Monday, March 26, 2007

Beyond Disturbing

This is one criminal record that might just make it to the record books :)

Bryan James Hathaway was recently convicted of having sexual intercourse with the corpse of a dead deer. The 20-year old didn’t get a prison sentence, though. What he got instead was probation.

I didn’t know that you could be criminally liable for having sexual contact with a dead animal. I’m aware of certain legislations involving the treatment of animals, but these laws usually only apply to live ones. Provisions regarding the handling and disposal of dead animals are usually contained in sanitary statutes.

Paul said that the man was lucky that he only got probation. He explained that in other jurisdictions, a person who’s caught having sex with an animal could even get a prison sentence. (How come you know about these things, Paul? Hmmm…. Just kidding :) )

Apparently the man needs professional help. Who, in his right mind, would have intercourse with a corpse of a dead deer? This wasn’t the first time either that he perpetrated a crime of a similar nature. He got a “felony mistreatment of an animal” conviction in April 2005 for killing a horse with the intention of having sexual contact with it. He got more than just probation that time. The court sentenced him to 18 months in jail. He was also meted a 6-year imprisonment for taking a car without its owner’s consent.

The judge lamented that the behavior exhibited by Hathaway was disturbing. I think that the court’s observation was mildly put. If you’re going to ask me, the act was plainly despicable. The probation was a very light penalty. However, it’s quite comforting to know that the court order also provided for Hathaway’s mandatory treatment at the Institute of for Psychological and Sexual Health in Duluth, Minnesota.

Thursday, March 15, 2007

To Pay or Not to Pay

I’m sure you’re already aware of the government’s position regarding the payment of ransom or any form of financial aid to groups that have been tagged as terrorists. I have no problem with this policy. In fact, I think it’s a necessary one. If governments would cower in fear and quickly reach for its purse every time one of its citizens gets abducted by good-for-nothing bandits, then they’ll be technically abetting the latter’s reprehensible acts.

All this tough talk is easy for us who haven’t been victimized by kidnapping syndicates or terror groups. I could just imagine the scorn that the policy gets from the family and friends of those who have been abducted by the outlawed groups. I’m sure they don’t care if giving money to the criminals would just result into more kidnappings in the future. It’s only natural that they would do all that they can to save their loved ones.

This was the dilemma that Chiquita faced. The banana company mainly gets it supply of the fruit from their plantation in Colombia. Unfortunately, the location of the farm is known to be one of the kidnapping hotspots in the world. Their employees are in constant danger of being taken against their will. Fortunately, not one of the plantation workers are in the custody of the terrorist groups lurking in the area.

This doesn’t mean though, that the security situation in the Chiquita farm is good. On the contrary, many terror groups operate in the area. It’s not surprising then that the company had received demands for protection money from one of the bandit groups that control the area.

In order to ensure the security of its employees, Chiquita acceded to the demands of the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) and paid protection money to the group. The Justice Department found out that it had paid AUC a total of $1.7 million between 1997 and 2004. A $25-million fine was meted out to the company for dealing with the terrorist organization.

I can’t blame Chiquita for dealing with people whose criminal records are probably as thick as a telephone directory. I just hope that the military and law enforcement groups in Colombia would exert strenuous efforts in eradicating the area around the plantation of unwanted criminals.

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Fatty Issue

Have you seen the Adidas commercial a few months back where Kevin Garnett said that we’re just being fooled to believe that it’s just all about him whenever his team is playing great? Well, I just remembered that line of his because an old friend of mine who saw my picture on blogger said that I look really fit and asked me if I’ve been working out.

I let out a loud chuckle after she said that. As much as I wanted to second her claim, I told her honestly that beneath that well-pressed suit lies a bulging (and still growing) belly. I also didn’t mention the chest hair because that might gross her out. We were enjoying our conversation and I didn’t want to abruptly end it by describing the lawn on my chest.

I’ve been planning to go to the gym for the longest time. However, my eyes usually play tricks on me whenever I examine myself on the mirror. For some reason I always see the reflection of a very fit man whenever I stand before the mirror. Maybe it’s not a mirror. Maybe it’s actually a 6-foot poster of a guy that looks lime me (minus the belly, of course).

I’m fully aware that there are many fat-burning pills in the market that could fry the lard off our tummies without lifting a muscle. However, I’m quite apprehensive in trying them because many say that there are very undesirable side effects. I bet some of the pharmaceutical companies who make fat-burning supplements have criminal records already for issuing defective or harmful products. The last thing that I need is a health problem. I’m not aspiring to have a body like Sylvester Stallone’s. All I want is to be healthy.

I’ve read an article which revealed that we could actually teach our body to burn fat. The methods by which you could do it require hard work, though. But, then again, nothing in life is easy.