OnlyFans Creator Penalized Over Indecent Beach Act

[webfact]

 

An OnlyFans content creator has been fined by Bangsaen police for sexually explicit public behavior on Bangsaen Beach after her video got over two million views. The video surfaced between November and December last year but recently gained public scrutiny, igniting discussions about the potential damage to the beach's tourist reputation.

 

The video depicted the woman raising her skirt revealing her genitals under a palm tree on the beach. She then engaged in erotic actions with a man who later also exposed himself at a site opposite the beach.

 

The investigation overseen by Police Lieutenant Colonel Prayong Sriwipan from the Saensuk Police Station led to the identification and summons of the 26-year-old woman involved, Natch. She was penalized for public indecency and fined 2,000 baht (US$54).

 

In a related incident, the Be One non-profit organization was approached for assistance after police refused to take action against a soldier who sold explicit videos of a woman online.

 

The 19-year-old victim, pseudonymed 'A', reported her ex-boyfriend, Sergeant Apisit, for uploading explicit videos of her that he recorded various times during intimate activities. 'A' was unaware of the videos until her friends discovered them on various platforms.

 

The content of the videos were explicit, clearly displaying her identity and private parts. These videos have significantly tarnished her reputation and have caused her great embarrassment, driving her to consider suicide. 

She confronted Apisit about the videos, where he admitted to posting them on Twitter.

 

Picture courtesy of MGR

 

 

-- 2024-05-06

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

[hotchilli]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

The video surfaced between November and December last year but recently gained public scrutiny, igniting discussions about the potential damage to the beach's tourist reputation.

Just stop this nonsense please.. 

[Gottfrid]

Fined 2000 baht! Wow, that will really be a deterrent. Now, off to make thousands of euros on more videos.

Edited May 6 by Gottfrid

[RobU]

17 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Fined 2000 baht! Wow, that will really be a deterrent. Now, off to make thousands of euros on more videos.

What should happen is she should be fined 2000 baht for each instance of it being viewed or upticked on only fans. I have not been to the site but I presume it has the facility to show how many views or how popular the video is. The same should happen to the soldier who posted the videos of his ex. 

[NE1]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

The video depicted the woman raising her skirt revealing her genitals under a palm tree on the beach. She then engaged in erotic actions with a man who later also exposed himself at a site opposite the beach.

 

The investigation overseen by Police Lieutenant Colonel Prayong Sriwipan from the Saensuk Police Station led to the identification and summons of the 26-year-old woman involved, Natch.

Miss S. Natch ?

Edited May 6 by NE1

[Gsxrnz]

The internet is forever, or at least until we all get nuked (some time before Christmas).

 

Every picture and every word posted on the WWW has the potential to come back and haunt you. "Hearsay" has been virtually eliminated, and denial in the absence of pictorial and textual evidence is pointless.  No wonder Gen Z is so angst.

[Gottfrid]

20 minutes ago, RobU said:

What should happen is she should be fined 2000 baht for each instance of it being viewed or upticked on only fans. I have not been to the site but I presume it has the facility to show how many views or how popular the video is. The same should happen to the soldier who posted the videos of his ex. 

That would be something. Like 2M * 2000 baht. Now we´re talking, dude!

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, RobU said:

I presume it has the facility to show how many views or how popular the video is.

These web sites are typically members only who pay for content. Potential new subscribers are forewarned about content and typically in subscribing must agree to a number of qualifications to become and remain a member. And typically content cannot legally be shared with non-members. 

Your lack of knowledge is applauded as it will protect you from such content.

 

Edited May 6 by Srikcir
msp

[SportRider]

Money well spent? 

[ignore it]

Darn,

 

Natch is a content creator.

 

I was hoping she might be more like an influencer.

 

[ChipButty]

That Natch been showing her Patch, disgusting

[RobU]

58 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

These web sites are typically members only who pay for content. Potential new subscribers are forewarned about content and typically in subscribing must agree to a number of qualifications to become and remain a member. And typically content cannot legally be shared with non-members. 

Your lack of knowledge is applauded as it will protect you from such content.

 

All the police have to do is create a false account and take screenshots with the the likes, upticks and followers showing. Good enough evidence for any court. 

[Bangkok Barry]

3 hours ago, RobU said:

What should happen is she should be fined 2000 baht for each instance of it being viewed or upticked on only fans.

 

Why?

[RobU]

1 hour ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

Why?

Why not?

[Bangkok Barry]

30 minutes ago, RobU said:

Why not?

Because being fined hundreds of thousands of baht is draconian. The video was only seen by people who paid to see it. You appear to be quite a puritan if you think that's worth such a massive fine. 

[brianthainess]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

The video depicted the woman raising her skirt revealing her genitals under a palm tree on the beach. She then engaged in erotic actions with a man who later also exposed himself at a site opposite the beach.

I thought the last report was it was a LB i.e. a man.  

[brianthainess]

1 minute ago, Sticky Rice Balls said:

dual fine...one for the lady one for the boy

I thought it was 2 men one in a frock. No females involved 

[RobU]

1 hour ago, Bangkok Barry said:

Because being fined hundreds of thousands of baht is draconian. The video was only seen by people who paid to see it. You appear to be quite a puritan if you think that's worth such a massive fine. 

No because it was performed and filmed in a totally inappropriate public space and the fine is far too small it will not prevent anyone from.doing the same thing again

[susanlea]

6 hours ago, Gsxrnz said:

The internet is forever, or at least until we all get nuked (some time before Christmas).

 

Every picture and every word posted on the WWW has the potential to come back and haunt you. "Hearsay" has been virtually eliminated, and denial in the absence of pictorial and textual evidence is pointless.  No wonder Gen Z is so angst.

In 5 years time nobody will know who she is.

[Bangkok Barry]

1 hour ago, RobU said:

No because it was performed and filmed in a totally inappropriate public space and the fine is far too small it will not prevent anyone from.doing the same thing again

 

And how many saw it being filmed? How do you know it wasn't done discretely in a quiet area? After all, no-one saw it and complained then, did they. But for you, they should be fined 2000 baht for each of the two million views. That marks you as an idiot, in my book. Other opinions may vary. Such as yours, of course. You think it is perfectly rational to fine someone four billion - billion - baht. Maybe you didn't bother checking the math before making such a stupid statement.

[RobU]

2 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

And how many saw it being filmed? How do you know it wasn't done discretely in a quiet area? After all, no-one saw it and complained then, did they. But for you, they should be fined 2000 baht for each of the two million views. That marks you as an idiot, in my book. Other opinions may vary. Such as yours, of course. You think it is perfectly rational to fine someone four billion - billion - baht. Maybe you didn't bother checking the math before making such a stupid statement.

It doesn't matter if no one saw it being filmed the point is anyone could have including children. Making a big example of this might make others think twice before filming sexually explicit videos in public places

[Bangkok Barry]

17 minutes ago, RobU said:

23 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

And how many saw it being filmed? How do you know it wasn't done discretely in a quiet area? After all, no-one saw it and complained then, did they. But for you, they should be fined 2000 baht for each of the two million views. That marks you as an idiot, in my book. Other opinions may vary. Such as yours, of course. You think it is perfectly rational to fine someone four billion - billion - baht. Maybe you didn't bother checking the math before making such a stupid statement.

Expand  

It doesn't matter if no one saw it being filmed the point is anyone could have including children. Making a big example of this might make others think twice before filming sexually explicit videos in public places

 

So you stand by your statement that they should be fined four billion baht. Okay. That IS what you wrote, even if not in those actual words. Maybe you didn't understand the part of the report saying that the video was viewed over two million times. Maybe you were unable to work out that 2000 times two million is four billion. Even though it isn't that difficult. Keep digging your hole....

[RobU]

16 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

So you stand by your statement that they should be fined four billion baht. Okay. That IS what you wrote, even if not in those actual words. Maybe you didn't understand the part of the report saying that the video was viewed over two million times. Maybe you were unable to work out that 2000 times two million is four billion. Even though it isn't that difficult. Keep digging your hole....

Why am I digging a hole Barry? I think it would be great if she and her boyfriend were fined 4,000,000,000 baht it would certainly be a massive deterrent to others planning on doing something similar and she would highly likely make no profit from her actions which she will now

[Bangkok Barry]

6 minutes ago, RobU said:

Why am I digging a hole Barry? I think it would be great if she and her boyfriend were fined 4,000,000,000 baht it would certainly be a massive deterrent to others planning on doing something similar and she would highly likely make no profit from her actions which she will now

 

Okay. I suppose you'd lose face by not knowing you were asking for a four billion baht fine, so now you have to say it's justified. Deeper and deeper....

[johng]

46 minutes ago, RobU said:

It doesn't matter if no one saw it being filmed the point is anyone could have including children. Making a big example of this might make others think twice before filming sexually explicit videos in public places

 

No one saw it but it doesn't matter because someone might have

and those someone might have been children  who of course should never witness anything explicit let alone sexually until the age of ???  16 ? 18 ? 21 ?   what should adults tell the "little angels" when they witness stray dogs fornicating openly on the street in broad daylight.

What if they ask about "the birds and the bees"

(totally natural procreation)

should they be scolded and sent to stand in the corner for such insolence ?

[Bangkok Barry]

28 minutes ago, RobU said:

Why am I digging a hole Barry? I think it would be great if she and her boyfriend were fined 4,000,000,000 baht it would certainly be a massive deterrent to others planning on doing something similar and she would highly likely make no profit from her actions which she will now

 

It's actually quite interesting to see a foreigner - I assume you aren't Thai - adopting the Thai way of trying to defend the indefensible - insisting no matter what it's Sunday when it's Saturday, in order to not lose face. While by doing so even more face is lost as it makes you look stupid.

[RobU]

53 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

Okay. I suppose you'd lose face by not knowing you were asking for a four billion baht fine, so now you have to say it's justified. Deeper and deeper....

😂No way am I embarrassed by the severity of such a fine. I think it would be brilliant. Your post is rather strange 'losing face' I am not Asian but it seems you have taken this 'cant lose face' concept practiced by some Asians totally on board

[RobU]

58 minutes ago, johng said:

 

No one saw it but it doesn't matter because someone might have

and those someone might have been children  who of course should never witness anything explicit let alone sexually until the age of ???  16 ? 18 ? 21 ?   what should adults tell the "little angels" when they witness stray dogs fornicating openly on the street in broad daylight.

What if they ask about "the birds and the bees"

(totally natural procreation)

should they be scolded and sent to stand in the corner for such insolence ?

😂🤣😁🤣 I have no response to that rambling diatribe other than laughter

[johng]

Glad to have made you laugh...because it is laughable to suggest that children can or even should be shielded for nature.

[RobU]

47 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

It's actually quite interesting to see a foreigner - I assume you aren't Thai - adopting the Thai way of trying to defend the indefensible - insisting no matter what it's Sunday when it's Saturday, in order to not lose face. While by doing so even more face is lost as it makes you look stupid.

Once again Barry losing face is an Asian concept and the only person promoting the concept in this exchange is you 😂. I don't give a toss about 'losing face' I am English.