I liked what you did there.
A California man faces up to a year inside after being found guilty of two counts of misdemeanor battery for ejaculating into a colleague's water bottle. Michael Kevin Lallana faces additional aggro after the jury backed a "sentencing enhancement allegation" that he committed said misdemeanours for "sexual gratification". …
If that were the only motivation he could have thrown the bottle away after polluting it. So I think he meant: because her lips were going to touch it.
If he gets let off because this particular act isn't covered by the "battery" law there will presumably be a public outcry and politicians will trip over each other in their efforts to approve a new "manbattery" law.
might be funny if she's a 15 year old girl (on account of it being, you know, an indirect admission that she has spent quality time around boys, and sex is still thought of as a embarrashing thing by quite a few misguided people), but as for a grown woman? Be surprising if she didn't know the taste of it.. next thing you'll claim that you dont? I don't think there are many humans over the age of 20 that don't know what semen taste like, be they man or woman (Except girls who figured out they were playing for the away team early on I guess) :)
I can honestly say that whilst I can make a guess what semen tastes like (salty or so I've heard?) I most certainly COULD NOT identify it from simply drinking some water!
And yes it made me smile that this woman admitted in open court that she could, but no that most definitely doesn't change the disgusting nature of the crime the guy committed!
A woman I used to work with, while on holiday in Spain, was at a bar with a nice chap dancing 'au naturel'. He then proceeded to dance up to their table, and kindly stirred her drink for her...
Apparently the bar staff were quite surprised when she wasn't pleased, and demanded a fresh drink. *
As it was a cocktail (fnarr fnarr) in a large glass filled with ice - the bloke probably deserves some kind of a medal. As well as a stern telling off.
* I guess anyone would need a stiff drink after that experience. OK, the coat it is...
"Who gives a f*ck what Frankie says!?"
No law to cover this heh? They should declare him an enemy cum battant and send him to Gitmo.
He certainly owes the young lady an HIV test at the very least.
And his wife, certainly must know that when he's with her, he's thinking of Tiffany.
His wife's probably like. "I'll kill his dick..."
Watch the video... it's hilarious. I can't get that quote out of my head.
In all seriousness though, however, someone *should* kill his dick. If someone did that to my drink, I certainly would.
What a wanktard!
Sadly the best quotes didn't make it through to the reg article:
"A defense expert witness, psychologist Ellen Stein, testified that Lallana has a narcissistic personality disorder and the maturity of a 16-year-old. Stein also said Lallana was known in his family as a prankster and could have done it as a joke, not for sexual gratification."
Perhaps the Judge bought in to the defence spin, hence the can of legal whup-ass remains to be opened, but that would be a pity. I doubt a teenager would get to use their age as an excuse for gross sexual assault. In fact I'd be insulted as a 16 year old, since I'd know it's only cool to argue over how much money it would take to get you to swallow [insert un-choice object/substance here].
Or something. Certainly this would be a pretty serious breach of regulations if it happened at a bottling company.
"Lallana's attorney is pondering an appeal on the basis no crime was committed"
Lallana's attorney is probably the only person on the planet who is prepared to go on the record with that opinion.
There was application of force alright. It just happens that the body part that was 'forced' didn't belong to her.
Ok, I tried not to use the word "spanked"; it sounds much less offensive, despite not too appropriate at the same time, doesn't it?
Where is a pedantic grammar nazi when we need one?
If you're thinking about your wife when you get off, you might as well be doing it with your wife? Don't most men wank precisely because they DON'T want to think about their wife while getting off? Sure, he's just trying to preserve his marriage, bit I'd say run, don't walk, away from this lying wanker.
as they reportedly do with nasty customers, they can get time, in California?
And this is the state with no money, no jail space and their prison system is operating under a court order for breaching guests rights?
At least Jerry Brown is back as governor - he's the guy who let Timothy Leary out.
This is a story quite similar, but quite not amusing, nor acceptable just the same.
I went to a party. It was 100% USAF personnel. It was off base, and it involved at least 2 kegs of beer, now the bathroom was a small little room and all of us 40+ had to use it, or go outside in the backyard/bushes.
A female left her purse in the bathroom, Hell even I used the bathroom at one point, but don't remember seeing any bag in there, anyway, as the party went on, and several hours, she came out screaming at everyone, nothing was stolen from her bag, but .... something extra was added to it. I'm pretty sure you can figure out what I mean.
It was total mayhem, and a lot of us left.
Fucking hell, there used to be a fine line between El Reg smut and 4Chan sadistic-machismo. No longer it seems, since the only slightly sensible comment on here so far is by an anonymous coward ('carrying any bugs').
For the post-tweenagers here, the 'bugs' semen can carry, such as HIV and hepatitis, are really no laughing matter, especially when they are forced upon you without consent. This was not an outrageous prank, it was a serious assault that potentially warrants far more serious legal charges than were applied. If someone did this to anyone I know then I wouldn't press charges, I would start by popping their eyeballs and forcing them to watch them be force fed their own testes closeup. Then I would get angry.
I think it would be equally hilarious if I tricked one of 'Team Register' into eating human excrement. Once I prank them, can I post that an article of that on the Register - or are there lines that you don't want to cross personally?
I'm with you on this one.
- Never understood "Beadle's about"
- Don't understand humour based on humilation
Whether or not she was careless with her water bottle, whether or not she swallowed several times a day, she was not asking for some idiot to wank into her drink.
I don't think holding that opinion confirms that I would ban pornography nor reintroduce hanging for anything more serious than stealing a loaf of bread.
Whether the idiot concerned had "learning difficulties" as one commentard suggested is a different matter but I don't find it difficult to understand that the woman felt upset.
What's the big amusement about Misogyny?
"What's the big amusement about Misogyny?"
It's already been observed that Reg posters would probably find it as amusing if a man were the victim. Economy of logic and deduction dictate that we don't multiply entities unnecessarily, for then we draw up legal categories that are worse than unnecessary. For example the laws on religious harassment which are legally unnecessary since existing provisions dealt with the matter adequately. Additionally, creating further categories of offender also creates new ways to attack the parent category from which the offenders are drawn, in this case men. Coote, Harman and Hewitt's diatribes point the way here:
"It cannot be assumed that men are bound to be an asset to family life, or that the presence of fathers in families is necessarily a means to social harmony and cohesion"
The Family Way: A New Approach to Policy Making, Anna Coote, Harriet Harman, Patricia Hewitt Social Policy Paper no. 1. Institute for Public Policy Research: London 1990 ISBN 1872452 15 9
Please do not mistake stupidity for misogyny. Please do not multiply categories unnecessary. It leads to Coote's et al. version of Rwanda's hate radio.
Did the guy have "learning difficulties" or was he just acting like The Stifler was his role model? And, frankly, what does "learning difficulties" have that would excuse this sort of behaviour?
I speak, by the way, as a person with "learning difficulties" (with scare quotes and all) who gets a bit pissed off when this reason is dragged out to excuse all sorts of nonsense. If he had problems reading, or writing, or adding up... fine, that's one thing. But to think doing this was okay? Come on...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019