Man urinates on dying woman, declaring it 'YouTube material'

[almaty 19]

Man urinates on dying woman, declaring it 'YouTube material'

Shouting, "This is YouTube material!" a 27-year-old British man urinated on a dying woman who had collapsed on the street, the BBC and local Hartepool Mail and Northern Echo tell us. He also doused her with a bucket of water and covered her with shaving cream.

The woman, 50-year-old Christine Lakinski, died at the scene of pancreatic failure.

In a sad sign of the times, it was all recorded on a mobile phone.

In court, Anthony Anderson said he had smoked a joint and been drinking with two friends when they spotted Lakinski. He faces jail after pleading guilty to "outraging public decency." Sentencing is set for Oct. 22.

"We will await the outcome and just hope he gets what he deserves," Lakinski's brother said after today's court hearing

[Fandango 1,439]

omG, how horrific.

Hartlepool is only a few miles away from where me & D live.....I'mma ask him about this.

Edited September 20, 2007 by LisaD

[Nagishkaw 510]

That just pisses me off !

[almaty 19]

i was shocked by this....sad...and that chopf##k needs to be sent to a british azz pounding prison

[DeadPoolX 9]

That just pisses me off !

You meant that on purpose, right?

[JODO 2]

sick

[BYRON-LEIDY 0]

Thank God it wasnt me!!! When i do nuber 1 i get the urge to do number 2....

[DeadPoolX 9]

Thank God it wasnt me!!! When i do nuber 1 i get the urge to do number 2....

And from the "TMI Department," we have this little number right here!

[LondonGooner 0]

I read that yesterday on the BBC website. For once the CPS did something right and petitioned the Court to have the sentencing transferred to the Crown Court where a judge can impose a much stiffer penalty than a magistrate. I would expect a judge to make an example of this guy and send him down for at least a year.

[Heracles 417]

Apparently according to some in other threads this used to happen all the time in previous decades..

[DeadPoolX 9]

Apparently according to some in other threads this used to happen all the time in previous decades..

Well, it might have happened at some points in previous decades. The two main differences being that the media wasn't "everywhere" back then so they didn't have the ability to report on it like they do now and this would probably have been considered extremely deviant years ago, so it would've been "swept under the rug."

That doesn't mean the man who urinated on the woman (if caught) wouldn't be punished. It just means his story wouldn't be blasted all over the nightly news, newspapers, and so on. The media, many years ago, felt that there was a limit to what people should and should not know, based upon "good taste" and "morality."

Nothing like that today, though. Which could be thought of as either a good or bad thing, depending on how you look at it. Good because then we get relatively unfiltered reporting; bad because we probably don't need to hear about some man who felt the need to urinate on a dying woman. Unfortunately, we can't really "pick-and-choose" how we want each story or headline. It's going to be one way or the other and so we just need to deal with it.

[Sinergy 3]

That is horribly f'ked up

[Fandango 1,439]

Apparently according to some in other threads this used to happen all the time in previous decades..

Well, that shoots a hole in your theory of pure glory days of yesteryear....

[Heracles 417]

Apparently according to some in other threads this used to happen all the time in previous decades..

Well, it might have happened at some points in previous decades. The two main differences being that the media wasn't "everywhere" back then so they didn't have the ability to report on it like they do now and this would probably have been considered extremely deviant years ago, so it would've been "swept under the rug."

That doesn't mean the man who urinated on the woman (if caught) wouldn't be punished. It just means his story wouldn't be blasted all over the nightly news, newspapers, and so on. The media, many years ago, felt that there was a limit to what people should and should not know, based upon "good taste" and "morality."

Nothing like that today, though. Which could be thought of as either a good or bad thing, depending on how you look at it. Good because then we get relatively unfiltered reporting; bad because we probably don't need to hear about some man who felt the need to urinate on a dying woman. Unfortunately, we can't really "pick-and-choose" how we want each story or headline. It's going to be one way or the other and so we just need to deal with it.

How many more examples do we need though before some see there is a change in society. Especially in attitude towards others. The media has nothing to do with this.

Another great example is teachers who have taught the same class over 30 years and say that there clearly been a change in behavior and attitude of the kids they teach, decade by decade. Where kids have little or no respect for authority. Where kids are able to lie through their noses and have no guilt about it.

[Nessa 23]

Thank God it wasnt me!!! When i do nuber 1 i get the urge to do number 2....

I was more shocked with this post than the original post