Articles Posted in F-bomb

Squeezed on:

judge%20mad%20angry%20irate%20contempt%20mean%20upset.jpg

After getting sentenced to 10 years for robbery, like Mr. Taylor, I’m sure you wouldn’t be in the best mood either. Still, you better be prepared to pay the price if you lay into the judge, as Mr. Taylor did. Here are excerpts from the decision by the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division:

Defendant appeals from his conviction for second-degree robbery … his sentence on that charge, and the imposition of two consecutive six-month sentences for contempt …

Did someone say “contempt”?

When the court asked defendant if he understood his appeal rights, defendant responded by stating, “Yeah, I understand that you all railroaded the shit out of me. That’s what I understand.”

Uh-oh.

Although his attorney attempted to calm him down and the court attempted to resume asking him if he understood his right to appeal, defendant persisted in confrontational behavior, stating, “you’re all — so full of shit.” The court warned defendant that he would impose an additional six months for contempt of court. Defendant was defiant, stating, “Add six. What the fuck I care now.”

This reminds The Juice of a truly classic, early Juice post …

The court warned defendant again about imposing six months for contempt. Defendant replied, and repeated, “Fuck contempt of court.” Both his attorney and a court officer attempted to calm defendant down. The court said, “I’m going to give you one opportunity —” but defendant interrupted, “Give me — give me — don’t give me shit, mother fucker. Do what the fuck you’ve been doing to every black mother fucker that come in this courtroom.”

Defendant continued to interrupt the court, repeating, “Fuck you” three times, calling the judge a “crazy ass mother fucker,” telling him, “Eat shit and bark at the moon, sorry son of a bitch.” When the judge said he was going to place on the record his reasons for imposing an additional six month sentence, defendant interrupted again, stating “[i]s that all you’re going to put on it, the six months?” He continued to interrupt and taunt the court, saying, “Keep adding six months then” and “well shut the fuck up and do . . . what you’re going to do.”

Yikes.

The court proceeded to set forth the acts it deemed contumacious as the basis for imposing an additional sentence of six months. Defendant continued to interrupt. The court noted further that this exchange occurred in a courtroom filled with fifty people.

After the court ordered defendant to be remanded, defendant replied, “Fuck you, bitch” and then stated “Suck my ass, you cracker bitch.” The court had him returned to counsel table and imposed an additional six months for contempt, to be served consecutive to the prior sentences. After remanding defendant once again, the court noted that defendant “held up his left hand with the middle finger extended in a gesture[.]“

So how do you think the appellate court ruled? Affirmed. The case is STATE v. TAYLOR, No. A-3326-09T2, Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. (August 24, 2011). You can read the opinion on Leagle here.

Squeezed on:

pulling%20tooth%20out%20with%20pliers.jpg

Your home is your castle, right? And your garage too? Not always, as this Florida man found out. As reported by tcpalm.com:

Port St. Lucie police on Sunday went to Francisco Rojas’ home after his wife told 911 dispatchers her 49-year-old husband was “drunk and in the garage trying to pull his tooth out with a pair of pliers, and she needs the police to respond.”

Yeow!

Three officers made contact with Rojas. “We observed him attempting to extract his tooth and there was vomit on the floor from his attempts,” an affidavit states.

Rojas’ wife lifted the garage door at an officer’s request to dispel the barf smell.

Asked what was troubling him, Rojas started cursing and was asked to calm down. “This is my [fucking] house, I can say and do whatever the [fuck] I want,” an affidavit states. “I’m [fucking] drunk and you can’t do nothing about it.” [expletives reinserted] 

Another officer asked Rojas to calm down, but he’s accused of more yelling and cursing that “affected the public decency as well as the peace and quiet of the children playing in the neighborhood.”

Rojas, of the 1000 block of Southwest Firestone Avenue in Port St. Lucie, was arrested on a breach of peace charge.

Breach of peace? Wasn’t the guy quietly trying to pull out his tooth (and puking) before the police came and stirred things up? Ay ay ay. Here’s the source, including the charging papers.
 
 

Squeezed on:

f-bomb%20fuck%20fing%20f-word%20f%20word.jpg

It’s not uncommon for police officers to charge people who flip them off. When those people fight the charges, they win. But what about f-bombing a police officer? Well, that depends, as an Ohio woman recently found out. As reported in The Knoxville News Sentinel:

Dorthea Frazier’s son Cody was arrested by Akron police after a brief car chase. Dorthea Frazier yelled at the arresting officers: “What the f[uck] are you arresting my son for? What are you doing?” She then yelled at a lieutenant: “You f[uck]ing crooked a– cop” and “You’re a b[astard?].” [uncensored by The Juice].

The lieutenant apparently ordered her to desist from further yelling, but Frazier persisted. Officers on the scene testified that her cursing drew a growing crowd and presented a possibly dangerous situation.

Officers charged her with resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. In the course of her arrest, she suffered a broken arm.

Her defense, of course, was the First Amendment. The result?

A jury found her guilty of disorderly conduct. During that trial, she requested a jury instruction on freedom of speech that read in part:

“In the event that you find that the Defendant’s conduct was Constitutionally protected free speech, then you must find the defendant not guilty. A person cannot be convicted of disorderly conduct based on the words the person has spoken because such speech is constitutionally protected unless the defendant’s words rise to the level of fighting words.

“A person cannot be convicted of disorderly conduct by the use of words because the First Amendment protects a significant amount of verbal criticism and challenge directed at police officers.”

The Judge refused the request. Ms Frazier appealed and … lost. You can read a lot more here.

Squeezed on:

f-bomb%20fuck%20fing%20f-word%20f%20word.jpg

Well … yes, and no. Okay, maybe. According to the Court’s latest ruling, yes. According to some prior rulings, no. Read on, from ANSA.it:

It is OK to say ”Who the f*** do you think you are?” to a boss as an ”instinctive” reaction to being reprimanded, Italy’s highest court said Thursday.

The expression was ”disrespectful but not threatening” and was not the sort of ”full-blown insubordination” that might justify a sacking, the Cassation Court said.

The court’s ruling, which sets precedents, came in the case of a Naples rest home assistant who was fired when he blew his top after his boss scolded him for breaking plates. The supreme court first OK’d the F-word two years ago, earning world headlines, but has since flip-flopped on the issue.

In July 2007, in its landmark ruling, the court cleared an Abruzzo town councillor who told the mayor to ”f*** off” during a stormy town meeting because the expression was now ”common usage”.

But it changed tack a few months later by ruling bosses couldn’t say employees were ”doing f***-all”.

A similar case last May saw the court take another view, saying mayors could use the word to swear at contractors.

But last July it said bosses must not swear at their staff in a case where a Sicilian company director accused an employee of not understanding ”a f***ing thing”.

Make up your mind already!

Squeezed on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWzqwvhF_N8

If you’re short on time, skip a bunch of the f-bombs and go to the 2:13 mark. The guy’s reaction upon learning the amount of the ticket is something to behold. And you won’t find a cooler cop – anywhere. Of course, that just makes the guy angrier.

Squeezed on:

f-bomb%20fuck%20fing%20f-word%20f%20word%20bomb.jpg

Can you just imagine how much money a college could take in if it could collect $25 from students for public cursing (and $50 for a second offense)? My guess is … a lot. And yes, there really is a college that has such a policy on the books. That school is Hinds Community College in Mississippi. The fines can be doled out for “public profanity, cursing and vulgarity” as reported at www.insidehighered.com. Here’s the skinny on the alleged f-bomber:

And the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has taken up the case of a student who faced charges following an incident in which — after class, but in the presence of an instructor — he said that a grade he had just received was “going to fuck up my entire G.P.A.” The instructor first threatened to place the student in detention and when the student pointed out (correctly) that the college doesn’t have detention, the “flagrant disrespect” charges were made.

Detention? Hilarious. Why not a “time out” for the young man? Regular Juice readers know that this policy is going down. See, there’s this document out there called the Constitution (note to school: See Amendment 1). You can read more – a lot – here.

—–
EXTENDED BODY:

—–

Posted in: F-bomb
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

f%20bomb%20f-bomb%20ball%20fuse.png

Oh no you didn’t just drop the f-bomb in court, Lord Justice Nicholas Wall. He did, to make a point. As reported by the Sun:

Lord Justice Nicholas Wall used the words of English poet Philip Larkin to stress the devastating impact on children when couples keep warring after they split up.

The Appeal Court judge, dealing with a residence order, said he hoped he would give the mother and father a fright because they had both come “within a whisker” of losing their nine-year-old son.

As he ruled the boy could live with the mother, he said the parents had harmed him by their “ongoing mutual dislike and recriminations” for each other following the break-up.

The judge issued a statement overturning a decision by Luton County Court, Beds, at which custody of the boy had been given to his maternal grandparents.

So what about the f-bomb? “Quoting poet Larkin’s 1971 work This Be The Verse, he said:

“They f[uck] you up, your mum and dad. They may not mean to, but they do.

“They fill you with the faults they had, and add some extra, just for you.”

Why the f-bomb?

He said: “These four lines give a clear warning to parents.”

Let’s hope so. They’ve certainly put Lord Wall on the map. Here’s the source.

Squeezed on:

f-bomb%20fuck%20fing%20f-word%20f%20word.jpg

Yes, and no. Okay, maybe. According to the Court’s latest ruling, yes. According to some prior rulings, no. Read on, from ANSA.it:

It is OK to say ”Who the f*** do you think you are?” to a boss as an ”instinctive” reaction to being reprimanded, Italy’s highest court said Thursday.

The expression was ”disrespectful but not threatening” and was not the sort of ”full-blown insubordination” that might justify a sacking, the Cassation Court said.

The court’s ruling, which sets precedents, came in the case of a Naples rest home assistant who was fired when he blew his top after his boss scolded him for breaking plates. The supreme court first OK’d the F-word two years ago, earning world headlines, but has since flip-flopped on the issue.

In July 2007, in its landmark ruling, the court cleared an Abruzzo town councillor who told the mayor to ”f*** off” during a stormy town meeting because the expression was now ”common usage”.

But it changed tack a few months later by ruling bosses couldn’t say employees were ”doing f***-all”.

A similar case last May saw the court take another view, saying mayors could use the word to swear at contractors.

But last July it said bosses must not swear at their staff in a case where a Sicilian company director accused an employee of not understanding ”a f***ing thing”.

Posted in: F-bomb
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

f-bomb%20funny%20fuck.jpg

Is it criminal to be incredibly rude and demeaning? If so, then this New Yorker dining out in Galveston, Texas is surely guilty. Here’s what happened, as reported in The Galveston County Daily News:

A Galveston officer was enjoying an early dinner at 4:15 p.m. Monday at Salsa’s Mexican and Seafood Restaurant, 4604 Seawall Blvd., when he overheard a conversation between a man and a woman, said Lt. D.J. Alvarez, a Galveston Police Department spokesman.

“The man said to the female, ‘I can’t believe you’re so f—— stupid,’” Alvarez said, who was reading from a police report of the incident made public Tuesday. “‘What the f— were you thinking?’”

Like I said, demeaning and rude, but criminal?

“The manager was offended by the curse words,” Alvarez said. “And the man was arrested when the manager came forward to complain about the breach of peace.”

The man was charged with a misdemeanor count of disorderly conduct, Alvarez said.

I haven’t been to Galveston, but I’m guessing that, like probably everywhere else on earth, there are more pressing problems than 2 f-bombs dropped in a restaurant. (Judge Juice says: Unidentified f-bomber, two hours with Miss Manners [Noooooooooooo!!!!!]; Lt. Alvarez, fight some real crime.)

Posted in: F-bomb
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

F-Bomb%20fuck%20you%20off.png

So the police respond to a call regarding a gas station burglary. At the scene, they see old Bullock trying to hide. When told to halt, he runs – and crashes through a plate glass window. He was caught and taken to the hospital. When the cuffs were removed, and put on with his hands in front of him so he could be treated, he ran again! He was caught again, charged with unauthorized entry and simple escape, and convicted on both counts. As a multiple offender, Bullock was sentenced to 17 years at hard labor. (Shazam!) You can imagine this did not sit real well with him. Per the Court, “After the trial judge granted an oral motion for appeal and the appellate counsel was appointed, the following dialogue occurred between the trial judge and defendant:

THE DEFENDANT: Fuck you.
THE COURT: Back here.
THE DEFENDANT: Fuck you.
THE COURT: Back here, padner [sic]. Let the record reflect the defendant just told the Court twice “fuck you.”
THE DEFENDANT: Fuck you, asshole.
THE COURT: No, you, Mr. Bullock.
THE COURT: Three counts in direct contempt of court consecutive, 18 months. Do you want to go for two years?
THE DEFENDANT: Fuck you.
THE COURT: Two years direct contempt.
THE DEFENDANT: Fuck you, asshole.
THE COURT: Two years, six months.
THE DEFENDANT: Fuck you.
THE COURT: Three years consecutive contempt.
THE DEFENDANT: Fuck you, asshole.
THE COURT: Three [**13] and a half years, Mr. Bullock. Three years, six months, direct contempt of court consecutive to the 17 years the Court just gave him.
MR. JOHNSON [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Just for the record, note an objection.
THE COURT: That will be noted also. Let’s go on the record as to James Bullock, so the Court of Appeals [sic] will know what happened. Mr. Bullock twice screamed “fuck you” to the Court after the Court had sentenced him. The Court found both to be in direct contempt and told the sheriff to escort him out of the courtroom. Mr. Bullock continued the entire way being escorted out of the courtroom, even after he was out of the courtroom before the sheriff’s [sic] could [*458] put him in a holding cell, continued to scream “fuck you” at the Court. The Court finds that each time he did this to be in direct contempt. It is six months on each one consecutive to the 17-year sentence the Court had just give [sic] him on the other charges.

Damn! Three and a half more years for that? Old Bullock appealed. What do you think the Supreme Court of Louisiana did?

Continue reading →