Squeezed on:

By

judge%20mean%20evil%20nasty%20bad.bmp

You be the judge. Over a period of years, Florida Judge Sheldon Schapiro engaged in the following conduct [which he admitted to in a Stipulation submitted to the Court] which is set forth in the Florida Supreme Court’s opinion.

A motorcyclist killed a child and fled the scene. At the bond hearing for the motorcyclist [to determine if he could post bond and leave jail pending trial], the child’s mother was present. The assistant state’s attorney told the Judge that the mother of the victim wanted to address the court. The Judge responded by saying “What do I need to hear from the mother of a [dead] kid for? All she will tell me is to keep the guy in custody and never let him out.” (The Judge says he used the word “deceased,” not “dead.” Sure.)

An assistant state’s attorney, who was 8 months pregnant, was hospitalized due to pregnancy complication on the third day of a trial before Judge Schapiro. Due to the hospitalization, she requested a continuance. HE DENIED IT! Against doctor’s orders, the attorney returned to court to finish trying the case.

That same attorney was arguing a motion to revoke bond [to force someone charged with a crime to post bond or go to jail pending his/her trial] before Judge Schapiro. He “summoned [her] to the backroom behind [his] bench and told her that she needed to emulate the style of male attorneys when addressing the court because male attorneys did not get as emotional about their cases as the female attorneys did.”

As a criminal defense attorney was making an argument in a sexual battery case, you cut him off and said, ‘Do you know what I think of your argument’…at which time you pushed a button on a device that simulated the sound of a commode flushing.

When the Judge thought an attorney was talking, he said “Why do I always have to treat you like a school child?” The attorney responded that the Judge routinely treated everyone in his courtroom like a school child. He was ordered out of the courtroom.

There’s more – but you get the idea. The Florida Supreme Court found that

In violation of Canon 1, Canon 2A, and Canon 3B(4), you have fallen into a general pattern of rude and intemperate behavior by needlessly interjecting yourself into counsel’s examinations of witnesses; embarrassing and belittling counsel in court; and questioning the competence of counsel by making remarks such as, ‘What, are you stupid?”

So what was the Judge’s punishment? Lose his job as a judge?

Continue reading →

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

By

mclovin.jpg

Why would The Juice presume that no celebrities would stay in James City County, Virginia? Because they have a law prohibiting the use of a fake name when registering at a hotel. Here it is:

Sec. 15-38. False registration by guests.

It shall be unlawful for any person to write, or cause to be written, or knowingly permit to be written, in any guest register in any lodging place in the county, any other or different name or designation than the true name of the person registered therein, or the name by which such person is generally known, or to enter false information regarding any vehicle. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

Surely all those law-abiding adulterers give their real names …

Squeezed on:

By

halloween%20pumpkin%20carved%20jack%20o%20lantern.jpg

In Newport News, Virginia, and some other fun-loving locales across the country, it is illegal for anyone over the age of eleven to trick or treat! This is truly one of the dumbest laws The Juice has encountered (and that’s saying something). Here’s the law:

Sec. 28-5. – Prohibited trick or treat activities.

(a) If any person beyond the seventh grade of school or over twelve (12) years of age shall engage in the activity commonly known as “trick or treat” or any other activity of similar character or nature under any name whatsoever, such person shall be guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor. Nothing herein shall be construed as prohibiting any parent, guardian or other responsible person having lawfully in his custody a child twelve (12) years old or younger, from accompanying such child who is playing “trick or treat” for the purpose of caring for, looking after or protecting such child. However, no accompanying parent or guardian shall wear a mask of any type.

(b) If any person shall engage in playing “trick or treat” or any other activity of similar character or nature under any name whatsoever after 8:00 p.m., such person shall be guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor.

Here’s a link to the City of Newport News Code of Ordinances (see Chapter 28).

Squeezed on:

By

<img alt="dentist_patient_nightmare.jpg" src="/files/2013/09/dentist_patient_nightmare-thumb.jpg" width="280" height="376" align = "left" style="margin-right: 7px;" Let’s say you’re in a car crash, and you go to see your dentist. It must be bad because, in one day, the dentist performs SEVEN root canals! Now see if you can guess how many should have been done. NONE!

Oh, and not only were the SEVEN root canals unnecessary, dentists who testified at Dr. Lawrence Ho’s hearing said they were done improperly, and required five additional procedures to repair the damage. And, after the 7-bagger, Ho continued to treat the man, Wayne Chalazan, for four more months, doing additional work, none of which relieved the pain! Did I mention that Ho also pulled 2 teeth without sufficient evidence that it was necessary? What about the dental panel’s finding that Ho overcharged for this butchery? And that he misdiagnosed Mr. Chalazan, and didn’t keep proper records of the tests, treatments or anesthetic he gave him? And that, since this took place in 1999, Mr. Chalazan has continuous pain, and can only eat soft foods?

All this, and the guy gets … a 2-month suspension (plus $102,000 in legal costs and other fees) from The College of Dental Surgeons of Saskatchewan! Absurd. They should have sentenced him to SEVEN root canals, and 2 pulled teeth (plus 4 months of pain and unnecessary treatment). Hopefully Dr. Ho will feel some pain in his wallet. Mr. Chalazan has filed a civil suit seeking at least $100,000.

Continue reading →
By
Posted in: Best Of
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

By

oops%20sign%20street%20road%20funny.jpg

Maybe “Plaxico Burress lite” would be a better description of what transpired in Seattle, Washington, as reported in The Highland Times police blotter:

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.

So how exactly do you set off a bottle rocket in your pants?

By
Posted in: Oops and Wacky
Squeezed on:
Updated:
Squeezed on:

By

argument%20arguing%20argue.jpg
Sure, all families argue. Thankfully, most of them don’t try to resolve their differences the way a few Kashmiri brothers recently did. As reported by the Kashmir Dispatch:

In a bizarre incident, brother-in-laws [?] of a woman on Monday chopped off her finger over a land dispute in Akhnoor tehsil of Jammu.

Yeowwwwwwwww!

Continue reading →
Squeezed on:

By

police%20stop.jpg

If you don’t know when to say when, at least know when to take a cab. As reported by The Murfreesboro Post:

Officers stopped a vehicle driving on the center lane traveling down Maple Street early Saturday morning.

When asked for her license, the woman driving the car handed the officer a credit card.

The driver agreed to attempt a field sobriety test, which she was unable to pass.

She was placed under arrest and informed of her rights and the implied consent law, to which she replied, “No, I am going to call a police officer.”

Okay, if that’s how you want to use your one phone call …

Squeezed on:

By

paper%20stack%20giant%20huge%20big%20large%20climb%20gigantic%20papers.jpg

How long was the Complaint filed by a Vancouver, Washington attorney against GMAC Mortgage, et al.? 465 pages! You probably won’t be surprised to hear that the Defendants filed a Motion for a More Definite Statement (in laymen’s terms, “What?”). Here’s a paragraph from the Complaint. Do you think Judge Leighton granted the Motion?

Plaintiffs, for a Fifty-Fourth Claim for Relief, reallege and incorporate herein Paragraphs 1 through 105, including the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, Twelfth, Thirteenth, Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Sixteenth, Seventeenth, Eighteenth, Nineteenth, Twentieth, Twenty-First, Twenty-Second, Twenty-Third, Twenty-Fourth, Twenty-Fifth, Twenty-Sixth, and Twenty-Seventh Claims for Relief alleged under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970 [“RICO”][Title 18 U.S.C.A. §§1961 et.seq.], and the Twenty-Eighth, Twenty-Ninth, Thirtieth, Thirty-First, Thirty-Second, Thirty- Third, Thirty-Fourth, Thirty-Fifth, Thirty-Sixth, Thirty-Seventh, Thirty-Eighth, Thirty-Ninth, Fortieth, Forty-First, Forty-Second, Forty-Third, Forty-Fourth, Forty-Fifth, Forty-Sixth, Forty-Seventh, Forty-Eighth, Forty-Ninth, Fiftieth, Fifty-First , Fifty-Second, and Fifty-Third Claims for Relief.

Okay, now breath. Judge Leighton granted the Motion, using the following prose:

Plaintiff has a great deal to say,

But it seems he skipped Rule 8(a),

His Complaint is too long,

Which renders it wrong,

Please re-write and re-file today.

Nice. Here’s the Order.

Squeezed on:

By

good%20deeds%20deed%20doing%20do.gif

Back in December, a Costa Mesa, California woman, who was herself going through a rough patch, allowed a woman to sleep in her car. Upon returning to the car, she reports that the sleeping woman had died. So what did she do? Nothing! Here’s what happened, and how the police just discovered the body, as reported by The Orange County Register:

Investigators said the driver of the car had befriended the woman at Mile Square Regional Park and allowed her to sleep in the car overnight in December. That was the last time she saw Signe [a transient woman from the Fountain Valley area] alive, Everett said.

After finding the body inside the four-door vehicle, the woman [who said she was a 57-year-old former real estate agent who at one time lived in a home in Corona del Mar] told investigators she was afraid to report the body to police, and instead decided to continue using the vehicle while the body sat covered in clothes on the passenger’s side.

How was the body discovered?

It wasn’t until Monday that the body was found by police, after receiving a call of a car partially blocking a driveway at the 2000 block of Tustin Avenue.

Officers were able to smell a foul odor coming from the car, and after seeing a leg underneath a pile of clothing on the seat, broke a window to get access inside.

Inside the car, officers also found a box of baking soda that the driver used to try to dissipate the smell.

Could the good samaritan be charged? Maybe.

An autopsy has revealed no obvious signs of foul play, but the cause of death is still unknown, he said. Officers are also looking at whether there were any health code violations due to the fact that the driver was transporting a corpse, he said. The driver has not been cited or arrested.

Click here to read the full story, which includes photos and a video.

Squeezed on:

By

drinking%20drunk%20inebriated%20wasted.gif

It’s axiomatic that the more you drink, the worse your judgment becomes. Hell, some folks can’t even tell their own house from someone else’s. Take this bloke, for example … Per The Northern Territory News:

A woman at home alone was terrified when she heard someone having a shower in her house.

Police later found a red-faced neighbour who was so drunk that he went into the house because he thought it was his own.

Perhaps red-faced, but at least clean …

The man got lost on the way to his house in Katherine on Wednesday night. He walked into the home and took a shower in an attempt to sober up.

The 34-year-old householder was asleep upstairs. She woke up, heard the water running and frantically rang the police.

When officers arrived, they found the 42-year-old sitting on the woman’s verandah – dressed again.

He said “sorry” to the police and woman many times after realizing his mistake. The man was taken into protective custody to sleep off his big night.

“Excuse me, sir. Northern Territory News. So what happened last night?”

The man sobered up yesterday but was too embarrassed to talk to the NT News.

As you might imagine, this has happened before.

A couple once found a man cooking breakfast in their kitchen in the early hours.

And a woman in Darwin’s northern suburbs was watching TV when a drunk strolled in through the front door thinking it was his house. He left when she screamed.

Oops. Here’s the source.