No "stable" address????
So where did he take his equine lovers?
A 66-year-old man today pleaded guilty in Leicester Crown Court to charges of "buggery of a donkey between February 2 and February 5, 1999, and buggery of a horse between March 15 and 18, 2004", the Independent reports. Joseph Squires, formerly of Overpark Avenue, Leicester, also coughed to two charges of damaging property, " …
No "stable" address????
So where did he take his equine lovers?
oh dear... very poor!!
Holy crap, that's some statute of limitations!
I'm not 100% sure, but I always understood that most statute of limitations impose a time limit from when the crime could have reasonably been discovered. In a contract dispute, for example, both parties have 6-years to bring an action which they would have known about as soon as the contract was breached. In the event of bestiality, the discovery could only have occurred when he confessed to it and any time limit would have started at the point of confession.
What an ass.
Mine's the donkey jacket, obviously.
"The defendant does not have a stable address.... "
Did his lawyer keep a straight face when saying this?
For publishing this man's name and details. Seriously, this is in the worst tradition of the British tabloid media.
Type your comment here — plain text only, no HTML
of a story my dad once told me of a police friend of his who moved to Norfolk and the first case he had to take to court was "Pig buggery." Coming from London where these things aren't very common he was a bit nervous of what to expect. The prosecution lawyer told him not to worry as half the people in court wouldn't know what pig buggery was and the other half wouldn't know what the problem was!
'...also coughed to two charges of damaging property, "relating to the two animals on the same dates".' Ouch is all I can say to that! :oS
um... what's the statute of limitations on horse buggery these days? I mean, really, how is this not a huge waste of the court's time? did the horse even particularly mind?
Hopefully that's the last straw, he'll never make bail now...
Will be insteresting to see what kind of a punishment he gets verses the guy who plead guity over the 6 second extreme porn clip, which if rumors are correct was a beastiality clip. So punsihment of doing the act verses watching the act. To me, it is obvious which one should get the biggest punishment. Over to you justice system to be logical.....
"To me, it is obvious which one should get the biggest punishment. ..."
this guy needs to get his gear in ass.
If he's been cohabiting with horses then maybe he does have a stable address?
I wonder what the neighbours said.
No, you make a mule silly by hitting it hard between the eyes with a cricket bat.
That's another keyboard ruined.
was he feeling a little horse?
I had a real hee-haw at that.
That after going at it for three days in 1999 it took him until 2004 to recover.
"The defendant does not have a stable address ......"
I wonder about the possible sentence if he just slaughtered the horse and donkey.
Add flagellation, and he could have been convicted of flogging a dead horse.
Donkey: So what do you do then?
Man: I shag donkeys
Donkey: Well, bugger me!
Pictures or it didn't happen!
Beer, because smoking is prohibited
If this bloke has larger equipment than your average donkey or horse such that "damage" occurs, why hasn't he already gone for the obvious career...?
Mind you, I think his time in clink is going to be interesting.
It was the donkey's equipment which was damaged when he tried to insert it into his own [censored], after which it took him five years to recover before he attempted the same with the horse, after which it took him six years to recover enough to stand trial.
I'll give it 3 to 2 that the gentleman was on the receiving end.
Not that there's no career in that, also...
by making such ASSinine jokes about such an abhorrent ASSault!
but then the law is an ASS...
though i would have thought the defendent would have been a MP, as they are renowned for their ASStute lack of taste and decency.
it was nice to see the Judge ASSessing the the situation and giving the defendant a STABLE abode to cool his heels. Im sure he will find the other residents giving every ASSistance to help him settle in comfortably.
"On the same dates". At least he took them out to dinner first!
Oh hell no. I'd get a horsewhippin'
Safe to work with Children but don't leave him in charge of...................
Would somebody think of the donkey's
'does not have a stable adress'
Bloody chicken madras everywhere, bastards.
Who says the law is an ass..
Mines the one with a riding crop in the pocket
"buggery of a donkey between February 2 and February 5, 1999, and buggery of a horse between March 15 and 18, 2004"
How did he make it last so long?
I bet he feels like a bit of a foal now
This guy obviously wasn't very adventurous, he should have gone for a bit of oral.
And Paris because I'm not very adventurous myself, but temptation might get me.
@ Neigh Lad
How does the old saying go? Is it not something like "Don't dick a gift horse in the mouth"?
Mine's the one hanging on the sail of the windmill.
Such unbridled passion could lead to the clippity-clop of tiny little Centaur feet.
Since when could BUGGERY of anything lead to offspring?!?
It was years ago. Did he cop to it? Did he take photos which someone found? You fuck a horse ten years ago and you think you've gotten away with it and all of a sudden....
...Neigh, methinks he doth protest, too much...?
Unless someone put him up to it.
Statute of Limitation is a US thing I think. In the UK there's no time limit AFAIK.
This reminds me of the case where this guy was shagging a goat in a field near a railway line, and a train came along & stopped right opposite him. "Mummy, what's that man doing?"
He was quoted as saying "I don't know what my mates are going to say" like anyone would admit to knowing him after that.
I remember the whole train and the sheep shagger story well.
Not for the obvious reasons, but because my boss at the time had the misfortune to share the same first, middle and surname of the individual in question.
The suns headline 'xxxxxx. Xxxxxxx sheep shagger' found itself on the message board rather quickly.
The obvious defence is to claim the accused couldn't tell the difference between a donkey and an inhabitant of Leicester: an easy mistake to make. After all, even the local football team puts 11 donkeys on the pitch every week. The judge would have to agree and dismiss all charges. Case closed m'lud.
They are just looking into this now 10 years later?
Was the horse or donkey hurt in any way?
Were they even offended?
Neigh I say. This is just a bunch of political horseplay. A needle in a haystack of much more important things. The courts should move on to greener pastures.
> Was the horse or donkey hurt in any way?
Of course they were hurt! It wasn't supposed to be a one-night stand. And the guy never phoned them afterwards. Or sent flowers.
Mine already has a facebook account. I guess I need to get the family plan so she stops borrowing my cell phone.
Flowers are always good. You can cover the gift and dinner at the same time!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017