• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Man nabbed for snapping selfies in daughter-in-law's undies

Rogue Trader

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
26,694
Points
113
Man nabbed after snapping selfies in daughter-in-law’s underwear

Ben Tan
Malay Mail12 June 2018
Police have classified the case under Section 509 of the Penal Code for insulting the modesty of a person. — Reuters

ISKANDAR PUTERI, June 12 — Police arrested a 52-year-old man who allegedly wore his daughter-in-law’s underwear and took selfies in sexually lewd positions at his family home in Gelang Patah here yesterday.

It was learnt that the man stored the obscene photos on his mobile phone.

A police team from the Iskandar Puteri district police’s sexual crimes unit arrested the self-employed man at a house in Taman Nusantara, Gelang Patah at 12.30am.

They also seized a Samsung mobile phone, which was believed to contain the obscene images.

Police had acted on a report made the day before, after the suspect’s 33-year-old daughter-in-law came across the photos while scrolling through the picture gallery on his mobile phone at their family home.

A police source, familiar with the case, said the complainant was shocked to find that her father-in-law had put on her underwear and taken selfies in several lewd positions.

“The complainant, who is from Indonesia and married to the suspect’s son, also found the obscene images worrisome as she is always alone as a housewife in the family home,” said the source to Malay Mail today.

Initial investigations revealed that the suspect had also been sexually harassing his daughter-in-law by asking inappropriate questions.

Another police source said the suspect, who is originally from Teluk Intan in Perak, will be remanded to facilitate investigations.

“Investigators will look for elements of nudity in the images. However, even if there is no nudity found, police can still charge the suspect if the images are shown to be depraved and the act is depicted to be sexually obscene in nature.

“Police have initially classified the case under Section 509 of the Penal Code for insulting the modesty of a person,” said the source.
 
my uncle say KNN is this even a case he did not outrage modesty of anyone but himself and a underwear is a object also cannot KNN
 
There is a lesson from all this. Don't ever store photo (and info) that you don't want others to see on your phone.
 
My phone has no personal photos, not even myself.....
My phone has no photos of anything because I don't use it to take photos. I use a proper camera.
Same here. But I have irrelevant photos of pets and scenery.
My phone has all the photographs of my girlfriends but I don't have a single picture of myself. Lol :D

You all don't be so knn OK? I've got like 18k photos in my Huawei now and I don't know what to do with it.
 
Could this be siaogin's brother?
Ginfreely's father.
lol-smiley-face-png.40588
 
after the suspect’s 33-year-old daughter-in-law came across the photos while scrolling through the picture gallery on his mobile phone at their family home.
Now the question is how she got access to his phone (assuming it's locked) and why did she had to browse through?
 
Now the question is how she got access to his phone (assuming it's locked) and why did she had to browse through?

Many of her panties were missing, he had that cheeko look, so she browse through the photos on his phone...or the two of them already have a tete a tete & have fallen out. The saying " no smoke, without a FIRE"...must have 'fired' too!
 
Back
Top