Articles Posted in Best Of

Squeezed on:

tea cup

You did not but this person for drinking tea suspiciously. You did? Think the court will approve? As reported by The Times of India:

Bewildered by the explanation that a man was arrested because he was drinking tea in a “suspicious manner” at a road side stall near Shivaji University in Kolhapur, the Bombay high court directed the police to back off and set aside the preventive detention proceedings against him.

So what happened?

Vijay Patil, a 49-year-old restaurant owner from Kolhapur had moved the HC to challenge his detention and sought damages.

His lawyer Satyavrat Joshi said the police had no real reason to pluck him off the street at 11am on February 22 while he was merely sipping tea. The HC said it agreed.

Said the high court:

The judgment penned by Justice Patel said, “This is bewildering. We were unaware that the law required anyone to give an explanation for having tea, whether in the morning, noon or night. One might take tea in a variety of ways, not all of them always elegant or delicate, some of them perhaps even noisy. But we know of no way to drink tea ‘suspiciously’.”

He added, “The ingestion of a cup that cheers demands no explanation. And while cutting chai is permissible, now even fashionable, cutting corners with the law is not.”

Bam! The court went on to slam the police for misusing a law that was meant to be “preventive, not punitive.” You can read more (a fair amount) here.

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

jail cell bars

This gent didn’t wait to see if he was convicted and sentenced before breaking out. As reported by The Toronto Star:

Toronto police are searching for a 32-year-old man after he escaped the College Park courthouse before his court appearance Thursday morning.

It is alleged that Steven Gonyea was before the courts at the Ontario Court of Justice, 444 Yonge St., on charges of criminal harassment and break and enter when he escaped custody sometime between 8:45 a.m. and 11 a.m.

Police are still trying to determine how the suspect managed to escape, but it is believed that he fled the cell area somehow. They said similar incidents have happened in the past.

Sounds like maybe someone else should be running the detention facility in the courthouse? Here’s the source, including a mug shot.

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

litter trash can

Have you EVER heard of anyone getting a ticket for littering? They should, but it just never seems to happen, much to The Juice’s chagrin.  Well, a litterbug in New York got busted, sort of. As reported by brooklynpaper.com:

The litterbug told police that he tossed some trash in the parking lot of a fast-food chain between Kingsland and Morgan avenues at 12:50 pm. A moment later, two men came up to him and showed him shields.

Officer, arrest that man! He just admitted to littering! No?

“Hold on,” said one of the men. “What you are doing is illegal.”

Citizen’s arrest! Citizen’s arrest! (This is funny only to geezers like The Juice who watched The Andy Griffith Show.) Sadly, there was no citizen’s arrest, but there was a little bit of strange justice doled out.

The fake cops told the man that they would write him a ticket if he did not give them $60 on the spot. They followed him to his house, but he could not find any money there, so they walked him to an automatic teller machine, where he withdrew $60 and gave it to the men, the real cops reported.

Bam! $60 fine!

Squeezed on:

bottle rocket

Ah the joy of setting off a bottle rocket – unless it’s in … your pants! As reported by The Highline Times (Washington):

Police responded to a call for medical assistance in the 12000 block of Ambaum Blvd. A man accidentally set off a bottle rocket firework in his pants. He was transported to Harborview by ambulance to be treated for superficial burns on his groin, face and hand. No other injuries were reported.

Oops.

Squeezed on:

ambulance

Who do you think this woman called after the crash, on the way to the hospital? She called her insurance company – to report it, right? Well, not exactly. As reported by PhillyBurbs.com:

On the way to the hospital after she was involved in a four-car accident last October, Regina Whitehead did what most people do: She called her insurance company.

Really? As a personal injury lawyer, The Juice can assure you that this is not something most crash victims do in an ambulance, on their way to the hospital. Anyway …

Only she didn’t call to report the accident, but to add comprehensive, collision and rental coverage, according to the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office.

On Friday, Whitehead was charged with insurance fraud and criminal attempt/theft by deception. The 22-year-old Ambler woman was arraigned before Bensalem District Judge Joseph Falcone, who set her free on $25,000 unsecured bail.

Both charges are third-degree felonies punishable by up to seven years in prison.

According to the AG’s office, Whitehead’s 1998 Ford Taurus was involved in the accident Oct. 6, 2011, shortly before 4 p.m. on West Chester Pike in Chester County. At the time, Whitehead was insured through Infinity Insurance, which has an office in Bensalem, according to a probable cause affidavit.

About an hour after the accident — during an ambulance ride to Chester County Hospital for treatment — Whitehead allegedly called the insurance company to add extra coverage to her car, according to court documents.

Better late than never? Not exactly.

A few hours later on the night of the accident, she called Infinity to report she was involved in an accident and to verify that she had comprehensive collision coverage. She was told during the phone call that if she didn’t have the coverage in place at the time of the accident, the insurer wouldn’t cover the damage, according to the attorney general.

The next day, Whitehead spoke with an Infinity representative in Bensalem and specifically affirmed that her collision coverage was added “before the accident,” according to the affidavit. Later that same day, though, she withdrew her insurance claim.

The attorney general said Whitehead admitted last month that she added the coverage after being injured in the accident and while in the ambulance and then lied about it. “Whitehead said she did this at the advice of a friend so she would be covered by the insurance company,” according to the attorney general.

Time for a new “go to” friend.

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

fight.jpg

Where is the absolute best place for a fight to occur? Think about access to medical care. From The Arab Times:

KUWAIT CITY, March 16: Four citizens, including two youths, sustained serious injuries when two families of 30 Kuwaitis engaged in a bloody fight at Mubarak Al-Kabeer Hospital, reports Al-Qabas daily.

Sources said police rushed to the Mubarak Al-Kabeer Hospital after the Operations Department of the Interior Ministry received information about the fight, and arrested several participants and referred them to Jabriya police station.

Apparently, the fight started due to a dispute between a man and his ex-wife, and sources said the man was in hospital for treatment due to injuries he sustained in a traffic accident. The man is said to have argued with his ex-wife who happened to be in the hospital at that period and he started beating her, so members of the two families rushed to the hospital and started fighting.

Yikes.

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

car on fire burning flames

Yes sir. This is one lucky man. But just remember, there are two kinds of luck … As reported in the police blotter of the Sun Star Courier (Ohio):

At 4:04 p.m. on Friday, a man was arrested on an active warrant after putting out a fire in his own vehicle on Barr Road.

The 34-year-old man’s truck caught fire due to failed wiring with the LED lights. A resident gave him a fire extinguisher to calm down the blaze.

After running the man’s information it was discovered that he had an active warrant from Cuyahoga County for failure to appear in connection with child support.

Doh!

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

cigarette

Here’s a tale of smoker who really, really wanted a cigarette. As reported in the Colorado Springs Police Blotter:

Officers were dispatched on a panicked call for help by a 24 year old resident of the Summer Grove Apartments, located near the intersection of N. Academy Boulevard and Austin Bluffs Parkway. The victim was an acquaintance of the 26 year old suspect. Santos Santier knocked on the door of our victim and requested a cigarette. Angered that he was awakened [at 1:00 a.m.] for such a trivial purpose, the resident closed the door without fulfilling his request, which now enraged Santier. Santier began kicking the entrance door, eventually gaining entry, then attacked the victim. Shortly after police arrival he was taken into custody. His actions resulted in an arrest for First Degree Burglary, a Felony. Only minor injuries were sustained by both parties.

Yikes.

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

no sign

Sure, the First Amendment permits you to yell at police officers, and even flip them off. But in most cases, they’re doing their job, and doing it within the law. And even when they’re not, you should consider your own circumstances before opening your yap. As reported by The Northwest Florida Daily News:

Niceville Police officers were investigating a case of underage smoking on Reeves Street when the man [age 21] and two of his friends “began hollering and asking questions about what I was doing,” the arresting officer wrote in his report.

That’s legit, as long as you don’t interfere. But you’ve now inserted yourself into the situation, which can have consequences.

The men consented to a pat-down and an officer felt two objects in one man’s pocket. The man said one of the objects was a lighter. The other he identified as a pipe he uses to “smoke weed.”

Yes? You said “yes”? Smooth move. There’s a reason the officer asked for your consent, jack. You could have said “no.”  The charges? … “drug equipment possession and marijuana possession.”

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

So do you think someone can get jail time for watching a cartoon? Would it make any difference if the cartoons were sexual? Decide for yourself, after reading this from stuff.co.nz:

Ronald Clark downloaded the Japanese anime cartoons three years ago, setting in train events that would see him in court in Auckland and jailed for three months for possessing objectionable material, and sparking debate as to what harm is caused by digitally created pornography.

That’s a yes. Perhaps a little background will assist you, perhaps not.

Clark has previous convictions for indecently assaulting a teenage boy and has been through rehabilitation programmes, but the video nasties he was watching in this case were all cartoons and drawings. He says the videos came from an established tradition of Japanese manga and hentai (cartoon pornography), a massive, mainstream industry in that country.

They weren’t even depictions of people – Clark’s lawyer Roger Bowden described them as “pixies and trolls” that “you knew at a glance weren’t human”. Bowden said the conviction for possessing objectionable material was “the law gone mad”.

However, while the cartoon characters were elves and pixies, they were also clearly young elves and pixies, which led to concerns the images were linked to child sexual abuse.

So what do you think? If you’re uncertain, you can read more (a fair amount) here.

Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Updated: