Squeezed on:


You can never be sure how someone is going to handle being insulted. No doubt this gent’s insulting days are over. As reported in The Daily Herald (Everett, Washington), according to court papers:

[Dallas Amber] Smith [18] and others were gathered at her ex-boyfriend’s home south of Monroe, watching a movie and drinking.

She boasted to party-goers that she was good at doing back flips and that she could do one off anything, court papers said.

A man, 19, challenged her to do a flip off the deck. Smith took off her shoes and attempted the maneuver. She couldn’t do it. That’s when the man laughed at her and told her that her feet smelled, [deputy prosecutor] Albert wrote.

Smith started to playfully wrestle with the man, rubbing her socks in his face. She started hitting him. After several seconds, he pushed her away, Albert wrote.

It’s a little weird, right? Check this out.

She grabbed her coat, picked up a steak knife and headed for the door. On the way, Smith walked up to the man and stabbed him in the back, court papers said.

The man and others called 911. A sheriff’s deputy found the man sitting on porch with the knife sticking out of his back, the blade buried a few inches in. His lung had collapsed from the stabbing.

Sticking out of his back! Someone is a wee bit oversensitive. The prognosis?

The man is expected to recover from the injury.

Whew. What did Ms. Smith have to say for her feet … er, herself?

Police arrested Smith at her parents’ home. She denied knowing about any stabbing and declined to speak with investigators.

Perhaps it’s a little late for the denial …

A witness told police that Smith came to his house that night and told him that she had hurt someone and she was in trouble. She told him someone had taunted her.

Doh! Here’s the source.

Squeezed on:


You may be wondering: “Can you break that?” Unfortunately for Mr. Doe, the answer is “yes.” And yes, it gave rise (sorry) to a lawsuit. The case, out of Massachusetts, is John Doe v. Mary Doe.

Facts. The summary judgment record, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, Coveney v. President & Trustees of the College of the Holy Cross, 388 Mass. 16 , 17 (1983), establishes the following facts. The plaintiff and the defendant were in a long-term committed relationship. Early in the morning of September 24, 1994, they were engaged in consensual sexual intercourse. The plaintiff was lying on his back while the defendant was on top of him. The defendant’s body was secured in this position by the interlocking of her legs and the plaintiff’s legs. At some point, the defendant unilaterally decided to unlock her legs and place her feet on either side of the plaintiff’s abdomen for the purpose of increasing her stimulation. When the defendant changed her position, she did not think about the possibility of injury to the plaintiff. Shortly after taking this new position, the defendant landed awkwardly on the plaintiff, thereby causing him to suffer a penile fracture.

Yeowwwwwwwwwwww! So, did Mr. Doe make the case that Ms. Doe negligently broke his, well, you know? Nope. You can read the opinion here.

Squeezed on:

LSU%20tigers%20funny%20football%20picture%20sign.jpg No doubt regular Juice readers remember this “Motion for Continuance.” This one is not quite as funny (the bar is now pretty high), but it’s still Juiceworthy. In the Louisiana case of Harrell v. Spencer, et al., defense counsel filed, I shit you not, an “Unopposed Motion To Continue Trial Due To Conflict With The LSU Tiger’s National Championship Game.” In his supporting Memorandum, defense counsel states:

All counsel to this matter unequivocally agree that the presence of LSU in the aforementioned contest of pigskin skill unquestionably constitutes good grounds [under the statute – for continuing the trial]. In fact we have been unable through much imagination and hypothetical scenarios to think of a better reason.

What do you think the Judge did with the Motion? Granted. Trial continued to February 11, 2008. Okay, now I have a problem. February 11th is George Washington’s birthday. Really. As Stephen Colbert says, “Look it up.” You can read the Motion, Memorandum and Order here

Squeezed on:


Q: Who has ever even heard of “rabbit phobia”? A: All of Germany, and with the help of The Juice, the entire world! As reported by Spiegel Online:

In Germany, drawing rabbits on the blackboard can land you in court. A schoolteacher has made nationwide headlines by filing a lawsuit against a 16-year-old pupil who allegedly did just that. The girl is also accused of claiming that the teacher had a rabbit phobia…

As school pranks go, drawing rabbits on the blackboard may seem rather tame. But it has triggered a court case in the northern German town of Vechta where an outraged school teacher filed a legal complaint against the alleged offender, a 16-year-old schoolgirl, and accused her of spreading the vicious rumor that she suffered from rabbit phobia.

Marion V., who teaches German and Geography, refuses to say if she is actually afraid of rabbits. But [Juice Exhibit A] when she walked into the classroom and spotted the drawing on the board she burst into tears and fled.

[Juice Exhibit B] She was so furious that she accused one pupil of defamation. The court must decide whether the pupil did indeed hound the teacher, or if the legal action is an overreaction.

In a nutshell:

“The plaintiff, a teacher, teaches the accused pupil at a high school in Vechta and claims the pupil drew rabbits on the blackboard of the classroom and told fellow pupils the teacher was afraid of rabbits and ‘flips out’ when she sees a rabbit,” the court said in a statement.

“The teacher demands that the accused refrains in future from drawing rabbits on the blackboard and claiming that she, the teacher, is afraid of rabbits and flips out at the sight of them.”

Could there really be a legal basis for this case? Well, one is claimed …

The court said the lawsuit refers to the “infringement of general personal rights according to §823 Clause 1 of the Civil Code in conjunction with Article 2 Clause 1 of the Constitution.”

What about the poor girl?

The defendant, named only as Kim, came to court with her mother. Media reports said she looked shy and sheepish during the hearing. She said: “I didn’t draw the rabbit. I know the teacher from my previous school where she also gave lessons. All I did was tell another pupil that she used to run out of the classroom whenever she saw a drawing of a rabbit.”

[Juice Exhibit C] Marion V. has been off work ever since the incident, media reports said. She wants the court to forbid Kim from drawing rabbits and to stop telling other pupils that she suffers from rabbit phobia and goes nuts at the sight of the animals.

Kim’s mother is outraged. “The teacher didn’t talk to me before she filed the complaint. My daughter has had rabbit stress all year because of this. You can’t treat kids like this,” she told reporters after the 30-minute hearing on Tuesday, the second trial day, Bild newspaper reported. The first trial day was on April 27.

Juice Exhibit D …

This is the second time Marion V. has taken a pupil to court for a rabbit offense. The first case in 2008 ended with a settlement in which the pupil concerned agreed to stop claiming that teacher got a fit, started crying, shouting or fleeing the classrom whenever she saw a rabbit or even when she heard the word “rabbit,” the court said in a statement.

And if Kim loses?

Media reports speculate that if Kim is found guilty of drawing the rabbit, she will face a €5,000 [$6,521.50 US] fine if she ever does it again.

Shazam! What do you think the Judge decided?

A German teacher has lost a defamation suit Tuesday in which she claims that a 16-year-old student spread vicious rumors saying that she has a rabbit phobia. The court case, which triggered nationwide headlines, was dismissed on the grounds that the student proved the teacher’s phobia as fact.

Here’s the original story and the post-verdict story.

Squeezed on:


There’s an old saying:”If it seems too good to be true, it is.” There’s another old saying: “There’s an exception to every rule.” Here’s an exception, as reported by Reuters:

Standing in the aptly chosen “Frohsinnstrasse” (“Cheerfulness Street”) in the town of Aschaffenburg, the unnamed pensioner wore a sign around his neck explaining his philanthropy: “I am not unemployed or homeless. I have a wife. I am well. That’s why I’d like to give you a euro.”

A passer-by who feared the pensioner was running a scam alerted police, who were surprised at the man’s explanation that he merely wanted to share his happiness at retiring.

[Note: The passer-by also enjoys hunting golden-egg-laying geese.]

After explaining himself, the pensioner was allowed to continue his generous retirement celebrations, because after all there’s no law against giving away your own money to passing strangers, according to local police.

Really? There’s no law against just giving money away money? Shocking. Here’s the source.

Squeezed on:


The Juice is not privy to the events that led up to this bizarre situation. The Juice is quite curious. As reported by The Express-Times:

According to court records:

Bethlehem police were summoned for a report of a burglary at a home in the 600 block of Pierce Street and arrived to find Andrea Decandia trying to crawl out of a basement window.

Hmmm. Crawling out … Burglary? Scratch that.

Decandia, who was a guest of a person who lives in the home, was found in the basement wearing only a pair of socks. The basement was flooded with several inches of water from a broken pipe, and several other pipes were bent. A circuit box and alarm system box were also opened and had components hanging from them.

Decandia told police he “freaked out” and allegedly caused the damage because he could not find his way out of the basement.

The crime?

Decandia is charged with criminal mischief. He was sent to Northampton County Prison in lieu of $5,000 bail.

Lucy! You got some ‘splainin’ to do!


Squeezed on:

Ebay is proof that there is a market for virtually everything. It is an absolute certainty, though, that you won’t see these being peddled on eBay. As reported by the Kenya Broadcasting Corporation:

Two men who were arrested for engaging in the bizarre trade in genitalia of corpses were Tuesday arraigned in court and charged with harming a dead body.

37 year-old Eliud Mwangi and Paul Kariuki aged 27, were arraigned at Kibera Law courts and charged with harming a dead body of a man by severing its genitals.

Squeezed on:


Seriously, you won’t believe what this man claims he found in his cereal. Warning: DO NOT READ THIS WITHIN ONE HOUR OF EATING. As reported by The Telegraph (Macon, Georgia):

An Upson County man and his wife have filed a federal suit against a grocery store chain and cereal manufacturer, contending that the man found a used tampon in a bowl of cereal.

If you didn’t just about hurl, what is wrong with you?

In the complaint, Thomas and Lynn Roddenberry said they bought a box of Chocolate Chip Crunch cereal from the Save-A-Lot store at 1021 N. U.S. 19 in Thomaston on Oct. 23, 2008.

The following day, Thomas Roddenberry opened the cereal box and poured cereal and milk into a bowl. After taking a bite, Roddenberry said he discovered the tampon in his bowl, according to the suit, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Macon.

Roddenberry said he spit out the milk and cereal and became nauseated almost immediately. He went to an emergency room for treatment, according to the complaint.

The seal for the cereal box and the plastic bag containing the cereal showed no signs of having been broken by anyone previously.

Roddenberry sustained physical injuries “from the adulterated food” as well as emotional worry, according to the lawsuit.

The Roddenberrys are seeking unspecified general and special damages, as well as court costs.

Chon Tomlin, a Save-A-Lot spokesperson, declined to comment Friday, citing pending litigation.

A representative of Ralston Foods, the cereal manufacturer, also declined to comment in a phone message.

Now that is one bizarre, gross case. Here’s the source.

Squeezed on:


Beginning at the beginning – it’s a hunk of metal, plastic and glass.It can be replaced. A brain splattered all over the pavement can’t. From The Orlando Sentinel:

Val Jacques was playing chess at a Christian community center on Central Boulevard in Orlando on Friday afternoon, police say, when he saw a man climb into his sport utility vehicle. He’d left the keys in the ignition.

Jacques tried to open the door to the Mazda SUV, but the man locked it. Police say Jacques climbed on the roof, and the thief hit the gas.

So the dude goes from playing chess to would-be stuntman like that [The Juice just snapped his fingers.]

Minutes later, police say the thief, later identified as Mazzard McMillian, blew through a red light at the intersection of Central Boulevard and Orange Blossom Trail, smashing into a pickup truck and sending Jacques flying.

Had Mr. McMillian seen more movies or tv, he would have simply slammed on the brakes. And to all of you “reading” advocates, you can’t get that stuff in books … As luck would have it:

An Orlando officer who happened to be stopped at the intersection saw the crash, noting in his report that he saw Jacques “in the air and it appeared he was thrown” from the Mazda.

When the officer approached to check on Jacques – who’d travelled about 100 feet from the SUV, he said – McMillian got out of the Mazda and took off.

100 feet? More like “launched” than “thrown.” So was McMillian caught? He was. And if Mr. McMillian was hurt (likely), he was at least in good enough condition to tell the police what happened. To read more, click here.

Posted in:
Squeezed on:
Squeezed on:

Hungry1995.jpg Fifty-year old Jim Nelson had been living in a tent outside a ski resort in British Columbia. After fasting for 60 days to attain spiritual perfection, he bagged it, and went into town. When he reached an upscale home, he threw a rock through the window and made himself at home. In Court, here’s what Mr. Nelson admitted to (in addition to breaking into the house):

He opened the presents looking for chocolates, raided the fridge and cupboards searching for delicacies, pigged out on cups of tea, chili, cream cheese and tortillas. He then puked and defecated in plastic bags before slipping into a stupor and curling up on the floor.

So, guilty right? Wrong! Judge Moss acquitted Mr. Nelson, whose defense was “necessity.” Said the judge:

Your actions were disgusting and foul, certainly so far as the homeowner is concerned. But that kind of action in and of itself presents to me clear evidence that your mind was extremely troubled and that you should not be found guilty. Really! For god’s sake, Jim, at least you could have used the toilet! The B.C. government, following in the footsteps of John “Bluto” Blutarsky, declared “Nothing is over until we decide it is.” Actually, they just appealed and … won. A new trial was ordered. For more on Mr. Nelson, click here.

Posted in:
Squeezed on: