Jo Margetson to sue over 'naked scanner ogling'

[straitman]

I was reluctant to post this considering the source but I will leave it up to individuals to make their own decisions on the subject.

Jo Margetson to sue over 'naked scanner ogling'

• By Anthony France, The Sun
• From: NewsCore
• March 26, 2010 7:39AM

A woman plans to sue after allegedly being ogled in a full-body scanner / Supplied

• Man "ogled woman" using scanner
• Woman "felt humiliated" and plans to sue
• Warnings such abuses are "inevitable"

AN airport security worker plans to sue her bosses after a colleague leered at her "naked" image in a full body scanner.

Jo Margetson, 29, has been in crisis talks with Heathrow owner British Airports Authority, The Sun reported.
She has consulted lawyers at civil rights group Liberty amid claims her privacy and human rights were breached. She could be entitled to £20,000 ($32,800).

The Sun told yesterday how security guard John Laker, 25, took a photo of Margetson's breasts when she mistakenly walked into the X-ray machine, which makes "nude" images of passengers to find hidden weapons.

 

[Skyring]

I was reluctant to post this considering the source but I will leave it up to individuals to make their own decisions on the subject.

You know how paparazzi make thousands over a candid shot of some minor celeb?

Well, just imagine your average security jock, all alone in a little cubicle with x-ray images of jet-setters to look at. To examine closely, in fact.

Of course he's going to whip out a camera or a phone when Kylie Minogue or Kate Middleton or whoever walks in, raise their arms over their head, and twirls for the scanner.

Get a good shot and it's worth more than he makes in a month. Or even just to add to the private collection, which, of course, will eventually find its way onto the web.

A few of these lawsuits, and the operators might find the things are too expensive to operate.

 

[JohnK]

No matter what anyone thinks or believes this moronic invention is an invasion of privacy and there will always be someone willing (or stupid enough) to exploit it.

 

[Skyring]

No matter what anyone thinks or believes this moronic invention is an invasion of privacy and there will always be someone willing (or stupid enough) to exploit it.

Apparently Jo Margetson is now being harassed by paparazzi. Photos of her getting into cars, at work, lifted from FaceBook, appearing in media and on web. This is ridiculous.

 

[anat0l]

So taking the core issue, the consequence and the pandemonium that follows the main event...

...the security personnel working the scanner is being taken to the task for a breach of human rights.

...the people who conceived the idea and/or manufactured the scanner are wondering what is going to happen to their bottom line.

...and finally the bottom-feeding paparazzi are 'just doing their job' digging up dirt and perpetrating human rights violations by the dozens day-in-day-out.

Makes all perfect sense to me

 

[Nigelinoz]

the people who conceived the idea and/or manufactured the scanner are wondering what is going to happen to their bottom line.

And the passengers are wondering about their own "bottom line" as well:!::mrgreen:

 

[anat0l]

And the passengers are wondering about their own "bottom line" as well:!::mrgreen:

*rim shot* :mrgreen:

 

[JMJMJM]

This is not true!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is not what happened or what was said!!! Check out the press complaints website for some real facts and search margetson, or visit her website jomargetson.com

i was reluctant to post this considering the source but i will leave it up to individuals to make their own decisions on the subject.

 

[samh004]

It’ll be exploited day after day, but it’s not going to go away because of LOTFAP, so you better get used to it. If they want to ogle me, meh so be it. I’m not going to sue… though if they posted my photos online that’d be different.

 

[JMJMJM]

I know but it's just such a shame when the reported facts are not correct.

 

[drron]

I know but it's just such a shame when the reported facts are not correct.

Haven't you been paying attention to the election campaign!Tell me when the facts reported have ever been correct.:shock:

 

[NM]

I know but it's just such a shame when the reported facts are not correct.

If you know the reported facts to be incorrect, perhaps you could post here what you believe to be the correct facts to complete the picture (no pun intended, honest).

 

[Maca44]

I also note JMJMJM indicates that the facts are incorrect concerning Jo Margetson; the OP is a new member to the forum and has the initials JM. Could this be the real Jo Margetson, and if so, please enlighten us on what really did occur. The members on this forum are 'mostly' interested in the truth.

 

[JMJMJM]

Haven't you been paying attention to the election campaign!Tell me when the facts reported have ever been correct.:shock:

So true! lol :idea:

 

[k_sheep]

And also note someone with a similar alias is posting on all fora mentioning Jo M.