Clearly putting in overtime, an Australian woman says she is entitled to workers compensation after she was injured while having sex in a motel room during a business trip. She claims she suffered a “psychiatric injury” (damn, was he that ugly?), as well as injuries to her mouth and nose, when a glass light fixture in her room smashed down onto her head while she was having sex with “an acquaintance” (aka, complete stranger).
The woman’s lawyer argued that the woman is entitled to compensation because sex is “an ordinary incident of life,” like showering, sleeping and eating. He continued that since the woman was required to spend the night in a motel chosen by her department, they should have informed her that having sex while on a business trip was not appropriate. (Because most business contracts outline this, obviously.)
“My client was actually quite significantly injured and emotionally traumatized, both by her injury and the way it has been reported as a subject of fun, which for her it is not,” he stated. Meanwhile, the insurance company argued that the woman should not be compensated because having sex has no relation to the woman’s job and took place outside the course of her employment. He maintained that the woman would only have a case if her employer “required” her to have sex or if she were able to prove that having sex was reasonably incidental to her work-related trip. It’s not clear when a verdict will be issued.
Police say a Judge from the aptly named Intercourse hollowed out acorns, placed condoms inside, put the tops back on and randomly handed them out. Two female recipients of the condom-filled acorns complained to police, who cited the judge for disorderly conduct. The judge explained that it was just a joke, but is now facing fines and/or disciplinary action by the state’s Judicial Conduct Board.
The acorns had been cracked open, stuffed with rubbers and then resealed with putty. In quite possibly the best press quote ever, “Police are holding several nuts as evidence.” Questions: Who thinks to unscrew the top of an acorn? How long had the judge been collecting acorns for the project? How much was spent in condoms? The world may never know the answers since the judge’s attorney declined comment, but the whole thing is clearly nuts!
Judge Jerks Off During Mediation
A district court judge is accused of using inappropriate language and appeared to be masturbating while mediating a divorce settlement. (How does one only ‘appear’ to be masturbating?) One of the lawyers present alleges that the judge’s actions were so offensive that even her client’s estranged husband complained about it during the trial. Moreover, the woman involved in the case continued that the judge attempted to discuss her undergarments and her sex life, though neither was relevant to the case.
After the woman filed a complaint about his behavior, the judge launched his own investigation into her private life and used his power to influence the divorce proceedings. She also states that he also had court personnel write false documents to the commission attacking her and insisting the judge did nothing wrong.
As a result of judge’s actions, the woman claims that she suffered loss of income, reputation, inconvenience, insult, mental distress, embarrassment, humiliation, anxiety, emotional pain and suffering. She is now seeking punitive damages. I always wondered what went on behind closed robes…
Former cocaine addict turned judge, created (another) controversy when he told a rape victim in his courtroom that he didn’t believe she was raped because she was “on top” during the act.
In response to his statement, the judge retrospectively commented that “In light of the nature of the offense, the better means would have been to call counsel for both sides into chambers, express my concerns, explain my concerns based on the evidence I had in front of me — and by that I mean the physical evidence — and then let them flesh it out.“ YA THINK???
Whether the judge’s concerns about the victim being on top were considered by the jury remains to be seen when the transcripts of the Houston case are released.
