Jump to content

Would ya?


\GoBillsInDallas/

Recommended Posts

Just now, KD in CA said:

 

And you can get any girl to look that bad in a drunk mug shot.    The truth is always somewhere in the middle.

Bingo.

 

I see a bunch of Instagram girls trying to add me all the time and it's incredible. And then there are girls I know and I see the photos they post - totally unrealistic 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Boyst62 said:

How is it illegal for having sex with a wedding guest?   That's irrelevant. 

 

Call me crazy, but I'd say it's peeing on the tree and then threatening to kill the cops' kids that gets her charged.  The rest is just arrest report filler.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, shrader said:

 

Call me crazy, but I'd say it's peeing on the tree and then threatening to kill the cops' kids that gets her charged.  The rest is just arrest report filler.

But the headline says arrested for having sex... Whiich is just retarded because it's not accurate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/27/2018 at 8:27 AM, Boyst62 said:

How is it illegal for having sex with a wedding guest?   That's irrelevant. 

Not illegal to have sex with a wedding guest, but other actions are 

 

The sex part precipitated, escalated the confrontation.

 

She wasn't arrested for that.  Reading comprehension is everything.

 

It takes "two to tango."  The other didn't seem to be arrested:

 

"'...A security guard, an off-duty sheriff’s deputy, reported wedding guests had found Mehta having sex with a wedding guest in a room at the venue, according to an arrest report obtained by the Star-Telegram on Monday.

Sheriff Larry Fowler said Mehta was a wedding photographer.

Mehta left the room, walked to a fountain and began to yell.

She then went to a nearby tree and urinated, according to the warrant.

She was placed in a patrol car, where she reportedly threatened deputies as she was driven to jail..."

 

"...Mehta faces charges of public intoxication and obstruction/retaliation, according to jail records."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boyst62 said:

But the headline says arrested for having sex... Whiich is just retarded because it's not accurate

 

Was it changed at some point?  Here is the headline I see:

 

Quote

Wedding photographer jailed after reportedly having sex with guest, urinating in public

 

That doesn't say she was arrested for having sex.

Edited by shrader
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WhoTom said:

 

"Jailed after" not "jailed for." Different things.

 

 

 

That and it also ignores the second part of the headline. If you’re going to read it the way he did, the two have to at least be taken together. That second act, there’s no debate, is an arrestable offense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...