Squeezed on:

wedding marriage ring

Yes, the current wife almost certainly would have found out anyway. But the new “wife” sure made it easy, thanks to Facebook. As reported by The Capital Journal (Pierre, South Dakota):

To save his months-old marriage, Brian Wright must, a judge said Tuesday, end it and then divorce the wife he married earlier so he can legally re-marry the woman he married in May, who accompanied him to court and watched him plead guilty to bigamy.

She left holding his hand.

Wright, 35, was indicted by a Pierre grand jury in June on a charge that on May 8 he committed bigamy, by marrying a woman while he was married to another woman.

“Guilty,” he told state Judge John Brown Tuesday.

Brown granted Wright’s request to suspend the imposition of any prison sentence.

So why didn’t the clerk marrying Wright know that he was already married?

When Wright and his new wife obtained a marriage license this spring at the Hughes County Courthouse, the register of deeds office had no way of easily knowing that Wright had previously obtained a marriage license with another woman some years before in the office and whether that earlier marriage was still in legal force.

Deputy Register of Deeds Patty Williams said divorce and annulments are handled at the state level. So county register of deeds offices have no automatic way to know if a marriage license filed in the county represents a still-current marriage, Williams said.

And how was Mr. Wright outed?

…  it wasn’t until Wright’s new wife posted the good news of the wedding on Facebook that it all came out, Williams said.

“His first wife saw the pictures and contacted law enforcement,” Williams said.

What say you, Mr. Wright? Well …

“I was married prior . . . and I didn’t take care of it in a legal way or anything,” Wright said. “The person I had married had left town and moved away. I made a mistake when I got married again.”

Oops. Here’s the source.

Posted in: Oops
Squeezed on:
Squeezed on:


This one is in its own category. As reported by metro.co.uk:

Paul Neaverson, 61, walked in to a branch of NatWest in Rainham, Kent and held a knife to the cashier’s neck.

However he was caught out when he asked the clerk to transfer the money in to his own bank account.

And why did he do it? Because he needed money to book a flight to Corfu for a job interview as a golf coach. Of course.

Maidstone Crown Court heard that during the terrifying raid the cashier managed to hit the panic button.

Neaverson fled, but undeterred, he only went as far as the HSBC just 400ft away where tried to hold up that bank too.

Danny Moore, defending, told the court that his client has been in trouble before and described his attempt to rob the banks as ‘ridiculous’.

He said: ‘It was ridiculous. It only had one ending – and here it is. He has led a law-abiding life and now finds himself staring down the barrel of a very long sentence indeed.’

Neaverson, of Rainham, Kent, pleaded guilty to two attempted robberies and possession of a blade. He has now been jailed for two years.

You’ll find the source here. 


Squeezed on:

chip microchip

Isn’t everyone worried about being microchipped? If not by the government, then by someone else? No? Here’s a law that’s on the books in Wisconsin:

146.25  Required implanting of microchip prohibited.

(1) No person may require an individual to undergo the implanting of a microchip.

(2)  Any person who violates sub. (1) may be required to forfeit not more than $10,000. Each day of continued violation constitutes a separate offense.

You’ll find the source here.

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Squeezed on:


If you are harboring any such doubts, this may dispel them. As reported by The Irish Mirror:

A young drug addict has been found guilty of possessing heroin with intent to supply after police discovered he was concealing 28 packages of the drug- in his anus.

The 16-year-old boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was arrested in March this year after police pulled over the car he was in with 46-year-old Alexander Mills, and noticed him acting uncomfortably.

During a two day trial at Guildford Crown Court, Mills denied knowing that the boy had 28 packages of heroin inside his anus.

He was found guilty on Thursday.

Lee Harris, prosecuting, said: “At around 11.30am on March 4, police spotted Mills driving in a blue Nissan Almera car with a passenger who was sitting in the back seat behind the driver.

“The car was then stopped in Claygate.

“Both these men gave different explanations of what they were doing when questioned by the police, with the passenger seeming uncomfortable.”

You can read a bit more here.

Squeezed on:

sinking ship ships

You’ll probably conclude, as The Juice did, that had loose lips not solved this crime, these gents would have found some other way to make it easy for the cops to close the case. Per The Florida Times-Union:

Two Kings Bay sailors have been arrested in last month’s break-in at a Fernandina Beach art gallery after one was overheard bragging about how the artwork was hanging on his wall.

Doubly brilliant! He bragged about it, and he displayed it on his wall!

Jonathan Ibrahim, 27, and Nathan Mendoza, 23, told police they were drunk and walking back to their vehicle when the Island Art Association’s back door was kicked in May 6, Police Chief Jim Hurley said. Police recovered all five pieces in an apartment where one of the suspects lives, Hurley said.

Hurley said Ibrahim and Mendoza were attempting to use their intoxication as an excuse.

They are charged with burglary, grand theft and criminal mischief and will face disciplinary action by the U.S. Navy, according to the Police Department.

The Navy too. Must have been some valuable art to risk all that.

Hurley said the artwork, which included some scenic beach paintings by city residents, totaled about $1,200 to $2,000. One of the two sculptures was broken beyond repair, the Police Department said.

Doh! Click here for the source, which includes a photo of one of the paintings.

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Squeezed on:

gun pulled handgun

Clearly this gent is not an adherent of the age-old retail philosophy that “the customer is always right.” As reported by wdrb.com (Louisville, Kentucky):

A smoke shop owner is in trouble with the law after police say he pulled a gun during a dispute with a customer.

It happened on Sept. 12 at the Smoke Shoppe II at 1850 south Hurstbourne Parkway. According to the arrest slip, 25-year-old Tariq L. Bayoud was arguing with four people when he pulled the weapon and pointed it in their direction.

Clearly there is such a thing as bad publicity. And it gets worse for Mr. Bayoud.

Police arrested Bayoud for violating a DVO [domestic violence order] which stated he could not possess firearms. The next day, police learned the gun was stolen during a burglary in Florida in 2007.

He was subsequently arrested on September 16 and charged with receiving stolen property.

It’s probably safe to assume there won’t be a “Smoke Shoppe III.” Here’s the source.

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Squeezed on:

police officer

So if you get pulled over for a traffic matter, would it ever occur to you that you have a constitutional right not to identify yourself?  Yeah, me either. But this lady? Whoa. You’re not going to believe this. As reported by The Carroll County Times:

Close to a dozen members of a local advocacy group against what they consider to be the misapplication of federal and state law waited outside the Carroll County Detention Center to greet a woman released Tuesday morning who had been arrested after failing to identify herself after a routine traffic stop in June.

During her time at the detention center, the woman continued to refuse to identify herself, claiming it was her Fifth Amendment right.

Bob Kurland, a member of the Westminster-based Save-A-Patriot Fellowship — a group claiming it is intent on ensuring that law is accurately interpreted and appropriately enforced — questioned the court’s refusal to release the woman, who became known as Jane Doe, sooner because of her choice to invoke the Constitution.

“Do you believe she is John Dillinger, public enemy No. 1?” said Kurland, who along with other members of the group refused to identify Doe. “How can you be held for exercising your Fifth Amendment rights?”

However, police, prosecutors and a law professor considered to be an expert on the Fifth Amendment contend that refusing to identify yourself to law enforcement isn’t protected by the Constitution.

“If that were the case, no one would ever have to provide information, and we would have burglars and robbers and people running all over the place not knowing who they were,” Carroll County State’s Attorney Brian DeLeonardo said Tuesday.

Essentially, the Fifth Amendment “protects criminal defendants from having to testify if they might incriminate themselves through the testimony,” according to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell University.

Doe, who continues to refuse to identify herself even after being released from jail, was arrested June 27 after she failed to stop for a Carroll County Sheriff’s Office deputy for a tail light that was out.

Doe, who spoke with the Times on Tuesday afternoon after her release but continued to refuse identifying herself, said she saw lights close behind her but “didn’t know what it was,” so she proceeded at a steady pace. When the trooper made contact with her at a traffic light, she refused to identify herself and had to be forceably removed from her vehicle, according to court documents. She was charged with failure to obey a lawful command, resisting arrest and obstructing an investigation, according to electronic court documents.

Because of her continued refusal to identify herself, neither the Sheriff’s Office nor the State’s Attorney’s Office believed it was prudent to immediately release her, according to Sheriff Jim DeWees.

Arrest and booking photos are provided by law enforcement officials. Arrest does not imply guilt, and criminal charges are merely accusations. A defendant is presumed innocent unless proven guilty and convicted.

The Sheriff’s Office was eventually able to obtain her fingerprints and, after submitting them to the FBI, felt it was no longer necessary to detain her, DeWees said. Her fingerprints were not flagged for any warrants, and they had no connection to any criminal investigations, he said.

“At the end of the day, we felt comfortable through the other outlets she was not a wanted person and felt fairly comfortable she served the appropriate amount of time,” DeWees said.

She was released Tuesday after 67 days at the detention center.

The State’s Attorney’s Office chose not to pursue the charges against Doe, officially dropping the case Aug. 28.

“When we are preparing a case, our overriding concern is always what is just in that situation,” DeLeonardo said. “Ultimately, we knew she wasn’t dangerous, so she served far in excess what she would have if she had cooperated. So essentially, it is an abatement by time served.”

Doe’s stay at the detention center cost the county about $4,500, DeWees said.

“If she had cooperated and displayed a driver’s license, she would’ve gotten a simple repair order and been on her way,” he said. “The lesson is, when the police stop you, you are required to submit a driver’s license. She wanted to play hardball and, in the process, she wasted an awful lot of taxpayer money by doing it her way.”

Doe said the Fifth Amendment is reiterated in the Maryland Constitution’s Declaration of Rights, “That no man ought to be compelled to give evidence against himself in a criminal case.”

“The constitution is the law, and no man ought to be compelled,” Doe said in a phone interview from a number associated with the Save-A-Patriot Fellowship. “Evidence is everything and anything, starting with my name, where I live, my mug shot, and my fingerprints.”

James Duane, a graduate of Harvard Law School and a professor at Regent Law School in Virginia who is considered a Fifth Amendment expert, said the Fifth Amendment does not give someone the right to refuse providing identifying information.

“The Constitutional right to remain silent is vast, and it gives you a right to refuse to answer any request for information that carries a reasonable probability that it could be used to convict you, but the right is limited,” Duane wrote in an email.

“[Eleven] years ago, the Supreme Court of the United States specifically ruled that a request from the police for a suspect to identify himself, assuming that the request was otherwise proper under state law, would not be a violation of the Fifth Amendment, because there is so little chance that such information, by itself, would pose any reasonable probability that it could lead to a conviction of that person.”

Doe said she is aware of the court’s opinion on the matter.

“Courts have ruled on this, and I’m not interested in what the courts say,” she said. “Even a name can be a link in the chain of evidence used to convict you. The last thing [government] wants people to know is that you can refuse to give a name or take a mug shot.”

Another member of the Save-A-Patriot Fellowship, George Otto, said Doe’s actions will help people understand what the country’s Founding Fathers meant when they wrote the U.S. Constitution.

“That’s what Jane Doe does; she helps people understand the law,” Otto said. “One thing we learned, if a law is not written clearly, it should be void.”

Doe also took issue with her length of detainment. The only reason the Sheriff’s Office and State’s Attorney’s Office gave to keep her in jail was the possibility of her being a criminal, she said.

“That’s not enough,” Doe said. “They have to have probable cause — a reason. That’s important to understand. I was told I could literally be a sex offender. ‘Might be’ is not probable cause. It’s their job to be proving things, and it is no man’s job to give evidence against themselves.”

DeLeonardo said there is no issue of this being an inappropriate detention as she was initially detained because of the crime she committed.

“The court refused to release her until she provided the information because they need that information to process her through the system,” DeLeonardo said. “Otherwise you’d have thousands of Jane Does.”

By refusing to identify herself, he said, all Doe was successful at doing was causing additional burden on herself, the county and its taxpayers.

“Essentially, if people think it’s a good route to go and want to spend an enormous amount of time in jail more than they would, they can do that.”

No thanks. I’ll take the ticket, and either pay it or fight it (and win!). Here’s the source.

Squeezed on:


Sometimes looks can deceive. This is one of those times! As reported at mmafighting.com:

Strawweight fighter Monique Bastos was on the way for her jiu-jitsu training with two friends in Acailandia, Brazil, on Tuesday night, when two men attacked her. They wanted their phones, but they had no idea Bastos was an MMA fighter.

“I was going to my jiu-jitsu training when they arrived on a motorcycle and said they wanted our phones,” Bastos told MMAFighting.com. “I tried to hold my phone, and I realized they were not armed. When they tried to escape, I lifted the rear wheel of the bike and they fell on the ground. The guy who took my phone ran away, but I was able to get the other one.”

Bastos, who has six professional MMA fights on her record and a few jiu-jitsu matches and muay thai bouts, got him into a rear-naked choke and took him to the sidewalk, where she locked a triangle choke and waited for the police.

Wesley Sousa de Araujo was arrested 15 minutes later, and that was not the first time Bastos had to stop a robbery.

“I’ve been through this a few times before, and it’s the second time I fought back,” she said. “There were two guys, and they were using knives, but I was able to use my jiu-jitsu and get my phone back. It’s a huge risk, but I did it to defend myself and my friends, so I used what I learned.”

Here’s the source, including a video.





Posted in: Bam! and Oops
Squeezed on:
Squeezed on:

beach sand

There are a lot of silly laws on the books. Take this one, for example from the Municipal Code of the City of Manhattan Beach, California:

12.08.300 – Throwing missiles.

No person shall throw, or otherwise propel, any missile, or mud or sand anywhere on the beach.

First of all, what kind of missiles are contemplated here? Second, mud is a missile? Third, sand is a missile? And finally, you’re seriously criminalizing throwing sand on the beach? Bet lots of citations have been written for that one. Here’s the source.  (You’ll have to scroll down to 12.08.300.)


Squeezed on:

submarine sandwich

In the wake of all the negative publicity Subway has garnered thanks to Jared, perhaps this could be seen as good publicity? I mean, these kids must really like Subway sandwiches, or they wouldn’t have done this. After all, they could have gone after a lot of other food. Here’s the story, as posted by wtvr.com (Richmond, Virginia):

Police are looking for a trio of teens seen in surveillance video, who robbed a VCU student of his sandwich at gun point.

Surveillance video shows the three teens, in a Subway sandwich shop, not ordering anything, until one asked for a cup of water.

Police said they then followed a man outside the shop on Semmes Avenue just after he got his sandwich, and stole his meal.

The boldness lay in the timing of the crime and how the suspects seemed not to care that they were caught on camera.  “It’s pretty shocking because it was over a sandwich, and we live here,” said Moore. “I’m not going to come out alone at night.”

People living in the neighborhood said apartment managers have warned them of petty crimes like loose change being swiped from cars, but nothing as serious as an armed robbery.

“I saw three kids walking down the block,” said one resident, who believes the three young people he saw, are the same ones seen in surveillance photos as they walked down 12th Street before heading into the sub shop.

Detectives ask anyone with any information about the suspects to call First Precinct Detective Brian Taylor at (804) 646-0689 or call Crime Stoppers at 780-1000.

Here’s the source.