Bus Driver Denies Intruding On Privacy Charges

August 29, 2013

Appearing in Magistrates Court this morning [Aug 29], a 52- year-old man pleaded not guilty to two charges of intruding on the privacy of a female.

The two alleged offences were said to have occurred in September 2012 and in July 2013. Both are alleged to have taken place on public buses involving a young teenage girl.

Crown Prosecutor Susan Mulligan told the Magistrate that at the time of the alleged offences, the man had been working as a bus driver but that he is not working as a driver at this time.

The man — who at this stage cannot legally be named — was granted bail of $10,000 and required to provide a surety. Magistrate Charlene Scott also ordered a bail condition that the man should not be alone with any girl under the age of sixteen.

Read More About

Category: All, Court Reports, Crime, News

Comments (33)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. frank says:

    if he is guilty, how come this creep was not checked out before we put him in a bus there must have been some hit

    • Time Shall Tell says:

      There’s always a first offense, this could be his so possibly nothing in his past. At this stage this is all allegations.

    • Chit Chat says:

      Oh no…not another BIU March & Strike!

  2. Ty says:

    If and only if this story is true… What the hell is wrong with you dirty bastards… If things are that bad, go buy yourself a rubber teenage doll….you can call her anything you want and do anything you want to it without getting your business blasted for all to see. Either do the above or seek some serious therapy.

    • KitCat says:

      @Ty: but that doesn’t solve the problem. Suggesting anyone in this alleged situation get a “rubber teenage doll” still means you’re fetishizing underage girls. I and many other girls in my class throughout middle school found ourselves being hit on, creeped on, yelled at from moving vehicles, and even worse- while wearing our school uniforms, pretty clearly showing that we weren’t likely to be above the age of consent. Bermuda has a HUGE problem with misogyny in general, but SO much of it is directed at young girls because they’re easy targets and the expectation is that they’ll just deal with it and not say anything, and the guys can go on and harass another child.

      The obsession with young girls as “jailbait” or forbidden fruit or any of the severely disgusting other terms for sexualizing female children has got to stop. But it won’t until we have a big conversation about the fact that Bermudian society is painfully sexist, and until we do that, more girls are going to be subjected to creeps…

      • Ty says:

        Hi KitCat…

        I totally agree with you. I was looking at it from a point that at least they won’t be inflicting any harm on a “real” human being.

        Three quarters of the population have “fetishes” (and it does not have to be sexual either) but it is how we act on those fetishes that can cause dire consequences. I would still prefer those that prey on young girls/ladies go buy a toy because most, if not all fetishes are uncurable unless amputation can be considered a cure.

        • Pastor Syl Hayward says:

          Even amputation doesn’t cure this. There are other appendages, and there is always verbal abuse. All my life especially in Bermuda, until I gained some weight (and sometimes even then) I have had to deal with nasty comments and/or invitations, hissed behind my back or even shouted from passing cyclists; unwanted touch, from hugs to molestation; and/or sexual gestures. And I know, as Kitcat says above, I am one of many. Bermudian men, many of them, do not know or respect boundaries, and often don’t have respect in general – not for age or for gender. As long as you are considered “easy meat” – i.e. able to be coerced, dominated, and/or exploited – you are a target.
          There are some good men out there, but they appear to be few and hard to find.

          • Come Correct says:

            Not to mention impotent psycopaths usually lash out violently to express their dominance and find other means of bodily penetration, sometimes with a knife. Unless you amputate the head…on the shoulders.

          • Ride says:

            @Pastor Syl Hayward

            I agree with most of your post except the reference to Bermudian men. I would argue that most men (Bermudian or otherwise) are respectable individuals. Its just easier for you to come into contact with the fewer socially challenged men as they are actively seeking you out and creating unpleasant memorable experiences when the find you.

            Ride

            PS: To be clear, I’m not saying that you’re doing anything in particular to solicit this unwanted attention. These sorts have their own perversions and fit whomever to them at will.

      • Darwin's Child says:

        Well said!

  3. OceansDaughter says:

    This headline should be reading “former bus driver”- I pray to God that he is not stilled employed as one! WTF!!!!!!!

    • Ha! says:

      Not former – he is still very much employed as a driver :(

      • E$ says:

        “the man had been working as a bus driver but that he is not working as a driver at this time.”

        who’s wrong?!

        • Ha! says:

          Not working as a bus driver at the time meaning off duty. No wrong or right, just facts.

  4. Triangle Drifter says:

    If found guilty I wonder if he is going to get a $7000.00 fine plus damages to the victims?

    • Um Um Like says:

      And maybe, if he is convicted, the judge will order his d!** to be “destroyed”!

      Or perhaps we should just let him off so that the biu doesn’t strike…

    • Sandy Bottom says:

      Did the victim end up in hospital with horrific injuries? Did she have $10,000 in medical bills? That would increase the penalty, for sure.

  5. Next says:

    Another alleged creep.

  6. Tired says:

    Why can’t he be named. Naming him is not going to point to the ladies he allegedly intruded upon.

    • Kiell says:

      And if by chance the alleged creep is indeed innocent how do propose we go about fixing his damaged reputation due to publicly naming and disgracing him? On the other hand if found guilty scream his name from the rooftops and post his pic all over the island.

    • Chit Chat says:

      I guess because there is always the chance that he is genuinely innocent. Not saying this s fact or I claim to know anyone involved as that is not the case at all. However, I did have a friend who was accused of a similar offense by a young female when her parents uncovered letters to a friend about a similar incident. When confronted, she panicked because she didn’t want to get the real perv in “trouble” since he was a friend and relative of the family and named by friend just to stop the prying from her parents – not realizing (as she was young and naïve) that the police would be involved. He was arrested, questioned and charged. She later admitted that he was not the real predator afterall, and named the correct person. His life would have been over had his name was released to the public. We all know that people generally remember the headline and not the story or the retraction. Again, not saying this is the case here – just trying to answer the question with an example.

      I do have one question? Why is it that a man (who has obvious mental issues to anyone hat has ever met him) has his name released for the same offense! And this mans name was not! I apologize if I missed something but I don’t believe Mr. Branco pleaded guilty – did he?

      Where is the consistency!? I apologize if I missed an obvious fact – its late. But can someone explain please.

      • Chit Chat says:

        I just looked up the Branco story and I see that he did plead guilty which explains why his name was released.

  7. kat says:

    screening needs to be done on ALL jobs these days even though you cannot detect a phyco until it rears its ugly head – shame !!!

  8. shawn says:

    ok wait. what the hell is “intruding on the privacy of…” bermuda gotta update thier laws.makes no sense ,there is no implied privacy once u leave ur house. what EXACTLY did he allegedly do b 4 we all OVER-REACT

    for example -it says he is no longer a bus driver…read da thing

    • Zombie Apocalypse says:

      It’s fully defined in the Criminal Code Act. “Intruding on the privacy of a women or girl” basically means accosting her, following her, or harassing her in a way that is intended to be indecent or would be alarming. The full wording is in the act. It is intended to prevent creepy guys from doing creepy things to women.

      I’m sure someone who is the victim of this wouldn’t think it’s an “over reaction”.

  9. Double Standards says:

    A lot of alleged perverts have been coming out of the woodwork lately…

  10. Enough says:

    Find it strange how you can mention That Branco earlier this week Man but you can’t mentioned this man’s name.

    • Da Truth says:

      Branco plead guilty – - this man is going to trial – -that’s the difference.

    • I'm Just saying...... says:

      I agree……Why is that?

  11. James Rego says:

    Why is this “former Bus Driver” not confined too his home and wearing an Ankle Bracelet also, like Mr. Branco?

    • Pastor Syl Hayward says:

      Because he has denied the charges. Part of Mr. Branco’s sentence, because he pled guilty, is to be confined to his home and to wear a bracelet. Until this un-named person is FOUND or PROVED to be guilty, he is presumed innocent and can move freely, since the judge did not see fit to remand him into custody.

      Also, to someone who mentioned all the creeps coming out of the woodwork recently, survivors of sex crimes are now feeling strong enough to report and press charges. The creeps have been there all along, they have just been getting away with their nasty behavior, primarily because their victims have felt too ashamed to report, and/or too scared/intimidated (by the perpetrator, by the police, by the courts, by public opinion) to press charges.

  12. Triangle Drifter says:

    Why is this guy not on unpaid suspension until the case has been settled?

  13. Not fair says:

    So why can’t they name this guy but they can Name Robert Branco??