What a nasty, freaky little irk...

Interesting, Petallus. How do you know the journalist was connected to a political group? He offered the story to the Sun and the Sunday Mail first. That does not sound very political to me.
By the way, Newmark has only resigned as a minister so far. He is still an MP. Not sure I would want him to be mine.

It was a journalist attached to a political group who 'set him up'.

I don't approve of the method at all although the police notoriously used it and then put the wrong man in prison for ten years or so.

Er, I am mumbling this because I feel mean passing it on.

However, read somewhere that thingie was considered by young women to be a bit creepy.

Well... the incident itself doesn't really matter that much does it?

Dear rosesarered when I was young and I accused my big brother of making me do something I shouldn't my mother always asked how he had"made" me do it. Unless he had actually forced me, she said, I always had the choice of not doing it. That is why he was SIMPLY set up. As for the teenagers. The point is that people in public office should set good examples of behaviour and realise what isn't acceptable. Explaining to young people the difficulties involved and why it isn't advisable to share such pictures is hard enough without them being able to say, "Well important,older people like him do it,so why shouldn't I?"
As for the qualities of MPs-being found out or associated with such behaviour would once have ruined his career and seen him leaving parliament-not any longer. So being found out no longer really matters.

He wasn't set up by the Mirror. The journalst was a freelance and the story was offered to other papers, who were sensible enough to turn it down just in case they could be accused of entrapment.
However, if the Mirror had not published, do you think that would be better? He would still have been in government, and telling charities to mind their own business.

I doubt if anyone's morals have changed. Just more opportunities and ready temptation.

It was a photo of a grown woman/women who was/were quite used to putting their photos online.

I do agree that he is not blameless though.

trisher You say you 'find it extraordinary that anyone would excuse his behaviour SIMPLY because he had been set up' really?? Entrapment , ie. causing a crime [though not a crime in this case] is a rotten thing to do.
This is a lapse of judgement caused by entrapment.Also that 'MP's used to have integrity, ability and morals' well, quite a lot still do, but in the past some didn't either! Nowadays, if you don't have those attributes, it will be found out, that's the difference.

He thought he was enjoying an online relationship with a woman [not a teenager] and 'she' [the reporter ] had requested the picture.
People are human.If they weren't, they would not be people [stands to reason.]

Excellent posts by you POGS and I agree.Also by*Hollydaze*and Jingl
Can't add much to them. Lots of men do what he did, there are so many sites out there, teenagers also take selfies of bits of anatomy and send them.Yes, silly of him [silly of anyone] but that's all.

I don't think there is any excuse for him sending the photo-glass of wine-moment's lapse- or anything else. I have friends working with teenagers who are battling to teach them that sharing intimate photos on-line is not a good idea at any time. The girls quite often think it is a requirement of a relationship, and are devastated when the liason ends, and the boy they thought loved them shares their pictures with others. I find it extraordinary that anyone would excuse his behaviour simply because he was set up by the Mirror. MPs used to have integrity,ability and morals-alas no more!

I wonder if the photo was sent late at night after a couple of glasses of wine?

For a person with such a responsible job, I would expect him to have shown at least some maturity, common sense and, dare I say it, decency.

I think there is a difference between someone, for instance, having an affair (in which case, it is a private matter - unless he takes a moralistic stance in public) and someone sending explicit photographs of himself to a young woman he has never met. He must be incredibly egotistical as well as being stupid.

What would you have thought if the reporter had said he was a 16 year old?

He was also the charities minister who told charities to stick to their knitting. He was paid nearly a hundred thousand pounds a year by us to help society be nicer to each other. That was his job. Sending pictures to someone he thought was a twentyone year old was not very civic minded. If a man his age did that to my granddaughter, I'd be very upset.

Is it just me? I just don't see the attraction of sending anyone explicit photographs The more intimate parts of one's anatomy are not the most attractive to look at and DH and I seem to have managed a reasonably successful sex life without any photographic assistance. Sending something like that to someone you've never even met just seems lunacy.

Of what interest was this story to anyone but his wife? He responded to a come-on from a pretty girl and was stupid. What's new? He wasn't in a high security, highly sensitive post (Minister for the Big Society or some such). He wasn't a high profile government big hitter. Had you heard of him before this news item, I hadn't? He hadn't expressed strong views on the sanctity of marriage. He wasn't sleeping with the enemy and many men in all levels of society do stupid things like this.

Did any of you or anyone you know buy the Sunday Mirror as a result of this 'scoop'? I doubt it. It's time the Sunday Mirror grew up and realised that the only people made to look silly in this story is themselves.

And we won't either grumppa.

grumppa.

Try not to think too hard.

Thank you for telling me where my brain is, nelliemoser. At least it's warm and sheltered for it down there.

I am none the wiser as to the feeling of GN's opinions re the OP and the role the Sunday Mirror played.

I see they are being reported to IPSO.

Tom Newton Dunn from the Sun said both the Sun and the Daily Mail had 'turned down' the story offered by the freelance reporter. Says a lot, perhaps the IPSO threat has made them think a bit before printing, I hope so.

I was looking at him from his wife's point of view, and that is exactly what I would have called him, I suppose. Having a fantasy and acting on it are two separate things and should stay that way, unless you have your partner's permission. Yes, I know it rarely happens like that, but I can fantasise that it does, too! Yet another good man whose brain occasionally takes up residence in his willy, sadly.

I know some teenagers go in for this sort of thing, but middle aged men..? The thought is too unpleasant...he should have known better.

I don't think it makes him a "bastard" janerowena. It's a product of the asge we live in. Most middle aged men have fantasies. But there's never been social media to put it's boot in before.

I feel so sorry for him. Must be so hard to handle this fallout.

Also I would be worried about what other people thought of me, if I had been a woman promoted (as in recommended) by him prior to this. I would wonder if people were looking at me and wondering what sort of photo I had sent him to get where I was.

Both of them are complete idiots and bastards, but in different ways. I feel for the MP's wife as much as I do for the girl who had her image stolen - and she was pretty daft too!