Too many at once. Pacing!
If the "do not want" heebie's referring to is the judge peeking briefly at the laptop, then closing it slowly with a pained expression, that's my favorite as well.
they left out the "that's racist!" gif, and it's my favorite
http://www.gifbin.com/981768
4: Word.
Also, no such list could be complete without these two.
The one with Bristol highlights again how grotesque her whole Dancing with the Stars stint has been. So awkward! Can't stop watching!
(Also, did they not tell any of the other contestants that Jennifer Grey was going to be on it? Seriously? These people want to keep being on television so badly that they sign up for a dance contest against Baby?!)
I was told there would be no corners.
The only problem is that reading that page felt more like somebody vomited however many years of pop culture right into. Or was busy extracting it from my skull, which sounds more painful.
max
['Now I want to return to my home planet.']
It does seem like the contestants who spent several years as professional dancers have an advantage.
"Do not want", killer bees version.
Something's been killing the bees. Well, now they're killing back.
It's not so much the fungus/virus thing: the European honeybees are probably just moving to the suburbs.
As the guy I linked to on the other thread pointed out, American plants managed to reproduce perfectly well without European or African bees for zillions of years. Somewhere in Guatemala, a rather clever Mayan peasant is giggling madly.
That took forever to load. In fact, it never loaded. Usually the only website ever to completely fail to load on my computer, repeatedly, is the Hullabaloo blog.
15. Sorry about that.
Yes I get that problem with Hullabaloo too, and today I got it with the Independent (newspaper). But only at work, where I'm locked into IE6. At home, FF3.x never drops anything.
17: Christ. What assholes.
I'm not part of the legal collective, but it makes perfect sense to me that he was charged. I don't see any way you could respond to personal ads involving sex, violence and complete strangers and expect the exercise to be free of legal risk. Especially not when the only confirmation you've bothered to acquire is exchanging a few faceless text messages with someone whose identity you have no way of verifying.
What DS said. Mens rea is an element of the crime, of course, and without it you shouldn't be convicted, but as a juror I can't see managing to work up a reasonable doubt about his mens rea unless he put forth some pretty convincing fucking evidence of it.
Did we not talk about this case back when it first hit the news? I have a vague memory of it, but maybe that was somewhere else.
I agree with DS and LB. As a society, the implications of this defense would be bad.
21: unless the jury pool is drawn from the readership of the local alt weekly
See, without engaging with the specific legal questions involved, I'd read it the opposite way. Both common sense AND a familiarity with the standards of the BDSM community would suggest that before you "make someone's rape fantasy come true", you meet with them in a public place and have a negotiation about exactly what is entailed. I can totally see a jury of normal straight people being like "huh, he thought it was her sending those interweb messages, right?" But perhaps I am prejudiced.
NULLIFICATION 4EVAR!
I agree with 22. IIRC, discussion was extensive.
21: Mens rea is absolutely required -- the statutory rape thing is a freak exception.
On the standard, I think it's actual belief -- if the jury has a reasonable doubt about whether the defendant was actually mistaken about the facts, they acquit. In a juror's shoes, I wouldn't take the story told by by the defendant as sufficient to create a reasonable doubt in my mind as to whether he actually believed she consented, unless it were much more convincing when delivered in the courtroom than I think is at all likely.
24: But I could see him getting acquitted by idiots on that basis.
Funny, I'm drawing a blank on the prior discussion. Are there any grudges I should be holding from it?
There was definitely extensive discussion about it somewhere.
5 commenters that no one remembers stormed off because of it.
a familiarity with the standards of the BDSM community
Maybe we should check with Domineditrix.
The defendant claims that the victim never used the "safeword" of antidisestablishmentarianism.
I would think (but am not going to bother with research) that the mens rea would apply only to the actual actus reus -- i.e., he knowingly commited an act of sexual penetration. The fact that she did not consent is an additional element of the crime, but not one to which the mens rea applies. Depends how the relevant statute is worded, of course.
Also, the victim should sue the fuck out of Craigslist.
Wait, urple has been around and discussing things? I thought he/she was new.
Also, this was the plot of an episode of The Closer.
Ah, a quick google search tells me 34.1.2 is not so. Sorry!
||
Well, fuck.
NMM2 the Jimmy Johns Workers Union. For now. Lost by 2 goddamn votes. 22 Unfair Labor Practices filed against the company. "No" voters are off celebrating on the company tab. Dumbasses. Like a night worth of free drinks is better than the option of having sick days.
We're gonna roll the union on though. Wobblies have suffered a lot worse.
||>
The Wobblies probably had better ham.
One of the issues that came up during this drive was a Shift Leader being instructed by her manager to use meat that had sat in a broken cooler overnight and was visibly decaying. So, yeah, pretty much.