Legal Juice

You live in Pennsylvania, and you just want to pick up a six-pack of beer and be on your way. So you head down to the Sheetz convenience store, which has a license to sell beer. But, under Pennsylvania law, because Sheetz wouldn't allow folks to drink on the premises, they're not allowed to sell beer at all! Say what? Sheetz took this absurd law to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and ... lost. Per The Daily Review: ...

...state law allows stores to sell six-packs only if consumers also may consume beer on the premises.

The Sheetz store in question didn’t want to accommodate beer-drinking in the store, prompting the court to rule that state law then prohibited it from selling beer for takeout.

It all makes sense, right? We want people to drink, then drive, instead of going home and drinking! Brilliant! Here's the source.

Tumid? Seriously, does anyone know what "tumid" means? Some legislators did, because they put it in Section 3303.14 of the Columbus (Ohio) Code:

"Nude" or "state of nudity" means a state of dress or undress that exposes to view: ...

2. Human male genitals in a discernibly tumid state, even with a complete and opaque covering, or

3. A covering or device that when worn, depicts, represents, or simulates human female genitals, human female areolae or nipples, or human male genitals in a discernibly tumid state.

(Emphasis added by the Juice.) As you may have guessed, "tumid" means "erect" or "stiff" or "rigid." Now, was that so hard? (Sorry!)

Seriously, you banned karaoke, Lilburn, Georgia? And it lasted 2 years? I'm guessing those lawmakers must have hated "Footloose." All that dancing and music ... As reported in The Atlanta Journal Constitution:

Sing your hearts out, Lilburn. Now, it’s allowed. Two years after the city put the kibosh on karaoke in an effort to curtail crime, leaders have relaxed their liquor law to permit karaoke and other forms of “interactive” entertainment, including trivia, darts and pool, at restaurants that sell alcohol.

Why the change in tune? [Ouch.] To attract and keep businesses and young adults.

“Lilburn has matured, and we want to keep it vibrant,” said Mayor Diana Preston. “Our focus is keeping our business community strong and that means a diversity of businesses.”

And, she said, Lilburn — which bans bars — wants to accommodate its young adults, who enjoy pub atmospheres.

Lilburn officials had tightened up its alcohol ordinance in 2007 amid controversy over Sports Fan Bar and Grill. The City Council had argued that crime follows bars, and they believed Sports Fan was a bar masquerading as a restaurant.

So leaders clamped down on common bar activities such as karaoke. The action stirred debate, with some accusing Lilburn of closing the tap on good times. Sports Fan shut down last year.

The City Council approved the ordinance revisions Monday night. Lilburn’s liquor laws now compare to Gwinnett County’s.

Thor Johnson, president of the Lilburn Business Association, said the change has been a long time coming. “Chain restaurants will not move into a community like this because restrictions we’ve had in the past,” Johnson said.

But what about crime? Preston said that’s no longer a concern given the number of police officers and the creation of the alcohol review board.

City Clerk Kathy Maner acknowledges that Lilburn officials are “walking a fine line. [Leaders] want to make Lilburn a business-friendly city as well as make sure their citizens are protected.”

Oyster Barn Grill & Bar had pulled its pool tables and video games during the 2007 clamp down. New owner Bob Carmen said he’s indifferent to the revisions and doesn’t plan to add entertainment options. "We frankly found the law to be provincial, but our objective is to be a good popular restaurant,” he said.

I guess, once upon a time (and still? - okay, let me have it, Tremontonians), certain animal behavior was popular in Tremonton, Utah. From the Tremonton City Ordinances:

13-221. Unlawful Acts. It shall be unlawful for any person to ... (4) ... let any male animal to any female animal for the purpose of providing entertainment or viewing to any person.

Zoinks! Here's a link to the Ordinances.

If you're scheduled to work on Sunday in South Carolina, how about this little ditty from the South Carolina Code:

Any employee of any business which operates on Sunday under the provisions of this section has the option of refusing to work in accordance with Section 53-1-100. Any employer who dismisses or demotes an employee because he is a conscientious objector to Sunday work is subject to a civil penalty of treble the damages found by the court or the jury plus court costs and the employee's attorney's fees. The court may order the employer to rehire or reinstate the employee in the same position he was in prior to dismissal or demotion without forfeiture of compensation, rank, or grade.

No doubt invoking this statute will put you on a path straight to the top. Here's a link to the above-cited Code.(Scroll down a bit.)

Sure, it's not a frontal attack on Christmas. Nevertheless, municipalities are chipping away at old St. Nick. As reported by The Telegraph:

[crossing guard] Kevin Simpson has decorated his lollipop [crossing sign] each year for Christmas to spread some festive cheer among the children arriving at Berrywood Primary School in Hedge End, Southampton. But this year, after he placed extra tinsel around the edge of the circular sign, an anonymous member of the public complained to his employers, Hampshire County Council. Despite protests from parents council officers banned father-of-two Mr Simpson from using the tinsel.

Other than being a spineless, anonymous weasel, what kind of person would complain about tinsel? Probably the same kind of folks who were behind these measures:

Westminster council banned Debenhams from playing Christmas carols at its store in Oxford Street, west London, over fears of "noise pollution".

Carol-singing Brownies and Guides were banned from the Marlowes shopping centre in Hemel Hempstead, Herts because of fears the girls would obstruct fire escape routes.

Last month, Wimborne council in Dorset threatened to ban the town's 400-year-old Christmas custom of firing muskets into the sky because of fears the noise would scare children. The custom dating back to the 17th century however was allowed to take place however following publicy outcry.

Plans for Christmas trees in the streets of Llandovery, Carmarthenshire, were also cancelled, after volunteers were told they risked breaking health and safety rules if they climbed ladders to put them up.

What's next, banning Festivus celebrations? Here's the source.

Things are crazy in the Hoosier state, where Ms. Liz Ferris got the vanity plate "BE GODS" nine years ago. Because she let the renewal lapse, she had to reapply. Her application was rejected! Why? Per The Indy Channel:

"We do not permit personalized license plates with references to deity," said BMV [Bureau of Motor Vehicles] spokesman Dennis Rosebrough.

Well, somebody might want to explain to Ms. Ferris (who filed suit after her renewal was rejected) how this makes any sense since the STATE OF INDIANA is issuing license plates that read ...In God We Trust! Yup, and the Indiana Court of Appeals just ruled that the plates are constitutional.

"Er, hello, is Ms. Ferris home? Uh, ma'am, we've reconsidered your renewal application, and you can go ahead and get your "BE GODS" license plates again. How can we do that with our new "no deity" rule? Well, we'll just grandfather you in 'cause you had it before the rule. Everybody okay?" Nope.

Ferris said she intends to move forward with the lawsuit in hopes the policy will be changed.

"You can develop a system that can monitor and … be fair to all parties and yet still allow reference to deity," Ferris said.

Ferris said she isn't seeking monetary damages from the BMV.

You can read more about Ms. Ferris and her case here, and about the "In God We Trust" case here.

How appropriate that I stumbled across this law the same day I saw our first snowflakes here in Washington, DC. Now, imagine - if you can - a law that both Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olbermann would agree goes too far. That law outlaws throwing snowballs! And the offending municipality is ... Grand Forks, North Dakota. Here's the law:

9-0123. Throwing rocks, snowballs, and other objects.

(1) It is unlawful for any person to throw or cast, or encourage, aid or assist others in throwing or casting any rock, stone, snowball, or other object into, upon, against, or at any building, structure, automobile street, alley, or other public or private property.

(2) It is unlawful for any person to throw or cast, or encourage, aid or assist others in throwing or casting any rock, stone, snowball, or other object upon or at any person or persons. (Ord. No. 4125, § XIX, 3-20-06)

They have outlawed snowball fights! And even throwing a snowball at ANYTHING! Absurd.

And what about this: you would also technically be breaking the law if you skipped a stone (or a rock!) in a creek. Check it out:

It is unlawful for any person to throw ... any rock, stone ... into ...any ... public or private property.

Well done! A beautifully crafted law. Click here (click on Chapter IX, and scroll down to 9-0123) to see this wacky law.

Not only is it illegal for men to go topless in Easton, Maryland, it's illegal for "any person." What about babies? What about boys? Here's the law:

Sec. 18-9. Required dress, upper torso, penalty.

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person, whether male or female, to appear upon the streets, sidewalks and highways, or in any public building of the Town of Easton unless he or she is wearing a shirt, blouse or similar article of wearing apparel designed to cover the upper torso of said person.

(b) The penalty for violation of this Section shall be ten (10) days in jail or a fine of not more than One Hundred Dollars
($100.00). (Ord. No. 70,
1 and 2, 6/17/74.)

10 days in jail! Here's a link to the Town Code.

Should spitting really be criminalized? "Yes," said the powers that be in Cincinnati. Here's a law that was passed in 2006 as part of the "Neighborhood Quality of Life Unified Code"

Sec. 1601-27. Spitting in a Public Place.

No person shall spit upon any sidewalk, street, highway, alley, the floor of any bus used for public transportation, theater, railway or public transportation depot or platform or the floor of any school house, church or public building of any kind.

Whoever violates this section is guilty of spitting in a public place, a minor misdemeanor.

Is it ever enforced? At least once, anyway. As reported by kypost.com, a Ms. Davis was busted for "flipping the bird" and spitting on the sidewalk. But that's not why she was put in jail.

Police also found Davis had two outstanding warrants.

Oops.

Outrageous, right? But true. As reported by UPI:

Police in Australia have set what they describe as "very generous limits" for an upcoming auto race [The Bathurst 1000]

The limit?

... no more than a case of beer a day for adults.

Holy shiznit. You know Aussie's like their beer if a case a day is a "limit." For me, it would mean death by alcohol poisoning. And if you're not a beer drinker:

Racing fans who do not like full-strength beer have other choices. They can bring in 36 cans of beer with alcohol content of 3.5 percent or less, a case of pre-mixed cocktails or up to 4 liters (about 8 quarts) of wine.

Zoinks. That is a lot of booze!

Power corrupts, and absolute power ... So maybe Italian mayors don't have "absolute" power, but they recently obtained additional authority to enact new laws. Here are a few of them, as reported by Reuters:

In Eraclea, near Venice, building sandcastles is now illegal

In Capri, it is illegal to leave the beach area wearing a bikini.

In Forte dei Marmi, you may not cut your grass on the weekend.

In Eboli, you can be fined 500 euros (about $745 US) for public displays of affection in a car.

And in Novara, while 2 people can hang out in the park at night, 3 people hanging out is illegal.

How about this one?

Rodrigo Piccoli, 33, called national radio to protest after he was fined 50 euros for lying down in a park in the northern city of Vicenza to read a book. The mayor has since promised to drop the ban.

Buono idea , Signore Sindaco. (Good idea, Mr. Mayor.)

Though it certainly wouldn't be the case, I guess not many legislators are eager to appear to be in favor of sodomy, flag-burning, cohabitation, or unmarried couples having sex. That's probably why, per the Virginian-Pilot:

The state code [still] declares it illegal for unmarried couples to have sex. Cohabitation, sodomy and flag-burning are still outlawed in the Old Dominion. And don't even think about unloading or loading oysters from a boat on Sunday. Tobacco warehouses must keep the Sabbath holy, too, although legislators have recently acquired enlightenment about Sunday sales at state-owned liquor stores in large cities.

You can read more here.

These laws are from the Code of Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana:

Sec. 19-12. Silly String sales restrictions.

... (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell any silly string, or its equivalent as defined herein, within three hundred (300) feet of any parade route within the parish on any day a parade is scheduled.

Sec. 19-13. Public nudity prohibited.

(a) A person physically present in a public place, who: ...

(2) Appears in a state of nudity; commits public nudity and shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. ...

(b) "Nudity" means the showing of the .. cleft of the buttocks, vulva ...

Here's a link to the Code. (The picture refers to another Louisiana law. The menace that is Silly String ...)

It's true. Starting in July, Dutch folks will not be allowed to smoke cigarettes in bars, restaurants and cafes, including in the coffee shops famous for selling soft drugs. But, and this is a big "but," smoking marijuana or hashish will still be legal! You can read more in this Spiegel Online article.

... party balloons! The California Senate passed a bill banning helium-filled, metallic party balloons. Why? Per the AP,

Utility company officials blame fly-away balloons for shorting out power lines and causing hundreds of blackouts in recent years.

Don't worry yet, kids. It still has to make it through the state Assembly, and of course, the Terminator. Here's the AP story (the second one down).

In addition to a few previously noted wacky British laws, as reported in The Daily Mirror, here are a few more that are still on the books:

A law enacted by George I states that: "The severest penaltys will be suffered by any commoner who doth permit his animal to have carnal knowledge of a pet of the Royal house."

In York, it is still legal to murder a Scotsman within the city's ancient walls, but only if he is carrying a bow and arrow.

In a law passed in 1837, women are allowed to bite off a man's nose if he kisses her against her will.

A law enacted by Edward VI states that anyone found breaking a boiled egg at the sharp end will be sentenced to 24 hours in the village stocks.

It is illegal to stand within one hundred yards of the reigning monarch when not wearing socks.

A motorist who feels compelled to urinate in public can do so only if he aims for his rear wheel and keeps his right hand on his vehicle.

To read more, click here.

Perhaps that's the reason Tennessee House Republican Leader Jason Mumpower did what he did. As reported in the Nashville Scene:

Tennessee is the only state in nation with a law preventing sex-change recipients from retroactively revising the sex designation on their birth certificates to correspond with their new gender identity. The law makes it difficult for those who have undergone such surgical changes to get driver’s licenses and other documentation, because obtaining such critical documents invariably requires a birth certificate.

So a bunch of Democrats put together a bill to bring Tennessee in line with EVERY OTHER STATE. Mr. Mumpower would have none of this. How did he kill the bill?

Mumpower attached an amendment that would have essentially created a new category of sex.

Really? Go on.

“A birth certificate can be amended with the designation MTF,” Mumpower tells the Scene, “designating male to female, or FTM designating female to male.”

I wonder if he considers himself a "compassionate conservative?" Here's the source (scroll down).

They can run for president. Of the United States. No shit. All you have to do is pay a $1,000 fee and you're on the ballot. That's just what Keith Russell Judd, a felon who is locked up in federal prison until 2013, did. You can read more (just a little bit) in this Idaho Mountain Express article.

Per a report in Reuters India:

Singapore bans sex between men and any man found to have committed an act of "gross indecency" with another man could be jailed for up to two years. There is no legislation on sex between women.

Okay, so this authoritarian country would allow a commercial showing women kissing? No way. A cable operator was fined for

airing a commercial for a song that featured "romanticised scenes" of lesbians kissing and portrayed the relationship as "acceptable".

Please explain.

"This is in breach of the TV advertising guidelines, which disallows advertisements that condone homosexuality," the media authority said.

Now it all makes sense? Here's the source. And here's an article on Singapore's "law and order" society" that puts this in context.

In Kansas (and probably lots of other states), absolutely. By law, the Bible reins supreme, and stands alone. Here's the text of Kansas statute 19-1906:

Bibles for prisoners; ministers to have access to jail. The sheriff of each county shall provide at the expense of the county for each prisoner under his charge, who may be able and desirous to read a copy of the Bible or New Testament, to be used by such prisoner at proper seasons during his confinement; and any minister of the gospel desiring to aid in reforming the prisoners and instructing them in their moral and religious duties, shall have access to them at seasonable and proper times.

Now I've got nothing against the Bible (or the New Testament), but providing it as a basic right? But what about, say, the Old Testament, the Qur'an (Koran), the Talmud, Vedas (Hinduism), the Tripitaka (Buddhism), the Book of Mormon (I'm being open-minded), Dianetics (I'm being very open-minded. I think they're nuts, but our government accepts them as a religion.) And don't forget about the right to access to "any minister of the gospel ... at seasonable and proper times." Here's a link to the Kansas statute.

Have they not seen "Footloose," one of the best Kevin Bacon movies of all time? People, you can't stop dancing, as Kevin Bacon proved beyond any reasonable doubt. So who dares to question the lessons of "Footloose?" The Indian State of Andhra Pradesh, that's who. Why? To stop obscene dancing. This is sounding very familiar... Just swap preacher John Lithgow for Home Minister K. Jana Reddy.

What does the new law do? It bans "dancing in clubs, bars and pubs." Not to worry though. Per Mr. Reddy, "orchestra and singing accompanied by eating and drinking, however, [is] permitted at these places if the managements obtained amusement licences."

Look, I've seen "Footloose" several times (please, don't tell anyone), so let me tell you how this is going to end. The leaders will realize that dancing is not really a problem, and Kevin Bacon will dance off into the Andhra Pradesh sunset. (You can read a little more here.)

Talk about weird laws. In the state of Utah - I shit you not - it is illegal to have a keg party! Section 32A-12-206 - Unlawful sale or supply of beer - provides as follows:

(1) A person may not sell, offer to sell, or otherwise furnish or supply beer to the general public in containers larger than two liters. This does not preclude licensed beer wholesalers from selling, offering to sell, or otherwise furnishing or supplying beer in containers larger than two liters to beer retailers authorized by this title to dispense beer on draft for consumption on the beer retailer's licensed premises.

(2) A person may not purchase or possess beer in containers larger than two liters unless the person is a beer retailer authorized by this title to dispense beer on draft for consumption on the beer retailer's licensed premises.

Two liters! That's exactly 67.6280451 ounces - less than a six-pack-worth of beer! People, rise up!

So when Timothy Joseph Boomer, then a 28-year-old engineer, fell into the Rifle River in Michigan, he let fly a bunch of curse words. No problem, except for (1) a law that makes it illegal to use vulgar language in front of women and children, and (2) the presence of a woman and 2 children. Incredibly, a deputy heard him and charged him with violating the 105-year-old law. What do you think happened?

The trial judge said the ban on cursing in front of women was uncontitutional, but not the ban on cursing in front of children! The appeals court chucked the whole law, reasoning that

"This ... would require every person who speaks audibly where children are present to guess what a law enforcement officer might consider too indecent, immoral, or vulgar for a child's ears."

The case is Michigan v. Boomer, 655 N.W.2d 255 (Mich. App. 2002).

From a BBC article, here are some crazy British laws that were never repealed:

It is illegal to die in the Houses of Parliament

It could be regarded an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the British king or queen's image upside-down.

Eating mince pies on Christmas Day is banned.

In the UK, a pregnant woman can legally relieve herself anywhere she wants.

The head of any dead whale found on the British coast automatically becomes the property of the King, and the tail of the Queen.

It is illegal not to tell the tax man anything you do not want him to know, but legal not to tell him information you do not mind him knowing.

It is illegal to enter the Houses of Parliament wearing a suit of armour.

Absobloodylootely barmy! To read the rest of the article, click here.

Japanese law forbids the importing of photographs showing male genitals. Why would I know this? No, not because of a recent trip to Japan. Because, returning home from a trip abroad, Japanese publisher Takashi Asai was carrying a book of Mapplethorpe photos that he published in Japan in 1994. Under Japanese law, imported genital photos are illegal. So how did he make the book in the first place? When he brought the negatives in years ago, customs did not check them.

Mr. Asai is challenging the ban. Although he lost in the lower court, he is confident that the Supreme Court will rule in his favor. To see some of Maplethorpe's work, click here.

After 10 years of marriage, some couples need to try something to reignite their passion. But this? Arthur Friedman told his wife that he wanted to watch her have sex with other men and women. So she did, and decided to go German - German Blinov, that is, one of the people involved in this hoped-for marital jumpstart. The feeling was mutual. Blinov, who was also married, divorced his wife. Natalie Friedman kicked Arthur to the curb.

"As you sew, so shall you reap" is only partly true here, because Arthur turned around and sued Blinov for alienation of affection, claiming that he caused the Friedman marriage to end! Scary thing is, the jury bought it. The judge then awarded Arthur the perfectly logical sum of $4,802 (huh?). Seeking revenge, finding humiliation. To read more, click here.

4real. Yes, for real. Pat and Sheena Wheaton named their son "4real." Only one problem - in New Zealand all children must be registered with the government within two months of their birth. When the Wheaton's registered 4real, it was rejected because names beginning with numbers are against the rules! But wait - the government is in negotiations with the Wheatons. Said Registrar-General Brian Clarke:

The name has not at this stage been rejected. We are currently in discussions with the parents ... to clarify the situation.

Should negotiations fail, 4real Wheaton will go in the books as "Real Wheaton." For real. (You can read more about this here.)

If you like to wear your pants on the low side, you might want to bypass Delcambre, Louisiana. The town council just approved an ordinance that will outlaw pants that reveal undergarments or certain parts of the body (I'm guessing one of them is two words, with the second one being "crack."). And what does the Mayor think of this ordinance, which will punish offenders with up to 6 months in jail and a $500 fine? She's going to sign it into law. Said Mayor Carol Broussard:

It's gotten way out of hand out here ... Just wear it properly. Cover your vital parts. I mean, if you expose your private parts, you'll get a fine. If you walk up and your pants drop, you get a fine. They're better off taking the pants off and just wearing a dress.

Fine, fine, fine. We get the idea!

You bet (while you still can!) Better get down to Louisana and catch a cockfight before it's too late. It's the only state that still allows cockfighting, but not for long.
The Louisana House and Senate have both approved of the repeal of a section of state law that declares chickens are not subject to the state's cruelty-to-animals laws.

All of these laws are on the books. Click on the statute and see for yourself.

No tattoos? Yup, no tattoos!

It shall be unlawful for any person to tattoo or offer to tattoo any person. As used herein to "tattoo" means to insert pigment under the surface of the skin of a human being, by pricking with a needle or otherwise, so as to produce a permanent indelible mark or figure visible on the skin. Provided, however, that the provisions hereof shall not apply to any act of a licensed practitioner of the healing arts performed in the course of his practice. §21-841

I'm in trouble with this next one:

Profane swearing consists in any use of the name of God, or Jesus Christ, or the Holy Ghost, either in imprecating divine vengeance upon the utterer, or any other person, or in light, trifling or irreverent speech. §21-904

No "holy shit?" No "damn you to hell?" No "sweet Mary, mother of God?" What about "holy crap?" Not to worry too much, though. The penalty:

Every person guilty of profane swearing is punishable by a fine of One Dollar ($1.00) for each offense. §21-905

Kids, watch your butts because:

... nothing contained in this Act shall prohibit any parent, teacher or other person from using ordinary force as a means of discipline, including but not limited to spanking, switching or paddling. §21-844

Damn, switching or paddling? Well, at least the fraternities have one less thing to worry about.

Again with the duels!

Any person guilty of fighting any duel, although no death or wound ensues, shall be guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in the State Penitentiary not exceeding ten (10) years. §21-662

Oh no you didn't just try and serve me with those legal papers on Saturday.

Whoever maliciously procures any process in a civil action to be served on Saturday upon any person who keeps Saturday as holy time, and does not labor on that day, or serves upon him any process returnable on that day, or maliciously procures any civil action to which such person is a party to be adjourned to that day for trial, is guilty of a misdemeanor. §21-912

When I drive, if the conditions don't meet to my liking (e.g., there are other cars on the road) I am a fountain of profanity. Words and phrases flow from my mouth that I don't even recognize. And it doesn't matter who is in the car. That is why I wouldn't last long in Oklahoma. Here's the law:

§21-906. If any person shall utter or speak any obscene or lascivious language or word in any public place, or in the presence of females, or in the presence of children under ten (10) years of age, he shall be liable to a fine of not more than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), or imprisonment for not more than thirty (30) days, or both.

Are you shitting me? I can't even cuss in front of my wife? One trip through town and I wouldn't see my kids 'til I'm a grandpappy. You can read the statute here.

Is this justice? In 1987, Jimmy Lee Page was on trial in Austin, Texas for murder. A jury acquitted him (with several of them even shaking his hand.) Yet Page is still in jail for that very same murder. Back in 1975, Page was convicted of killing his friend (according to Page, he and his friend were shooting beer cans when Page accidentally grazed his friend's thigh, then continued shooting when his friend tried to retaliate) and sentenced to life in jail. He was paroled in 1986. So how can he still be in jail for a crime he didn't commit?

According to the parole board, he did commit the crime. They heard from only one witness, a police detective. Amazingly, that's all it takes. Despite having been acquitted by the jury, Mr. Page has been in jail ever since for committing that very same crime. Last year, 91 other parolees in Texas met the same fate. After either being acquitted in court or having the charges dropped, they were returned to jail anyway.

As for Mr. Page, who has been denied parole 12 times: "It can just go on for the next 20 years. It's been hard. It's not the time. Doing time for no reason — that's hard."

Only in Montana (really - it's the only state that allows it.) A couple can get married without either of them attending! It's called a double-proxy wedding. Per Montana Code Section 40-1-301:

If a party to a marriage is unable to be present at the solemnization, he may authorize in writing a third person to act as his proxy. If the person solemnizing the marriage is satisfied that the absent party is unable to be present and has consented to the marriage, he may solemnize the marriage by proxy.

Only one problem with the law - folks from around the world are using it. Because of language issues, it takes the court clerks quite a spell to do the paperwork. So, a bill has been introduced requiring one of these folks to make the trip to Montana. ("Do you, proxy, take this man/woman to be that-person-who-is-paying-you's husband/wife?" "Yes, he/she does." "You may now #%@*#! the bride/groom." It's unclear, as of this writing, exactly what the legal limits are on the proxy's interaction with the bride/groom, post-solemnization.) Maybe Borat shoud have hit a double-proxy wedding in Montana on his way to meet Pamela?

This is just WRONG! Nobody disputes that you paid your taxes ON TIME, and you still get assessed a 10% late fee! Ms. Jansen, of the village of Sleepy Hollow (really) in Westchester County, New York, tried to pay her property tax bill on-line ($6,516.84 for 6 months!) 5 days early. Her payment was rejected because the town requires payment by check, in an envelope postmarked on or before the due date. So the Sleepy Hollow Bank issued a check for the taxes, which was sent 5 days early, and which the village acknowledges it received before the due date. Yet they still hit Ms. Jansen with a 10% late charge, plus a $2 fee! ($653.68)! Guess why?

Because her bank issues checks through Bill Pay, which uses bulk mail, which does not produce a postmark! Surely the Bill Pay log showing that the taxes were timely paid would satisfy the town, right? Wrong. While the Sleepy Hollow tax collector admitted that the law was antiquated, she said that she could not accept a bank log as proof of timely payment!

Oh, and if she doesn't pay the late charge by this Friday, March 30, she'll be hit with another penalty!

So the Idaho Senate decided to pass an "English only" law (Senate Bill 1172). Perhaps they should have looked at their own STATE SEAL that contains the Latin phrase "Esto Perpetua" (which means "let it be perpetual"). Oh, and here is the Idaho Statute that makes "Esto Perpetua" part of the "Great Seal of State."

I propose a new state motto. Instead of "Let it be perpetual," just "Let it be."

So here are the crimes:

67.5. Theft of crawfish

A. Theft of crawfish is the misappropriation or taking of crawfish belonging to another or proceeds derived from the sale of such crawfish, whether done without the consent of the owner to the misappropriation or taking, or by means of fraudulent conduct, practices, or representations, with the intent to deprive the owner permanently of the crawfish, or proceeds derived from the sale of the crawfish.

§93.5. Sexual battery of the infirm

A. Sexual battery of the infirm is the intentional engaging in any of the sexual acts listed in Subsection B with another person, who is not the spouse of the offender, when:
(1) The offender compels the victim, who is physically incapable of preventing the act because of advanced age or physical infirmity, to submit by placing the victim in fear of receiving bodily harm.
(2) The victim is incapable of resisting or of understanding the nature of the act by reason of stupor or abnormal condition of the mind produced by an intoxicating, narcotic, or anesthetic agent administered by or with the privity of the offender. ...
B. For purposes of this Section, "sexual acts" mean the following:
(1) The touching of the anus or genitals of the victim by the offender using any instrumentality or any part of the body of the offender; or
(2) The touching of the anus or genitals of the offender by the victim using any instrumentality or any part of the body of the victim.

§45. Simple kidnapping

A. Simple kidnapping is:
(1) The intentional and forcible seizing and carrying of any person from one place to another without his consent.
(2) The intentional taking, enticing or decoying away, for an unlawful purpose, of any child not his own and under the age of fourteen years, without the consent of its parent or the person charged with its custody.
(3) The intentional taking, enticing or decoying away, without the consent of the proper authority, of any person who has been lawfully committed to any orphan, insane, feeble-minded or other similar institution.

So which crime will get you the most time?

Continue reading "Stealing Crawfish Twice, Kidnapping, Or Sexual Battery Of The Infirm? In Louisiana, Which Will Get You More Jail Time?" »

I sure didn't. I was reading through the Idaho Code (couldn't sleep - and was almost there when I got to the definition of "mayhem")

Every person who unlawfully and maliciously deprives a human being of a member of his body, or disables, disfigures or renders it useless, or cuts out or disables the tongue, puts out an eye, slits the nose, ear or lip, is guilty of mayhem. (Idaho Code, Section 18-5001)

Now wide awake, I read on:

CANNIBALISM DEFINED -- PUNISHMENT. (1) Any person who willfully ingests the flesh or blood of a human being is guilty of cannibalism. (2) It shall be an affirmative defense to a violation of the provisions of this section that the action was taken under extreme life-threatening conditions as the only apparent means of survival. (3) Cannibalism is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison not exceeding fourteen (14) years. (Idaho Code, Section 18-5003).

So, if you're ever in Idaho, (1) watch your back, because someone can legally eat you if the cupboard is bare, (2) don't drink anything red, and (3) if you're not sure what it is, don't eat it!

If your honor has been besmirched, or if someone has 14 items in the "10 items or less" line, and "rock, paper, scissors" just won't do, consider challenging the offender to a duel. If you are in Rhode Island, though, try flipping a coin. DO NOT CHALLENGE YOUR OPPONENT TO A DUEL.

Merely challenging a person to a duel will get you 1-7 years in jail, as will accepting the challenge, whether the duel is fought or not! And don't ask your friend to set it up. That offense is punishable by up to 5 years in jail.

Undeterred, you decide to have the duel anyway, netting you another 1-7 years. Go alone. Anyone who helps you, acts as your second, or comes as your "surgeon," is looking at up to 5 years.

Jail time or not, you will not be denied. So you decide to have the duel in another state. Vengeful? Yes. Stupid? Perhaps. If you have the duel in another state, and injure your equally clever opponent, who then dies in Rhode Island, you have just committed murder! And both seconds are accessories to murder.

True, one guy may be dead. But on the plus side, a score has been settled, and you and the seconds may be off the hook. If you were smart enough to pick a state that does not frown upon dueling (oh, maybe Virginia - one of the 29 states where an ordinary citizen can get a permit to walk around with a concealed handgun) and that state clears you of wrongdoing, you walk baby!

If you are thinking that dueling is outdated, and that you'll just meet your opponent for an old-fashioned, bare-knuckled fight, think again. "Fighting by appointment" is punishable by up to 10 years or $5,000. In Rhode Island anyway, perhaps spontaneity is the best course. In Virginia, North Carolina, Idaho, Ohio, Louisiana, Florida ... where some folks walk around with loaded handguns - perhaps not.

I really don't know where to start with this Maryland law, so here it is:

A person may not sell or offer for sale a contraceptive device, whether or not advertised as a prophylactic, by means of a vending machine or other automatic device at a kindergarten, nursery school ...

So, I guess that means no "condom" slot in the soda machine? How will the teachers cavort safely? Oh Maryland, what have you done? Click here to read the statute.

If you want to be a taxicab driver in King County, Washington (county seat, Seattle), be advised that you cannot wear shorts, sandals, jogging or warm-up suits or sweatshirts or similar attire, or "any similar clothing." Fortunately, raingear is allowed (unless it looks like a warm-up or a sweatshirt?). Unfortunately, you may not wear underwear "as an outer garment." King County Code Section 6.64.680

If you still want to drive a taxicab in Seattle, heed the following: You must wear "suitable clothes," defined as "full-length pants, collared shirts and shoes." (I'm out, since I only wear a collared shirt in Court, or for my website photo.) You must also be "well groomed," which requires "bathing or showering on a normal basis" (Is there a King County "Bathing and Showering Inspector?"). You must have "hair that is neatly trimmed, beards and mustaches [that] are groomed and neatly trimmed at all times in order not to present a ragged appearance, and scalp and facial hair [that] are combed and brushed." Oh, and a poorly groomed taxicab driver involved in an automobile accident will be presumed to be at fault. (Okay, there is no such presumption. But you had no trouble believing it, right?)

Now, if you are STILL interested, make sure you have no convictions for the following crimes or you're out of luck, no matter how well you dress: use of a machine gun in a felony, murder, manslaughter, kidnapping, arson, robbery, and, of course, leading organized crime. King County Code Section 6.64.600. If you are really, really bored, the entire King County, Washington code may be viewed at www.mrsc.org.

This current (as are all laws on the Juice) Alabama law is just flat-out weird. Here it is.

Section 30-1-3 - Issue of incestuous marriages not deemed illegitimate.

The issue of any incestuous marriage, before the same is annulled, shall not be deemed illegitimate.

(Code 1852, §1945; Code 1867, §2334; Code 1876, §2673; Code 1886, §2310; Code 1896, §2840; Code 1907, §4880; Code 1923, §8994; Code 1940, T. 34, §3.)

Here's the link to the Alabama Code.

Just when I was planning to hold the First Annual Cross-Dressing, Pinball Marathon in Big Bear, California, I came across three major legal hurdles on the books of Big Bear.

No person over the age of sixteen years shall by costume, makeup or disguise, impersonate a person of the opposite sex on or in any public street, sidewalk, park or place, except when such costume, makeup or disguise is worn or assumed in participation of some public celebration, holiday, parade or event.

Why oh why would a law like this be necessary? Was there a slate of cross-dressers who nearly took over Big Bear Lake? The good folk of the city must head for the hills on Halloween and International Crossdressers Day (It's January 30th, according to Laura Amato.)

Pinball? In this fair city,

It is unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to keep, maintain, possess or have under control in any place whatever, either as owner, lessee ..., any table game or device commonly known as a 'pinball machine' ... or similar device by whatever name known, the operation, use or play of which is controlled by placing any coin, plate, disk, key or other device, or by the payment of any fee.

And if you dare to defy this ban on the devil's diversion device, the machine will be declared a "nuisance," and "shall be destroyed with its contents by the sheriff..." Of course, "If the machine contains money, such money shall be deposited in the city general fund."

And endurance contests? Forget about it.

It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or association of persons to conduct, carry on, operate or cause or permit to be conducted, carried on or operated, or for any person to participated in any public marathon dance, walkathon, endurathon, speedathon or any such public human endurance dancing or walking contest or exhibition, within the city, outside of municipal operations.

Should you think about flouting this law, a conviction is punishable by imprisonment of up to six months in the county jail. Legend has it that one man convicted under this law protested by staging a dance-in-place-in-your-cell-athon. He was charged with another violation, the cycle continued, and he remains in jail to this day. Click here to see all three laws.