A court in Virginia must decide just whether it's actually possible to drive a car at 85mph while simultaneously engaging in drunken back-seat sex. The answer is yes, according to a plaintiff who's filed a claim at Fairfax County Circuit Court for $75,000 damages against the driver who allegedly piled into his vehicle in May …
Sounds like he was having a race
But did he come first?
Could have been having sex in the Clinton style legally defined meaning of the term. That's a much easier trick to pull off.
"Rather than fingering his back-seat squeeze"...
And there was me thinking it was The Law that had the long arm.....
Rather than fingering his back-seat squeeze,
A new keyboard please!
Funnily enough I'd just been thinking through the mechanics of it, and figured the only way you could be partially in the back and drive would be to stick your arm through to the back, leading to the conclusion that he was.....
Great start to Monday
"...fingering his back seat squeeze". Thank you. Truly. Thank you.
Can't have been too drunk...
If his wedding veg was operational. Still, caught with his trousers down and rightly so!
"STOP", "FAIL", "D'oh!", Pint, TOTC, fanboi or Winbooze user? Spoilt for choice on this one.
Paragraph 11 ?
•Paragraph 11: “At the time of the collision, Defendant was a little grey hairless creature with large oval black eyes and then metamorphasised in front of my eyes into a normal looking human.”
Paragraph 11 was redacted by the judge who guessed that it probably wasn't true (or that it was but aliens must be kept secret), but the other paragraphs could remain.
Other positions are available
"and on top of a female."
Not necessarily. Unless Virginia has banned everything except the missionary position, of course. And other interesting options are available too, which despite the claims of Slick Willy Clinton, definitely *do* count as sex.
FWIW, in many cars it's quite possible to reach the steering wheel from just about anywhere in the car if you really want to. The problem is how to reach the pedals. If he had cruise control then this could well explain the accident - car's at a fixed speed, steering is possible (even though it probably isn't going to have your full attention!), but we're not at home to Mr Brake Pedal.
the 'italian version'
I remember a story from many years ago. This Italian judge dismissed a court case of a couple having 'alleged sex' in the old style Fiat 500, because it was 'alleged' that it was physically impossible to have said sex in a Fiat 500.
Wasn't that the same judge who said it was impossible to rape a woman wearing jeans so the act must have been consensual never mind what she says and what her injuries are?
Dunno about the court case but I know very well indeed that it's physically possible.
The heels do tend to scuff the dash though.
You're a midget, and your partner an Asian featherweight?
... choice of language in the second last paragraph.
"Rather than fingering his back-seat squeeze"... Nice!
Thumbs up because fingers are always helpful.
"Rather than fingering his back-seat squeeze..."
Need I say this?
Playmobil or it didn't happen.
Not sure who
but someone is clearly unloading a considerable quantity of bovine excrement.
Although Playmobil is the Reg tool of choice for recreating similar scenes, I think we might have to go with a Stretch Armstrong reconstruction this time.
No he wasn't "driving" cruise control was....
On top? surely not!
It doesn't say "on-top" though. I've broken a front seat whilst experimenting positionally in such activities; the car was definitely stationary on time
Nah, a Prius driver couldn't get laid...
Need a copy of the Karma Sutra
To prove this is possible.
1) Driver's seat back-rest folded down almost flat
2) Driver's squeeze laid face down leaning over driver's seat operating the pedals
3) Her `nether parts` raised to the appropriate angle
4) Driver plugs himself in to the aforementioned nether parts for stability while operating the steering wheel.
CAR-ma Sutra, you mean?
Getting my keys now ....
Paragraph 11, revealed
Paragraph 11: “At the time of the collision, Defendant was sending tweets explaining his status in detail.”
In the US you can be convicted of drunk driving if you are in the drivers seat drunk. The car does not have to be on or moving. So you can be convicted of DUI if you are not driving.
Similar in UK
Except it would be "drunk whilst in charge of a motor vehicle".
You can be done for leaving a party to get something out the boot of your car, with the intention of walking straight back into the party.
RE: Drunk Driving
Same in the UK - the charge is being in charge of a vehicle so merely possessing the keys can be sufficient.
This Situation Has Come...
..up several times. Me gasping in panic and trying to get a foot onto the brake.
The sex is generally very unfulfilling.
Tank goodness I wake up before the crash.
Was he firing on all SEAL-ENDERs, while someone
was "getting a 'tune-up'"?
Was the plug sparking?
His ignition sequence was in full overdrive, i guess.
The big question is of course..
. if he was wearing protection..
Tadum tidum ..
There was no driver
Nobody was driving the car, it was blind luck that the accident didn't happen sooner.
Must have been a straight stretch of road.
The guy accused of driving the car had been driving prior to climbing in the back seat and leaving the car to do what it would do with no driver.
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- BBC suspends CTO after it wastes £100m on doomed IT system
- Peak Facebook: British users lose their Liking for Zuck's ad empire