inappropriate but lets forgive and forget!

[MrBen]

Turdgate.

[uncleglen]

Given that alcohol has the effect of removing self-control at certain dosages and this person would have been encouraged to drink more than he was used to given the circumstances, then since all he did was crap on the floor and he didn't put anyone in hospital (unlike the imbecile that put my son in hospital for no reason)then these things will happen- unless of course alcohol is banned!

[Sue]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

I don't want to make any defecatory statements.

xxxxxxx

:))

[Mick Mac]

Is a stag do and shit in the toilet just a big coincidence? Could be of course but unlikely.

Lots of people protecting reputations today maybe.

[KidKruger]

You couldn't invent this shit.

[bawdy-nan]

Wonder if this will make it into the Times/Guardian/Telegraph/Mail property porn pages.

[Penguin68]

We are all assuming that the incident was intentional - even if the intention was 'warped' by the intake of alchohol. However I have known those who are 'very, very, drunk' to have quite genune accidents where their ability to get to and use an appropriate receptacle is overtaken by events (or even where they are unsure that they have reached an appropriate place). I suspect that most of the near, and not so near, misses in pub lavatories are associated with this, rather than with an intent to shock and dismay. The 'friends' of the stag in question all appear to be arguing that this was not an intentional action on anyone's part, and that at least, as far as my own expertience of alchohol fuelled festivity, is not implausible.

[Otta]

If it was an accident his mates wouldn't "allegedly" have been blocking the door.

[*Bob*]

How far away from the intended target can a chod be - and still qualify as a 'near miss'?

There's some leeway here but I'm sure 'a short walk' has to be too far.

[newboots]

If it was one of the stag party and it was an accident (still grim and not easy to forgive imho), then the appropriate thing would have been for one of the perp's mates to at least offer to clean it up. And they should have left a hefty cash apology behind the bar.

[*Bob*]

We've all done it - little accidents will happen.

Only last week I had 'one over the eight' and - totally accidentally - shat in the washing machine.

[cle]

I love this thread. Might a big group of lads on a big night out have been guarding the toilets and ensuring who came in and out for another reason?

[Earl Aelfheah]

It was a stag doo doo.

[Mick Mac]

A friend of mine (during university times) woke up one Saturday morning with his Mum shouting at him, as he had apparently shat in his own bedroom wardrobe. He couldn't remember.

[Otta]

cle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I love this thread. Might a big group of lads on a

> big night out have been guarding the toilets and

> ensuring who came in and out for another reason?

If you're getting at what I think you're getting at, it would be more likely they'd guard the cubicle than the whole thing. Far too obvious.

[Mick Mac]

From the picture I saw, I can't imagine he would have had much success in that area, not the way he was presented on that night anyhow.

[Millhaven]

I think powdering his nose was being implied rather than cubical intercourse. But then again...

[*Bob*]

Could it be possible that one of the lads had seen some stray urine on the floor of the toilet and - fearing a slip by another unwary EDT punter (leading to a possible no win/ no fee claim) - had resolved to guard the door until the manager could be fetched and a yellow warning sign placed?

Then, coincidentally during this time, could not a sudden and unexpected earth tremor have dislodged an unflushed log and threw it out of the pan and onto the floor?

Surely this is possible? We can't go round making accusations until all the possibilities have been explored.

[cle]

Millhaven Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think powdering his nose was being implied

> rather than cubical intercourse. But then again...

Yep indeed. One of the main reasons for domestic stag/hen do's, no?

[Otta]

Millhaven Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think powdering his nose was being implied

> rather than cubical intercourse. But then again...

Yeah that's what I was getting at.

[KidKruger]

"However I have known those who are 'very, very, drunk' to have quite genune accidents where their ability to get to and use an appropriate receptacle is overtaken by events "

Well fair enough then, the old under-the-influence get out clause, "I was pissed so it doesn't count".

- Oh I shat on the floor in the public loos - but i was pissed ! Oh, well no problem then, perfectly acceptable in that case.

- I ran over your daughter - But i was pissed ! Oh well, be my guest, I hope your car wasn't too badly damaged, can I contribute to the cost of some new panels ?

- I gave my girlfriend a black eye when we argued - but i was pissed ! Not a problem, please don't feel bad about it.

No problem. If you can't handle your alcohol, it's not your problem, it's everyone else's.

[HHBilly]

Bravo KK

['bout now]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "However I have known those who are 'very, very,

> drunk' to have quite genune accidents where their

> ability to get to and use an appropriate

> receptacle is overtaken by events "

>

> Well fair enough then, the old under-the-influence

> get out clause, "I was pissed so it doesn't

> count".

> - Oh I shat on the floor in the public loos - but

> i was pissed ! Oh, well no problem then,

> perfectly acceptable in that case.

> - I ran over your daughter - But i was pissed !

> Oh well, be my guest, I hope your car wasn't too

> badly damaged, can I contribute to the cost of

> some new panels ?

> - I gave my girlfriend a black eye when we argued

> - but i was pissed ! Not a problem, please don't

> feel bad about it.

>

> No problem. If you can't handle your alcohol, it's

> not your problem, it's everyone else's.

This.

[BunnyBurrow]

Surely if being pissed was the problem he would have taken his "deposit" home with him in his pants rather than managing to pull them down before he even got to the cubicle.

Then again, he was wearing a dress and maybe he wasn't wearing pants? Which I guess would make facilitation of the whole incident much easier whether it was on purpose or an accident.

[Otta]

BunnyBurrow Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Surely if being pissed was the problem he would

> have taken his "deposit" home with him in his

> pants rather than managing to pull them down

> before he even got to the cubicle.

>

Exactly!

Let's stop giving this person thw benefit of the doubt, it was a prank that they thought was hilarious at the time, simple as that.

But also agree with KK. I've regretted a few rhings I've said or done whilst under the influence, but I was still responsible for those things, the booze didn't somehow give me license to be a prick.