. But I guess since they were both married she couldn't face it.

God alone knows Ashes but I shall be sure and never have my bra anywhere other than on my person at all times...

The people who live on the island would not be out for a walk where this happened because the tide would be in and the cause way would be covered. Doesnt really matter though, anyone else in the world may have been going for a walk.

There's some great mental gymnastics being used to try and make this about the police/the courts etc.

It's against the law to shag in public. This isn't unreasonable, and the police rightly aren't allowed to pick & choose which laws they enforce.

The "caution" system allows them to avoid wasting time/money on minor offences, but it would be completely stupid if people could just reject cautions and nothing more would happen.

This woman has the right to reject the caution (even though her partner accepted his ...), and go to a trial... which she lost... and which led to the case going public. She's not a victim of anything. It's all on her.

Surprised at the amount and size of judgey pants on this thread

That would cut more ice if you had expressed any sympathy for Mr Affleck and Mrs Gartside who now have their spouses' infidelity splashed over the papers because of this silly and selfish woman.

Of course they have nothing to be ashamed of but I bet they would prefer if it were not public.

I'm trying to process how does having a bra in your handbag is relevant.

Have you never got off with a guy/woman in a car? Dearie me!

Anyone who does that should accept the risk of getting caught. Indeed, isn't that part of the thrill?