Well, this is embarrassing.
Misspelled is mis-spelled [sic].
Dec12|15 ~ anonymous ~ " 'My lawyers will be in touch': Lady C threatens
yet MORE legal action after ugly Twitter spat with Duncan Bannatyne's girlfriend
You know that when the DM puts up an anonymous article, it's gonna' be
really f*cked. In this case the DM wants to make some old twittering
twerp named "Lady C" look like the same sort of ESL moron the DM
editors actually are, and you know how this is going to go. To accomplish
this feat of anonymous character assassination, the anonymous DM nincompoop
started throwing around "sic's" like sharpened hatchets. Only
they turned out to be boomerangs.
a first matter, "sic" is short for "sic erat scriptum,"
which translates to "thus it was written." Pedantic pricks
place the nasty little note in parentheses directly after an error the
pricks wish to point out, and, of course, in the pointing out the error
the pricks are also attempting to establish their superiority over the
persons who made the error. I do this all the time; it really feels
Up first is the DM
goof in the below screen-shot in which the cowardly DM writer mistakenly
flags "dismissed" as "mis-spelled." It's
not. But what was misspelled was "mis-spelled," which is
only hyphenated by 4th graders and Bangladeshis learning the nuances of
What Lady C
certainly did misspell -- by way of typo, no doubt -- was "Lawers."
The DM anonymous nincompoop "reporter" not only missed this
entirely but corrected the error in the headline, without comment. I would also note
that the nincompoop placed an apostrophe before "This,"
presumably intending to use it as an open quote. And, in fact, there
is an orphaned closing quote after "(sic),". Apostrophes
may be used for internal quotes, but there are no internal quotes
here. Then there is
the errant comma after the first "tweet" and an errant
apostrophe at the very end that is not connected to anything. When you put all of these wild
punctuation marks together, what they sum to is indisputable proof that this
pedantic DM nincompoop has no idea how English punctuation is actually
Up next is the following screen shot that
has me completely bamboozled. Here the DM nincompoop -- showing commendable
journalistic balance -- goes after the other party of this stupid
Twitter-spat. Once again our nincompoop uses an apostrophe where a
quote is required, but at least this time he/she has an "open
apostrophe" and a "closed apostrophe." But at the
very end he/she attempts to stab his/her victim, Nigora, with a
"[sic]." But I have no idea what that "[sic]" is
referring to. Nincompoop probably thinks the "who's" is
not proper grammar. It is -- it's a contraction of "who
is." Nothing like being impaled on your own ultracrepidarian sic's.
I really thought I was going to get to stick it to Ms. or Mr.
missing a "sic" behind that "hinging on to" phrase, but,
alas, I've learned something: that is a proper idiom -- it means rely on or
depend on. Yes, even the participle version is valid. Must be
Finally, I would like to point out how this idiot DM piece
is a perfect example of a pernicious brain-ded habit of writers of demotic online news
rags like the DM: Every sentence is its own paragraph. Apparently the DM
editors see their readers as being so frickin' stupid that they can't hold two
sentences-worth of information in their wee brains long enough to finish one
paragraph. And with respect to anyone who would waste their time reading
this particular article, the editors are probably right. (Discounting myself, of
Note to editors of HuffPo: Wrong jet, you morans.
Huffpo FrontPage Dec14 carried this headline/photo combo:
story was about the Turks shooting a Russian Su-27 out of the sky over
Syria. This picture is the tail section of a Russian passenger
jet, MetroJet Flight 9268, lying in the Egyptian desert.
Remember wacko judge in Michigan who locked up the 3 kids?
She's busted by the judicial ethics
Back on July12|15 I went on an
("Lisa Gorcyca: Poster-girl for what's wrong with Americans' system
of choosing who judges them") about this nutter Michigan judge Lisa
Gorcyca. She's the one who locked up three young kids because
they refused to have lunch with their father, who they accused of being
violent and beating their mother.
was not possible from just the news accounts available then to fully
appreciate the legal fine points regarding how much latitude judges in
Michigan have in dealing with people before them. Well, apparently,
however much latitude there may be, the Michigan judicial ethics cops
decided Gogcyca stepped over the line in the way she dealt with these
children and their mother. Our Judge Judy of the Frozen North is now
facing a very serious judicial ethics complaint, including charges of
lying before the judicial ethics tribunal, aka Michigan Judicial Tenure
We can only hope that
Gorcyca, with a rep as a hardball judge and prosecutor, now gets a good
and lasting taste of what it's like when those judging your conduct play
ball with a very hardball. And a bat.
is the best example of investigative journalism you will ever read
Christian Miller & Ken Armstrong ~ Pro
Publica, Dec16|15 ~ "An Unbelievable Story of Rape"
maybe they overdid it on the rape details a time or two. And maybe
this could be seen as a DIY piece on how to be a serial rapist and not get
caught (i.e. don't use gloves that leave marks on the window), but, other
than that, an incredible piece of writing. Absolutely mesmerizing.
Perv cop in Manasass, Va. in the news
again. Story gets worse.
On Jul25|14 I pitched
a rant about pervy cops and DAs in Manassas, Va. who busted a 17-yo kid
for reciprocally sexting his girlfriend -- of course she was not busted for her
part in the sexting. The detective, David Abbott, Jr. threatened
the kid that if he refused to plead guilty to felony charges they would force
him to have an erection so they could photograph it and use the photo as
evidence against him. At the time I said:
". . . you have to be one frickin' perv to bust a kid and
then threaten to photograph his woody unless he pleads guilty. One frickin'
That was my
honest opinion of Abbott over a year ago and still is. I mean, mind you, the cop photographed the kid's
junk once, but that wasn't enough. He wanted to see it stiff. Of
course, there were DA's touching this story, too, if you'll forgive my choice of
And today we can say that if you were one of those who smelled a pervert cop
driving this disgusting story back in July, come on down and collect your
prize. For on Dec15|15 the Manassas
Patch reported that Abbott was just that: a perv with a history.
On Tuesday the county cops showed up at Abbott's house to arrest him on a warrant for indecent
liberties with and sexual solicitation of an 11-yo. boy two years ago. As
the county cops closed in on him Abbott locked himself
in his house and shot himself dead. It looks like the cop's kiddie-lust went back to at least 2008
-- that is 6 years before the woody-evidence case went viral -- and involved at
least one other child. My guess is that victims will start crawling out of the woodwork now
that the light is on this pervert's history. The fact that he killed
himself when the warrants came home to roost says a lot more about him than I
ever could. But to drive home the point that Abbott was a total prick, there is
the lawsuit he filed against the 17-yo boy's lawyer.
About a month ago the WaPo's Tom Jackman reported
that Abbott's lawyer, Dirk McClananhan, non-suited a defamation law suit
he had filed in behalf of pervert Abbott against the boy's lawyer, Jessica H.
Foster. Ms. Foster was reported in the WaPo as characterizing Abbott's
tactic of trying to extort a guilty plea out of a 17-yo by threatening to
force him to have his woody photographed as crazy: "Who does this? It's just crazy."
It sounded like an absolutely accurate, material, and long
overdue observation to me, but McClananahan made the decision that
Foster's comment warranted a defamation suit. That any judge would
decline to immediately throw such a suit out and consider sanctions against McClananhan
seems to me to be inconsistent with not just most Americans' sense
of justice, but inconsistent with Ms. Foster's 1st Amendment guarantees of free speech. That judge was Loudoun County Circuit Court Judge Thomas
Unfortunately, McClananhan's non-suit does not necessarily mean the defamation
case is over. Lawyers in Virginia non-suit all the time, especially bogus lawsuits, but there are many tactical reasons to
temporarily or permanently drop a valid
lawsuit, too. McClananhan has a year to re-file the suit and start over.
Yes, he could re-file the suit even though his
pervert client is good and dead. We'll see.
To end on a more positive note, I want to point out what a fantastic job of journalism
Tom Jackman has done on this case right from the beginning. I envy
and admire his strong, clear writing style and extreme self-control in
writing about such evil, perverty people. Below are more
of his WaPo pieces.
Tom Jackman, WaPo,
Jul09|14 ~ In 'sexting' case Manassas City police want to
photograph teen in sexually explicit manner
Tom Jackman, WaPo,
Jul10|14 ~ Manassas City police say they will not serve search
warrant in teen 'sexting' case
Tom Jackman, WaPo,
Aug01|14 ~ Manassas City teen placed on probation in 'sexting'
case where police sought photos
'cuse me Professor, but
macrophages do not kill sandflies.
Barrett is Prof of Biochemical Parasitology at the University of
Glasgow and so he must know his stuff. What he doesn't know is how
to talk to the public about his stuff. He has written a
piece that has appeared in multiple online sources today about how
the disease leishmaniasis is becoming a problem in Syria. As with
any useful discussion of leishmaniasis, Barrett's article includes the
part about how the sandfly is a primary vector for spreading the
disease. And then he pops off this paragraph employing the medics'
just mentioned sandflies in his penultimate sentence, Barrett then goes on
to say that macrophages "normally kill bugs." Sounds like
he is trying to say macrophages kill sandflies, which certainly are
bugs. No. Macrophages don't kill sandflies, and they don't kill
bugs. They kill microorganisms. If Barrett felt he
needed to dumb it down to our level, "germs" would have been a
far better term to use instead of "bugs."
to clarify this point for Prof. Barrett. Macrophages do not kill the
crawly, multi-legged things most laymen think of as bugs: sandflies,
mosquitoes, ants, spiders, &etc. Macrophages kill the legless
things most laymen think of as "germs," which are often called
both "bugs" and "microorganisms" by health
what communication is made of." ™