Breast milk, it does a body good

Breastmilk sprayer sentenced for assault

Fantastic headline, isn’t it? You’re intrigued. Alas, you may be disappointed, I know I was.

Stephanie Robinette, 30, was given two years probation, a $200 fine and has been ordered to take anger management classes at a hearing in Delaware, Ohio, yesterday.

Grammar Nazi note: Wouldn’t it be “two years’ probation” – you know, possessive, like her ass is owned by those two years?

A $200 fine? That’s it? She has two years’ probation and all she has to pay is $200?

Anger management classes … with Charlie Sheen or Jack Nicholson?  This can’t be good.

The 30-year-old was arrested in June after she had a fight with her husband at a wedding reception in Powell, assaulting him and locking herself in their car. 
Okay, she was arrested because she got in a fight with her husband? Come on, that’s no fun. If we get arrested for getting in fights with our significant other now, what are they going to do next, arrest us for breathing?

Okay, okay, she assaulted him. Of course, I would like to know how and with what she assaulted him. I mean, did she just smack him? Did she beat the crap out of him with a baseball bat? I really think we need to know the details here.

Police arrived about 1am and tried to make her leave the car, but in an attempt to keep them away, Robinette "pulled out one of her breasts and started literally milking it, then spraying breast milk towards the officers," Delaware County Sheriff Walter Davis III said in June. 
AP style alert: It should be “1 a.m.” Always use the periods. Silly writers and editors.

Okay, what’s wrong with this thought process: to keep the scary policemen away, I’m going to whip out my boob. Men like boobs. Men are attracted to them. Don’t whip it out unless it hangs down to your knee and no longer resembles a boob.

Now, here’s the thing, if she’s able to milk her boob, she must still be breastfeeding (and if she was able to spray it any sort of distance, she must have been engorged beyond all hell), where is the mention of her child at this point? Any story like this always has the heart-wrenching moment where you feel sorry for the kid because his/her mom is a giant screw-up.

Surveillance footage shows Robinette becoming increasingly violent and verbally abusive as she is pulled from the car.

Whoa, I find this hard to believe. I mean, she was ordered to anger management classes, and she got violent with the cops. No way.

When told the arrest was being captured on video, she yells: "Record it all! Record it all!"

I love it. It’s like Cops, all redneck-style. In Ohio, not even Mississippi or Alabama, to boot. Of course she wanted it recorded, she’s hoping some porn director will come looking for her later. This could be her big break, you know.

During the hearing, her husband told the court his wife needed to get help.

Really, jackass, you wait until now to inform someone she needs help? Why didn’t you tell her this before? Or was this incident really your first indication that she had an issue? You just want to look like a victim here – but the fact is, either a) you caused her violence or her issues because you’re a douche, or b) you refuse to help her because you’re a selfish twit who won’t look out for the well-being of his wife and child, or c) all of the above.  

Why didn’t someone check her for post-partum depression? I mean, it’s a legit thing, she’s obviously post-partum (unless she’s one of those freaks who breast-feeds her kid till he/she is like five-years-old, but I find that highly unlikely in this situation), and she obviously has issues. I’m not saying this is the case. I’m not saying that it even excuses spraying cops with breast milk. I’m just saying, perhaps she needs some real help.


But perhaps she’s just whacked.

"I don't know that alcohol is my wife's problem. I'm no doctor so the doctors will have to determine that."

Thank you, Captain Obvious. You’re obviously not a doctor. Otherwise you probably would have prescribed her anti-depressants or something long ago. If you were a rational human being who gave a damn about his wife, you might have tried to force her to get help long ago.

**Warning, therapy content** Alcohol is NOT your wife’s problem. It is a symptom of the problem. Something causes her to want to drink. You need to help her find the source of the problem (I’m betting it’s you!) so she’ll stop drinking. **end therapy content**

Elitist reporter note: This is the FIRST mention of alcohol. There was no mention of her being drunk when all this went down. It’s a logical assumption, absolutely, but the way the story is written, she sounds like she’s nuts and this ending quote just comes out of left field. That’s shoddy writing.

I can't drive 55 - but this 8-year-old can

Drunk father lets 8-year-old son drive pickup: police

Let’s discuss the headline. First, I always hated the whole “Police:” bit when before a headline, but in the newspaper world, you do work with limited space, so I understand why it’s done, even if I can’t stand it. But this IS THE INTERNET! You have all the space in the world (well, as much as your server can handle). What the hell, Reuters?

Second, why isn’t the “police” attribution at the beginning? I mean, it sort of reads like the dad let the kid drive his pickup and the police. Well, good job kid.

Reuters, you blow. No wonder most people go to the AP for their news.

A drunk father allegedly allowed his 8 year-old son to drive his pick-up truck on a southeast Louisiana highway on Saturday while he slept, until patrol officers pulled over the boy, police said.
Grammar Nazi note: This sentence reads funny. It just does. I mean, I get what it’s saying, but honestly, it just could have been worded about 1,000 different ways that would have been easier to read.

So, this does beg the question, if the 8-year-old knew what to do when the blue lights came on, you have to question how often he’d seen his dad get pulled over, or his dad’s let him watch Supertroopers way too many times.

Of course, you know you wanted the cop to walk up to the car and ask, “Do you know why I pulled you over?”
“No.”
“You’re 8-years-old, that’s why. You’re grounded.”
“You’re not my daddy.”
“Somebody should be.”

The boy was driving the Chevrolet truck on Interstate 12 near the town of Holden, with his father in the passenger seat and his 4 year-old sister in the back seat, Louisiana State Police said in a statement.
Grammar Nazi note: Again, this could have been worded so many different ways that would have been better.

So, here’s the conundrum – which is more dangerous? Drinking and driving or letting your 8-year-old drive? I guess with all of the kid's experience behind the wheel of a Little Tikes car and a Power Wheels Jeep, daddy figured he had plenty of on-the-road experience.

And wait a second, where was he able to get drunk with an 8-year-old and a 4-year-old in tow? Wow, some bartender blows ass. Or he’s got some equally dumbass friends.

A passing motorist noticed the pick-up truck was being driven erratically and called police.
When Louisiana state troopers pulled over the truck in Livingston Parish, they found the 8 year-old boy behind the wheel and interviewed the father, 28 year-old Billy Joe Madden of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, police said.
Jesus Reuters, my head is about to explode. Please, please, please, give me a high-paying editing job because whoever you’ve got writing/editing this stuff sucks. Badly.

Alright, so obviously they found him behind the wheel, I mean, we gathered that from the previous two paragraphs. I mean, I know the bit – tell them what you want to tell them, then tell them again, but come on, how stupid do you think we are?

I should hope they interviewed the father. I should hope they freaking beat the crap out of the father. Someone, quick, give that kid a breathalyzer because dumbass daddy might have given him a beer too.

Police said they determined Madden was drunk and that he had been sleeping while his son drove the vehicle, en-route to Dallas, Texas.
Okay, okay, okay – how did they determine it? Field sobriety test? Breathalyzer? Smelled his breath? Lucky guess?

Alright, now, I admit I had to look this up, but Dallas is almost a 500-mile trip from Livingston Parish. I learned how to read basic maps when I was this kid’s age, but I had no idea how to navigate the interstates. Shoot, I’m *ahem, cough, cough* years-old and I still have trouble navigating the interstates sometimes. This kid must be a genius.

Wait, no, with a daddy like that, highly unlikely. Just saying.

Madden was arrested and booked into jail on two counts of child desertion, parent allowing a minor to drive, open container and two counts of no child restraint and no seatbelt.
How is child desertion if he had them with him? I guess cause he was asleep that counts as desertion? I mean, I agree that this guy deserves to have every charge against him filed, but I don’t see how that one works.

Parent allowing a minor to drive, that’s really a charge? You learn something new every day. And if it wasn’t before, it is now.

Open container. Reference my comment about the kid earlier. Are you sure that was daddy’s open container?

No child restraint – oh come on, those booster seats are a bitch to install on the driver’s side. You can’t really expect the kid to drive effectively while in a booster seat, can you?

No seat belt – for him? Well come on, now, you know as well as I do you can’t sleep very well with a seat belt on. It makes it impossible to curl up in the fetal position and suck your thumb while you sleep. Duh.

Madden remains in jail at Livingston Parish Detention Center in lieu of $1,474 bail, said sheriff's deputy Dustin Sanders at the facility.
He couldn’t make $1474 in bail money? Really? I mean, with a bail bondsman, it’s only $147 dollars. Come on dude, do you really suck that bad? Do you have no friends?

Both of Madden's children were turned over to child welfare authorities and were awaiting the arrival of a family member who could take custody of them, police said.
You freakin’ think? Where’s momma in all this? Oh, I bet she probably died in a car accident when the kid was 6-years-old, as he drove her home from an AA meeting.

Today's PSA: This is your brain, this is your brain as a giant fat ass

New British guildlines say even babies should exercise
Grammar Nazi note: Really, a typo in the headline? Do I really have to go on this tirade?

The British government launched a new campaign on Monday aimed against obesity, saying that children under the age of 5, including those who cannot walk yet, should exercise.
First of all, it does sort of go without saying that children who are unable to walk, are under 5.

Second of all, yeah, make sure you plan exercise with your three-week-old. I mean, really? I mean, I understand the sentiment here, but, really, you know there’s some idiot out there who is going to throw a sweatband and a mini-Flashdance-style sweatshirt on their child and abuse that poor kid, and then claim the British government told them they were supposed to do it.

The health department said, in the first guidelines issued for children that young, that children under 5 who can walk should engage in some kind of physical activity for at least three hours spaced throughout the day. Parents are urged to limit the amount of time young children spend indoors or strapped into strollers.
Back the train up, didn’t they just say in the lead that this included children who weren’t able to walk yet? What’s up with the change in mentality in just a couple paragraphs? No wonder we wanted to be free of your tyranny 200+ years ago.

Officials said that young children's daily exercise needs can be met by simply walking to school and during playtime and play dates. Additionally, parents should start getting babies active at birth, allowing them to play on their stomach or enjoying swimming sessions with their parents.
We do allow them to play on their stomachs, it’s called “tummy time” and most newborns HATE it. As far as the obesity argument is concerned, it was so much easier to make sure my kid ate healthy later on then force tummy time when she screamed her little head off.

If their daily exercise needs can be met by simply walking to school and playtime, then why are we even being given these guidelines? (I mean guildlines, my bad.) Seems to me the logic in that argument isn’t working. Yeah, you need to make sure they get plenty of exercise, but that’s probably being met by daily activities, so no worries.

Currently, nearly a quarter of British are obese. By 2050, experts estimate that about 90 percent of adults in Britain will be heavy.
Wow, that’s a statistic I’ve never read before. But hey, you know they say 78 percent of statistics are made up on the spot. Maybe they’d do better at thwarting obesity by banning the sale of couches as opposed to setting out stupid guildlines.

According to a 2008 health survey, only about 5 percent of Britons meet the government's minimal activity standards of 150 minutes of moderate to vigorous exercise a week.
I know I don’t need to point this out, but a 2008 survey is sooooo three years ago. I’m sure one has been done since then. Come on, reporter boy, let’s do some research.

So, someone please tell me why children under the age of 5 are supposed to have three HOURS of exercise a day but the guildline for adults is a mere 2.5 hours A WEEK?

The new British campaign is ambitious. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends children and teenagers get one hour or more of physical activity a day.
The U.S., land of the fat-asses (including mine, thankyouverymuch), doesn’t recommend as much physical activity a day. I’m shocked.

Now ... just to throw this out there, in doing a web search for images to accompany this, I stumbled across the Baby Bariatrics website. This is, quite frankly, the most "what the fuck were they thinking" thing I have ever seen. You think I'm kidding don't you? I can't make this up.

Get in there, no talky, no talky

Not gonna lie, first thing that went through my mind
when I saw this was "The Shining."

Father locks son in box for 8 weeks

A FATHER locked his 21-year-old son in a tiny wooden BOX — as punishment for stealing chickens.
I’m not really sure what I have the biggest problem with here – the fact  guy decided to punish his 21-year old son, the fact he did it by cramming him into a wooden box, or the fact he did it because his son stole chickens?

In the basement of his home in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, Johan Knelsen lived in the 10ft-by-6ft filing cabinet-style cage for eight weeks before police arrived.
Wait, wait, wait … he was “punished” for eight weeks? For two months? Holy crap. Even when I got grounded when I was a kid, a month was the most I ever got.  So he was in the basement - I hope it wasn't during the rainy season, because being stuck in a box in a flooded basement would really suck.

I love the wording here, “before police arrived.” Uh, yeah, well, why’d they show up? Did someone tip them off? How long would this have gone on had the police not freed him?

His father, David Knelsen, a Canadian, told authorities his son was mentally ill and needed punishing for taking three chickens.
Alright, I’m going to avoid the obvious here – his kid’s “mentally-ill.” We all know the “right” thing to say and the “right” thing to do.

Okay, he stole three chickens. Why is three so important? Why wasn’t it just “punishing him for stealing chickens?” I mean, had it been just two, would he have only gotten a month in the box? If it was just one, he would have given him a hug and thanked him for dinner?

Alright, so the kid steals, you lock him in a box. Sheesh, I don’t even want to think about what this guy would do if the kid raped a girl or something.

Local media reported Johan was also in his father's bad books for using a phone.
Hehehe, “bad books” is funny. In America that’s called the shit list.

Um, maybe he needed to phone to beg someone to free him from his psychotic father.

The family is part of a certain Mennonite denomination which strictly interprets the Bible and shuns the use of technology.
Where in the Bible does it say, “thou shalt not use thy cell phone” or “thou shalt not friend anyone but Jesus on Facebook?”

When Johan was released from the box, police found it crammed with pillows and urine-filled bottles.
Johan said: "I went out, and when I came back they were angry with me here at home. Some people tied me up and put me in here, eight weeks ago.
Well, let’s at least give his dad credit for giving him pillows and bottles for his urine.

Wait a second, his dad wants to punish his kid but he can’t even do the dirty work, he’s got to get people tie his son up? You really are stellar dad material. 

"I ate and slept here. I did everything here. I ate and drank water and washed here."
Well, duh, if you were in there for eight weeks, you did everything here. We get it, Captain Obvious.

Of course, if he had slipped you a little pot or LCD, the box could have been more interesting. (Hey, don’t judge for the drug jokes, and old episode of “That 70s Show” is on in the background.)

The prosecution lawyer handling the case said locking someone up like that was against the law.
No shit, Sherlock. Damn, that law school you went to really taught you good, didn’t they?

Ever Merida added: "It is not permitted that a boy is physically and psychologically tortured inside a jail. It is in total violation of Bolivian law."
It’s in total violation of the Geneva Convention. Okay, well, maybe not, but it sounded good. But come on, it’s common sense. Only the cops are able to physically and psychologically torture people inside a jail.

Under orders from police, Johan's father opened the box and helped the young man to his feet.
Somehow I have my doubts Johan gave him a big hug and told him he loved him.

There are dozens of Mennonite settlements in the rich lowlands of eastern Bolivia.
And they are all bat-shit crazy too.

In 2009, eight men from a Mennonite community where arrested in Bolivia and accused of raping at least 60 women in their farming settlement.
See, bat-shit crazy. Obviously the Mennonites aren’t all there, and do things that are against the law all the time. If I had my druthers, I’d rather the Mennonites steal a couple chickens as opposed to abusing children and gang banging women. But, hey, you know what they say – what happens in the Mennonite settlement stays in the Mennonite settlement.

The (w)hole truth, to help you God

This is, oddly enough, the second blog I’ve written about a big hole in the last two months.  Who would have thunk? Both have their own share of stupid, though. 

Russian who buried himself alive dies by mistake

A Russian man has died after persuading a friend to bury him alive for a night, hoping it would bring him "good luck".
Was he aiming for luck? Or to be the Russian David Blaine? Because come on, dude, even David Blaine doesn’t want to be David Blaine.

Was his last sentence before descending into his hole, the Russian equivalent of, “Hey y’all, watch this!”

Grammar Nazi note: I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. Period INSIDE the quotes.

The victim dug a hole in a garden in the eastern city of Blagoveshchensk and climbed into an improvised coffin, with holes for air pipes, taking a mobile phone and a bottle of water with him.
An improvised coffin? The definition of improvise (well, one of them – the one that most likely pertains) is “to make from items readily available.” Umm, if you’re planning this, shouldn’t you actually buy appropriate materials? “Well, I got this old refrigerator box, some duct tape and some bendy straws just lying around the house. Yep, that’ll make me a lucky, lucky man.” What the hell, you moron?

It may not have really been a coffin to start, but it sure was to finish, wasn’t it? *rimshot*

His friend covered the coffin with earth and then left, after the buried man phoned to say he was fine.
He covered the coffin with earth? What else was he going to cover it with? Mars? More duct tape? Potatoes?

The next morning, he returned to find his friend dead, investigators said.
He didn’t just return, wouldn’t he have had to dig the “improvised coffin” up to find his dead friend? Seeing as how it was a coffin and he had to dig it up, does that mean he gets busted for exhuming a body?

The 35-year-old victim had believed that burying himself alive for a night would bring him luck the rest of his life.
I sure hope those last few hours of his life were lucky.

"According to his friend, the man wanted to test his endurance and insistently asked his friend to help him spend the night buried," said Alexei Lubinsky, a senior aide to the region's chief investigator.
According to everyone else in the world, they thought this was stupid.

"We know that the victim was a computer programmer and that he has a small child."
I’m not even going to say a computer programmer should be smarter than that because, well, I know a lot of computer programmers and whereas some are some of the smartest people I know, some are complete morons. Most lack the sense God gave a goose.

As far as the having a small child thing, where was the kid? Did the baby momma live with him? Why didn’t she talk him out of this idiotic idea? If he didn’t have someone living with him, why did he think it was a good idea to bury himself in the yard while the small child slept unattended? You won’t be lucky when (if) you make it out of your “improvised coffin,” you’re going to jail for child neglect. If the kid didn’t live with him, why the hell didn’t his friend talk him out of it? A true friend would either a) attempt to talk you out of it or b) do the stupid stunt with you. Either way, I bet he’d still be alive today.

The coffin was covered with soil to a depth of about 20cm (eight inches), Mr Lubinsky said. He speculated that heavy rainfall overnight could have blocked the air supply to the man trapped inside.
Alright, moron, you took a cell phone with you. We know you got reception down there because you called your friend to tell him you were okay and he left. So when you started having trouble breathing, or water started coming down your air pipes, or all of the above, why didn’t you call your friend to come get you out?

The superstitious victim was probably influenced by reading stories about self-burial on the internet, investigators said.
Or he was just really, really drunk (and/or stupid) and thought it was a good idea.

In a bizarre trend, numerous Russian bloggers write of undergoing supervised self-burial. State newspaper Rossiiskaya Gazeta has even run a feature on the practice.
Something bizarre coming out of Russia? No, I can’t believe it.

The BBC's Steve Rosenberg, in Moscow, says it is not the first time this has happened in Russia.
So you’d think this guy should have learned from the first guy’s mistake.

Last summer a man in the north-western Vologda region persuaded his friend to bury him in the ground - to help him overcome his fear of death.
He was found dead an hour and a half later, crushed by the weight of the earth.
Well, hey, on the upside, he got over his fear of death, didn’t he?

Pot, kids and violence - always a recipe for success

TPD: Mom beat kid for eating her pot

A Tampa mother is behind bars Monday after beating her one-year-old child for eating her marijuana.
They say marijuana is a gateway drug. Can you imagine what she’d do to that poor kid if he/she found something harder in there? It’s obviously a gateway to harder drugs and child abuse – not necessarily in that order.

Tampa Police say India Couch, 22, faces drug and felony child abuse charges.
You think?

Investigators say the child was left unsupervised, found the pot in her mother's purse, and ate an undisclosed amount of the drug.
How many parenting fails can we find in this single sentence?

1. The child was unsupervised. Never, ever leave a one-year-old unsupervised.
2. The kid found pot in momma’s purse. Never, ever leave your pot in a place where children (and cops, for that matter) will rifle through.
3. The kid ate the pot. Which means the kid has seen momma using it and knew it had to be ingested somehow. (Okay, that’s not really fair, one-year-olds stick everything in their mouths, however, you know the kid has seen momma toking. Don’t try to play it off like this was the first time the kid saw pot because you know it’s not true. Which means, the kid’s contact buzz probably ran out and he/she was just trying to continue the high.)
4. The mom didn’t know how much pot was in the bag, so she was unable to account for how much was missing after the kid ate it. Bad mom. Bad druggie. Bad. (Alright, I’ll be fair, it does say “undisclosed” and not “unknown.” But I prefer to read it as “unknown.” It’s more fun that way.)

That's when police say Couch beat the child with a sandal and then hit the one-year-old hard enough to leave welts.
Wait, how much time passed between the unsupervised one-year-old eating the pot and momma noticing it missing so she could beat the kid? Or did she catch the kid in the act? These are facts we need to know.

TPD also says this mother attacked her live-in partner with a dumbbell.
Was this a separate incident? Or after she was done beating the kid with a sandal, did she go after her live-in partner with a dumbbell screaming, “How could you let this happen? You were supposed to be watching the damn kid. Now we can’t get high tonight, asshole.”

Some people should not be allowed to wield pens (part II)

Who the hell is Daren the Lion? Whatever happened
to the cuddly little DARE Bear? Not badass enough to
scare kids off drugs?

Harrodsburg DARE officer indicted on 148 counts of sex abuse

A Mercer County grand jury on Wednesday indicted a Harrodsburg police officer on 148 counts of felony sex offenses.
That’s a lot of counts of sex offenses. How did the cop have time for that when he was supposed to be out PROTECTING AND SERVING? Did you think you were protecting and serving those little kids?

Jason Elder, 31, of Harrodsburg was indicted on two counts of third-degree rape, 48 counts of third-degree sodomy and 96 counts of first-degree sexual abuse, according to the indictment.
Way to rack ‘em up. I mean, I guess if you’re going to go down, you might as well go down for a ton rather than just one or two.

The indictment is the result of a Kentucky State Police investigation. Detective Brandon Curlis, who is listed as the witness who testified before the grand jury, was not immediately available for comment.
Elitist reporter note: Was he available for comment at a later time? How about taking out the extraneous word “immediately?”

The rape counts say that Elder engaged in sexual intercourse with a person younger than 18 from November 2007 to November 2009.
The sodomy counts say Elder engaged in "deviate sexual intercourse with another person" younger than 16 from November 2007 to November 2009.
Elitist reporter note: Okay, we get it, 146 of the counts took place between November 2007 and November 2009. Couldn’t you combine the two paragraphs? And honestly, do we need a definition of rape with a minor and sodomy? I think we know what they are and I’m not sure we want to be reminded.

The sexual-abuse counts say that Elder "subjected a minor who is less than 18 years old to sexual contact with whom his position of authority or special trust came into contact with the minor as a result of his position."
Whoa, wait, I get the impression this guy used his position to gain a special trust to take advantage of his position. I could be wrong though. Legal documents fail. Picking up quotes from legal documents – extra fail.

Elder is listed as the officer who conducts Drug Abuse Resistance Education in the Mercer County school district. It is not known whether the contact with the victim or victims in the indictment resulted from Elder's position as a DARE officer.
Um, yeah, probably.

But you know, DARE is all about drug abuse. It’s to keep kids off drugs, not off sex. Especially sex with creepy cops.

Elitist reporter note: Don't you love how the headline of the story refers to his position as a DARE officer but it's not mentioned until damn near the end of the story? Editing fail.

Harrodsburg Police Chief Rodney Harlow was not immediately available for comment Thursday morning.
Elitist reporter note: There we go with that “immediately available for comment” line again. Some people never learn, do they?

All 148 counts are Class D felonies, each punishable by one to five years in prison.
Sounds like 740 years to me. Have fun shmuck. Hope someone finds you pretty and teaches you what at least 48 counts of sodomy are really like.

Some people should not be allowed to wield pens (part I)

Stop, before you go on, I just have to say, this is *mostly* being posted because of the horrible writing contained in this story, not so much the subject. I just have to ask (again), why is it I struggled to find a job for six months out of college, and another 18 months after I got laid off – being turned down by the Herald-Leader both times, when they have people who can’t write their way out of a paper bag?

/pity party

Georgetown woman who allegedly was making meth in car charged with 13 counts

A Georgetown woman was charged with 13 felony and misdemeanor offenses early Thursday after she tried to run over two police officers and was found to be cooking methamphetamine in a car, police said.
Well, of course she tried to run over police officers, you get more points for cops. Duh.

Elitist reporter note: Woohoo, passive voice, here we go. “… was found to be cooking …” AWKWARD. How about “ … after she tried to run over two police officers who found a working methamphetamine lab in her car.” Still awkward, I admit, but better than the original.

Amy Whisman, whose age was not listed, was charged with two counts of first-degree wanton endangerment, one count of manufacturing methamphetamine, fleeing or evading police, and resisting arrest, among other charges, said Georgetown Police Lt. Robert Swanigan.
Elitist reporter note: Look, we don’t have to list people’s ages. A lot of times we do, but it’s really not necessary. I mean, did you list the ages of the cops in the story? Nope, sure didn’t. So, it’s really quite superfluous to say “whose age was not listed,” instead of just skipping it all together.

As a general rule of thumb, we use “according to” or something equally wishy-washy when we’re not using direct quotes. We only use “said” when we can attribute an actual quote to the person. Again, general rule of thumb, not really hard-and-fast. But you have to admit, it reads kind of funny to see that someone “said” something but having nothing actually attributed to them as far as quotes.

Police responded to a call of a suspicious person at 725 East College Street and found a woman sitting in the passenger seat of a Toyota Corolla. When police questioned her, she provided what was later found to be a false name and Social Security number, Swanigan said.
Elitist reporter note: Maybe it’s just me being picky, but I would have said, “When the officers questioned her…” instead of “police” because the term “police” is more of a term for the collective whole, and we’re actually referring to the officers who responded here.

Elitist reporter note: Of course it was "later found" to be fake. It's not like she could give it to them and they could find it fake in the past. It's like that Mitch Hedberg joke: One time, this guy handed me a picture of him, he said,"Here's a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture is of you when you were younger. "Here's a picture of me when I'm older." "You son-of-a-bitch! How'd you pull that off? Lemme see that camera... what's it look like?"

Elitist reporter note: And why is Lt. Swanigan the only one who has anything attributed to him? (And note even anything directly. There are no direct quotes whatsoever in this story.) The names of the officers who responded were available, why not talk to them directly? Why not get quotes from someone else? The fact you only have one source, and no direct quotes whatsoever really kind of eliminates credibility.

When officers asked her to step out of the locked car, the woman refused and slid over to the driver's seat and tried to drive away, nearly striking officers Shannon Miller and Chris Zirbes, Swanigan said. Neither officer was hurt because they got out of the way, but the Corolla then hit the front of Miller's cruiser.
Elitist reporter note: Not that it really has bearing on anything, but I think we need a “the” between “when” and “officers.”

Elitist reporter note: That’s good they weren’t hurt, but logic would say it’s because they got out of the way. Or she’s a really bad driver. That’s not really important, it seems to add unnecessary verbiage to the sentence.

Couldn’t it work just as well like this – “When officers Shannon Miller and Chris Zirbes asked her to step out of the locked car, she refused, slid to the driver’s seat and tried to drive away, nearly running over the two officers. Neither officer was injured, but one of the cruisers was damaged during her attempted escape.”

The officers then broke out the Corolla's windows with their baton/flashlights and used a Taser to immobilize the woman. She still climbed out of a passenger side window and tried to run away, Swanigan said.
Elitist reporter note: This is my favorite. The way this is written, it implies they used a special device, a hybrid baton and flashlight. Maybe a batashlight? Or a Flashton? Yeah, I don’t think so. How about this instead: “Using a baton and a flashlight, the officers broke the windows out of the car and used a Taser to immobilize Whisman.”

Elitist reporter note: Why the hell is her name only used once? It’s always pronoun her or she and it doesn’t have to be.

Elitist reporter note: They Tasered her but she still managed to climb out the window and run away. Then obviously they blow with a Taser, and I would amend the previous sentence to read, “… used a Taser to attempt to immobilize Whisman.” After all, the way it was written makes it sound like they were effective when, in fact, they were not.

After she was under control, police found a working meth lab in the car, and Swanigan said the woman had been cooking it as she sat in it. A Kentucky State Police team was called to the scene to dispose of the hazardous, flammable materials, Swanigan said.
Elitist reporter note: Okay, here’s my second favorite. “…the woman had been cooking it as she sat in it…” So, the way this reads, I have a mental image of her sitting in a pot stewing along with some meth. Mmm, cannibalistic meth. How about this instead: “After Whisman was under control, the officers searched her car to find a functioning meth lab.” Because, to say it was functioning infers it was actually working, and it eliminates the mental image of her turning herself into a hallucinogenic drug.

The woman was later identified as Whisman, who also was charged with third-degree assault, possession of methamphetamine, possession of marijuana, a prescription drug not in a proper container, first-degree and third-degree criminal mischief, providing a police officer a false name and address, and improper registration.
Elitist reporter note: Well, of course she was identified as Whisman, after all, that’s part of the second paragraph of the story. Thanks for clearing that up, Captain Obvious.

She was lodged in the Scott County Detention Center, where she remained without bond later Thursday morning.
Say it with me now, awwww.

OMG, it's worse than snakes on a motherf*&kin' plane!

Cancer patient denied seat on flight

You know, when you first read that headline, you get irritated. I mean, of all the people to be an ass to, it’s someone who is internally fighting the fight of their life.

Korean Airlines denied a woman diagnosed with stage 4 breast cancer a seat on a Seattle-to-South Korea flight because she looked too frail to fly.
Now you read this and think, “aww, that’s kind of sweet of them, looking out for her best interest and all.”

Of course, then you sit back and think about the wonderful caliber of people who take your ticket, scan it, and hand it back to you while muttering, “Enjoy your flight,” never once looking up … and these derelicts actually stopped her?

Let’s be fair, it could have been one of a bunch of people you deal with getting on a plane. But in all of the people I have dealt with, from checking in my bags to TSA to gate attendant, I have never, ever had anyone pay enough attention to me to care. If I was having a nervous breakdown (which I take Xanex to prevent when flying, thank you very much), I don’t know that they’d be paying enough attention to me to stop me from flying.

Crystal Kim had approval from two doctors and a note clearing her to fly over the weekend, according to KING5-TV, NBC News' local affiliate in Seattle. The carrier thought Kim might not be up for the long flight, Korean Air spokesperson Penny Pfaelzer said.
Now you land in super-pissed-off land. The woman had a doctor’s note, nay, two doctor’s notes clearing her to fly, but Korean Air, in all their infinite wisdom didn’t think that was good enough. Since when is Korean Air more medically-informed than two M.Ds?

Pfaelzer said the carrier arranged a hotel for the Kims while it attempted to get proper authorization. She said other passengers would be "traumatized" if a passenger were to die in flight, and called the situation unfortunate.
Yeah, well, judging by how awesome the carrier sounds, I bet it was like a Motel 6 or something.

Okay, let’s think about this “other passengers would be traumatized if a passenger were to die in flight” bit. It’s not like it’s never happened, and shoot, it happens in movies and TV shows all the time. (Remember the House episode, anyone?)

Plus, the fact is, anyone could walk on a plane and die – sudden heart attack, unknown health malady, brain aneurysm, and a myriad of other things could happen to anyone on the flight. It seems insanely wrong to discriminate against this woman because she’s already sick. The nerve of some people.

"I wanted to take my mom there for Mother's Day," said Mimi Kim, Crystal's daughter.
Elitist reporter note: Bad transition. We’re talking about the airline fearing she’d die, and the next sentence is “I wanted to take my mom there for Mother’s Day.” Bad, bad editor. Someone slap the editor with a ruler, and a red pen.

But I do find it very sweet she wanted to take her mom to Korea for Mother’s Day. Wow, I wish I had the money to jet around the world for Mother’s Day. Every holiday a new excuse to travel!

The Kims went back to the doctor Monday to get another note, the younger Kim told KING-TV. "Her vitals are normal ... she is fit for travel," she said.
She had to go get a third note? Really? The poor woman’s going to lose her battle with cancer before this gets resolved.

The airline reportedly was still dissatisfied, and left Seattle on Monday without the Kims.
What the hell does it take to make these people happy? I’m guessing since they didn’t wrap the doctor’s note around a stack of large bills.

"It's absolutely ludicrous, heartless and unbelievable," Mimi Kim said.
Yeah, what she said.

Delta Air Lines said it would fly Kim to South Korea on Wednesday, KING5-TV reported.
I hope for free and first class. I hope Korean Air refunded the money. Plus any charges incurred by the doctor to get the notes. Oh, and her pain and suffering. Quite frankly, Korean Air should be paying for all of her cancer treatments just so they don’t have to fear her dying in flight next time because, you know, they took it upon themselves to make sure she was healthy enough to fly – doctors be damned.

A call to Korean Air's corporate office in Seoul was answered by a person who said Tuesday is a national holiday, and said to call back Wednesday. Several Asian countries celebrate Buddha's Birthday, which falls on May 10 this year.
If it was a national holiday, and no one was there, why did someone answer the phone at all?

Am I the only one who thinks their logo looks like the
Pepsi logo?

Korean Air's marketing department in Los Angeles has not yet responded to an e-mail from msnbc.com.
I’m not surprised, because msnbc.com is going to rip them a new one and paint them poorly in the press.

A call to Delta also has not been returned.
This surprises me. I would think they’d be all over the good publicity. Then again, maybe they just wanted to do something nice for the sake of being nice. Are there still people/companies like that out there anymore? (Save for Chick-Fil-A, of course, we know they do.)

Customer Service - or not

Stupid TigerDirect.com. Ugh.

Scott got it in my head we should get Galaxy tablets. I’m all for that. A new toy, hell yeah. So, I go out searching for the WiFi model because, well, I already pay a small fortune to Sprint every month for the phones, I don’t need to add anymore to that monthly raping.

I decide on TigerDirect because it ships same day, I had the option to bump it up to Two Day shipping for next to nothing, and, most importantly, I could use my BillMeLater. This is important. Not because I don’t have the money (well, not for both – but for one, yes) … but rather this is the ONLY form of payment I currently have access to since ALL of my cards (debit and credit) are currently unavailable since reporting them as stolen on Thursday and I haven’t received replacements yet.

So, I place the order, it goes through, woohoo!!!

I got on TigerDirect’s website late last night and it said it was pending for credit authorization. Alright, I’m not sure what exactly that means, but maybe it was a BillMeLater thing, so I let it slide. Didn’t think anything of it.

This morning I get on TigerDirect’s website to see if they had shipped yet. No, they had not. In fact, my order status was listed as “Cancelled.” No explanation, just cancelled. Worse yet, I had to find that out by going to the site, they didn’t even have the DECENCY to e-mail me to tell me this.

I went to BillMeLater’s site and the charge was listed on my account as pending, so obviously there was no problem with the BillMeLater account (which, might I add, I used successfully just a couple weeks ago). I even called BillMeLater to make sure, and she assured me everything was fine with the account.

Not that I have testicles, but you get the idea...

So, I called TigerDirect’s customer service to find out what the hell was going on. The girl was about worthless. “It says your order was cancelled.”

Well, no shit Sherlock. Tell me something I don’t know. “Can you tell me why it was cancelled?”

“No, it doesn’t say, just that it was cancelled.”

“Okay, well, what do I do to fix it?”

“You can try placing the order again.”

Are you freakin’ kidding me? Just to go through all this again? Nope, went out and bought it from another site (which, unfortunately for me, is “powered” by TigerDirect, so I’m still at their mercy).

I subsequently sent the following e-mail to TigerDirect.

"I ordered a router and two Galaxy WiFi only tablets yesterday, thrilled that I was able to find them. Even better was the fact I could have them shipped immediately and for a reasonable price.

Imagine my dismay when I logged in to check the status of my order and found it was cancelled. No reason, just cancelled. (Last night I saw it was under credit review, which made little sense to me considering I have used BillMeLater in the past with no problems. The credit is available and has been used previously. I digress.)

I called customer support to find out what was going on and how I could fix it. The girl was less-than-helpful, telling me she saw it was cancelled - well, no duh, I knew that, that's why I called. She said she didn't know why and that I could try to re-order it.

As if. As much as I have always loved TigerDirect in the past, this has put a sour taste in my mouth. My order was cancelled when there was more than enough credit on the account used to cover the cost. My order was cancelled by TigerDirect and you didn't even have the decency to e-mail me to tell me. And your customer support just told me what I already knew. Why the hell would I call if I wanted them to rehash what I knew?

Before even calling customer support, I went to BillMeLater to make sure there were no problems with the account and it showed that a $XXX purchase was made from TigerDirect - so obviously the problem is not with BillMeLater. And if it is, they neglected to tell me too, and I will write them a nasty e-mail too. I have good credit, I always pay my bills, and I find it a bit ridiculous that it is this difficult to buy a Galaxy tablet. I mean - honestly.

My going to a different site (even if it is powered by you guys - only because you have a monopoly over my ability to purchase a WiFi only Galaxy tablet at the moment) will not break you. Nor will my expression of disgust to my friends and family. But rest assured, I'm not happy.”

And this is what I get in response:

“Dear Valued Customer:

Thank you for your e-mail.

Please accept our sincerest apologies for any inconvenience that may have caused you. We value your comments and suggestions, and they will be forwarded to the proper department. We constantly strive for customer satisfaction and hope this incident will not change your opinion of our company. Again, we apologize and thank you for your time and patience.

Thank you for visiting our website. We appreciate your business. If you have further inquiries and reply to this email, please make sure to include your entire message, so we can address it appropriately.

Sincerely,
Felben
TigerDirect.com Web Response”

Uhh, too late.

Never going back to TigerDirect if I can help it. Thankyouverymuch.

You want to get your kid drunk? Just go to Applebee's!

Tipsy Toddler: Restaurant Mistakenly Serves Alcohol to Child

It was toward the end of their meal at an Applebee's restaurant in Detroit when Taylor Dill-Reese noticed something odd about her son, D.J.
Really, it took her this long to realize her kid was odd?

The 15-month-old boy was acting strangely, his mother said. "He was saying hi and bye to the walls," she said. "He eventually laid his head down on the table and we thought maybe he was just sleepy."
Honestly, my toddler says “hi” and “bye” to a lot of things, and I’m sure she’s done so to a wall a time or two. It’s because they are toddlers. Toddlers are crazy. This is the time in their lives when it’s acceptable to have a conversation with a stuffed dinosaur and not be thought crazy, I don’t see why the wall would be any different. Plus, you’re at an Applebee’s. They have pictures of all sorts of has-beens on the wall, maybe he wanted to talk to them. You just don’t know.

Maybe so, but the toddler was also drunk. He had been served alcohol mixed in with his apple juice.

Drunk = sleepy, so it’s all good.

Served alcohol mixed with the apple juice. Good times. Remind me never to order Munchkin apple juice at Applebee’s.

Let’s think this through – a snafu with the apple juice … at Applebee’s. How apropos.

Police said it was an accident; a mislabeled bottle at the bar was poured into a cup for the child. Applebee's said it's looking into the matter.
Are the police sure? Maybe the toddler was irritating some people. I mean, the waitress could have been pissed at the kid for throwing food on the floor, so she figured if she got the bartender to slip him something, he’d go to sleep. Or maybe he was throwing food AT people sitting at a nearby table and they instigated it – and paid for it. “Hey, sweetheart, get the toddler over there a mixed drink, it’s on us.”

The mislabeled bottle at the bar story doesn’t work for me. Number one, they said earlier it was mixed in with the apple juice. Pouring a kiddie cup of apple juice does not involve multiple bottles. Which means this kid got straight liquor because they weren’t mixed. Sure, yeah, the original bottle could have been drained and they had to get a new bottle out, okay, but wouldn’t someone notice the liquids didn’t look the same while pouring. I mean, piss-colored drink in the cup and clear liquid being poured in is very obviously two different things. It’s not rocket science people. Which brings me to another question, who doesn’t know what apple juice looks and/or smells like? Why couldn’t the bartender tell what was going into that cup wasn’t apple juice, if it was mislabeled or not?

Plus, let’s harp on the parents for a little while, shall we? Didn’t they smell it? I would think you’d be able to smell it from a distance. Did you not taste it? I’ve totally been known to steal a few drinks from Munchkin’s drinks. But, that’s the bad mom in me coming out. (Rest assured, if we order apple juice anywhere that it doesn't come in a clearly-marked box, I will be taste-testing!)

What about the kid, if it tasted funny, why did he drink it? Granted toddler’s palettes aren’t very refined, but you’d think he’d recognize it was not apple juice.

"Obviously, any situation like this is unacceptable," Applebee's said in a written statement. "We are working with local authorities and conducting our own investigation to assess exactly what happened."
A situation like this is unacceptable? You think? What else were they going to say? “Obviously we find this situation to be funny as hell, and kudos to all the people who didn’t pay attention to make this possible. We will be introducing a new happy hour every night from 7-8 for our patrons 3 and under. If they don’t puke after the first one, the second one is free!!”

Alright, now, they are working with local authorities (really, what are the cops going to do here?) and conducting their own investigation. How much of an investigation is warranted? Find the supposedly mislabeled bottle, see what’s in it, find the bartender and find out what the hell happened. End of investigation. We know no one will ‘fess up to this, so just figure out what went wrong and fix it. If it’s truly an “accident,” then no one needs to be fired over it.

Applebee's has been in this situation before. In 2006, a New York City Applebee's admitted accidentally serving a 5-year-old a Long Island iced tea alcoholic drink instead of apple juice.
Wait, they’ve been in this boat before? Really? But wait a minute, wait a minute … this one is more ridiculous. The kid is five. The kid clearly knows what apple juice tastes like and is clearly old enough to verbalize “This isn’t apple juice,” or “This apple juice tastes funny,” or something like that. So, yeah, the idiot kid just wanted to get plastered.

"Within minutes, his eyes were glazed," the child's mother, Cynthia Pereles, said. "It was clear he was under the influence."
LITs have nothing but alcohol (save for a shot of Coke to give it color), you can’t tell me you didn’t smell that across the table.

LITs are served in glasses. (In some places, giant fishbowls!) So what sort of idiot mixed one and poured it into a kiddie cup anyway?

In 2007, a California restaurant served a margarita to a toddler in a covered, plastic sippy cup. Again, the patrons had ordered apple juice.
I’m clearly detecting a theme here. Do not, under any circumstance, order apple juice at Applebee’s. Lesson learned. Next.

This one has no excuse. You put the drink into the kid’s sippy cup, it’s obviously not one of the ones the business uses. You were very obviously trying to do something to that poor kid. You cannot, in any way, mistake a margarita for apple juice.

In Detroit, after realizing what had happened, Dill-Reese said her son was taken to the hospital. The toddler was found to have a 0.1 blood alcohol level, well above the legal limit for an adult to drive.
Elitist reporter note: Editing fail. You don’t go to generalizations like that and then back to the story. It’s confusing, I had to read the story twice before I could follow the convoluted flow. You write about the situation, and then, to close, you talk about how this isn’t the first time this happened.

I hope Applebee's will, at the very least, be paying those hospital bills. 

His mother said the child is now fine but Dill-Reese, who is 18 and too young to drink legally in Michigan, doesn't understand how something like this could have happen.
This sentence structure is awkward, I had to read this one twice too, because the first time I thought they were talking about the kid being 18, not the mom, so I was like, “Wait, this just happened and the kid is 18 now? What, I don’t get it.”

She doesn’t understand how it happened? Really? I don’t think anyone does, hence the internal Applebee’s investigation which is in conjunction with local authorities. Does it really matter to you how it happened? It’s not like, “oh, well, it was just a blind bartender, it’s no big deal.” No, whatever reason behind it does not make it acceptable. Unless you liked your kid being drunk, in which case we need to worry about your parenting skills.

"Nobody at the table ordered alcoholic drinks; we can't, so he definitely shouldn't have received one," Dill-Reese said.
Even if you had ordered alcoholic drinks, he shouldn’t have received one. God, what an idiotic statement.

** EDIT 4/12/11 ***
Apparently, as a result of this accident (which, as you read above, was the THIRD time it happened), Applebee's is changing their policies on juice pouring.

Applebee's changes policies after child served alcohol