Offline
that's...not a tongueSeems a little rude....or tongue in cheek?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
that's...not a tongueSeems a little rude....or tongue in cheek?
any tom, dick, or harry should know that you can't just censor someone's name, that's rudet.i.l. there's a potty word that does not have a censor code
So we can write that but not kitty cat?any tom, dick, or harry should know that you can't just censor someone's name, that's rude
hey i don't make the rules i just abuse themSo we can write that but not kitty cat?
seems like the Peter principle is at work
Someone just needs to take one for the team and name their kid P(kitty cat).So we can write that but not kitty cat?
seems like the Peter principle is at work
Dude needs a business cardAt least the janitor can take solace in knowing that his penis is a deadly weapon.
There is video evidence of the "indecent assault" that he is being charged with. If he tests positive for the STD and she now has it, yes there's a defense argument that could be made, but barring any evidence of a prior relationship between her and the janitor (which seems unlikely at this point), it would fail and he would also be convicted of the aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
Genome evidence probably not necessary with evidence or with a distinct lack of evidence of a prior relationship between the two.
Further, it probably doesn't matter if she got the STD from him or not. There is clear evidence that "aggravated assault with a deadly weapon" occurred, as having video that shows he put his STD-infected genitals in contact with her water bottle is already proof that the assault with a deadly weapon occurred, whether or not the assault was successful.
If I attack you with a knife but don't manage to cut you, did assault with a deadly weapon not occur?
The prosecution rests, your honor.
The real STD is the friends we made along the way.So that seems reasonable.
Serious rebuttal: there’s obviously precedent for charging assault with a deadly weapon and/or attempted murder for STDs.If you can’t give someone an std by sticking your dick in a water bottle you can’t attempt to give someone an std by sticking your dick in their water bottle.
Serious rebuttal: there’s obviously precedent for charging assault with a deadly weapon and/or attempted murder for STDs.
Is putting your dick in someone’s water bottle an assault on its own? The “indecent assault” charge tends to imply that the prosecutor believes so.
If it’s an assault, and an STD-infected penis is a deadly weapon when used in the context of sexual acts, then it’s assault with a deadly weapon.
The intent or lack of intent to give an STD is irrelevant, just like if a mugger with a knife never actually intended to stab his victim and the knife was all for show. It’s still an assault with a deadly weapon.
Or perhaps if the mugger had a gun in his waistband and merely opened his jacket to reveal it. Didn’t even put his hands on it. Can he kill someone just by showing he has a gun? No, but it’s still assault with a deadly weapon.
Once again proving that if enough time goes by and you dig up an debate thread between me and @superchuck500, I’ll be proven right.Lucio Catarino Diaz, who worked as a janitor at the practice, was sentenced on Tuesday after pleading guilty to a charge of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, namely, his urine. He was sentenced to six years but has already served two.