Cry-Baby of the Week
Jul 5 2013
Cry-Baby #1: Jason Marin
The incident: A man received a text message from his neighbour asking him to turn his music down.
The appropriate response: Depending on the time of day and volume of the music, either reducing the volume or saying "no".
The actual response: He allegedly attempted to bite off his neighbour's penis.
Late last month, 39-year-old Dover, England resident Richard Henderson became annoyed at the loud music coming from the apartment of his neighbour, 41-year-old Jason Martin.
He sent Jason a text message, telling him it was too loud.
According to Richard, Jason then knocked on the door to confront him about sending the text.
Describing what happened next to Canterbury Crown Court, prosecutor Mary Jacobson said, "A verbal altercation ensued, which culminated in the defendant reaching around Mr Henderson’s back with one hand and grabbing him by the crotch – his penis and testicles – with the other hand and then pulling Mr Henderson out of his doorway." Adding, "Once out of the flat a scuffle ensued during which the defendant pushed Mr Henderson against a wall, stooped down and bit into and gnawed at, Mr Henderson’s penis."
A neighbour heard Richard's screams and came out to try and help. She attempted to pull Jason's face away from Richard's crotch, but was unable to do so. A second neighbour, who had also heard the screams, came out and managed to separate them.
When police arrived at the scene, they found Jason "with blood over his mouth".
When asked by a jury to describe the attack, Richard said, "my willy was not attached to the rest of my body. I have never experienced that kind of pain to this day and I don't want to experience it ever again."
Jason, however, denies the alleged dick-biting, saying "How could I bite him? I have no teeth."
The incident: Singer Pharrell Williams launched a YouTube channel called i am OTHER.
The appropriate response: Watching it/not watching it. Depending on your tastes.
The actual response: will.i.am is attempting to sue Pharrell, because he was using the term "I am" first.
Last week, will.i.am filed a notice of opposition against Pharrell's company, i am OTHER, claiming that he had legal ownership of the term "I am."
In documents obtained by Rolling Stone, will.i.am's legal team said that Pharrell would be using his "i am OTHER" logo in a similar way to how will.i.am uses his own "I AM" logo. "The registration of the mark . . . is likely to dilute the I AM mark and the WILL.I.AM mark," the document reads.
In a statement to Rolling Stone, Pharrell said, "I am disappointed that Will, a fellow artist, would file a case against me. I am someone who likes to talk things out and, in fact, I attempted to do just that on many occasions. I am surprised in how this is being handled and I am confident that Will's trademark claims will ultimately be found to be as meritless and ridiculous as I do."
Pharrell went on to countersue, claiming that his use of the term "I am" is "markedly different" to will.i.am's use.
The term "I am " has previously been used by the movie I Am Legend, the songs "I Am the Walrus" and "I Am What I Am", as well as the the young adult book series I Am Number Four. Additionally, it is commonly used by every single person who has spoken English ever. And probably by people who speak other languages, too.
The trial continues.
Which of these fools is the bigger cry-baby? Let us know in this little poll thing:
Winner: The chalk ones!!!