A General Rant
I’m just going to rant in general today. I actually started this yesterday but I had too much to say to finish it, so bear with me. While the Liz Carroll judge prefers not to partake in this “cacophony” I choose to partake, it’s my first amendment right.
In local news a jury found Liz Carroll guilty of murder, involuntary manslaughter, kidnapping, felonious assault, and 3 counts of child endangering. The rest of the world is not surprised. This is like saying, “Britney Spears is found to be a bad mom.�? No kidding, she wanders the globe like an addlepated tart and is generally too busy stripping, drinking, or puking to bother taking care of her children. It’s been a while since I’ve handed out the douche bag of the week award, but I can’t pick just one this time. It’s like douche bag city, there’s no end to the douche baggery in the death of Marcus Fiesel.
Douche #1, David Carroll – What kind of husband brings his girlfriend to LIVE in the home with his wife? I mean, there’s extramarital affairs and then there is ridiculous. There are conflicting reports as to whether or not David & Liz shared Amy Baker as their girlfriend or not, and I don’t care what’s true in that case. I’m
Douch #2, Liz Carroll – Ok, when the prosecuting attorney is making his closing argument and brings up that “they treated the family dog better than Marcus�?, you don’t say, “but the dog was alive.�? Liz, that didn’t make you look smart, it didn’t make you look caring, and it certainly didn’t help your case! You were also old enough to know better. Also, using a foster child as a source of income is disgusting. I suppose that’s what people do when they are to ugly to strip.
Douche #3, Amy Baker – You get immunity for telling “the truth�? which conveniently doesn’t implicate yourself. Good work, you’re the smartest piece of trash in
Douche #4, Liz Carroll’s lawyer – although I have the STRONG feeling he was trying to guarantee her firm ground for appeal by giving such a piss poor defense.
Douche #5, The Cincinnati Enquirer – I’ve made no bones about how poorly written I find this paper. I mean, isn’t there an editor to find the typos and the bad grammar? It’s not like my blog, it’s a newspaper, people are supposed to read it! Anyways the Enquirer is being recognized with this coveted award for publishing the names and occupations of the jurors in this case. Where do they get off? I once served as a juror in a medial malpractice case where a man had died (because his wife didn’t care about him, not the fault of the doctor) and as the foreman of that jury I would have felt my safety was in danger. Heck, I felt endangered enough just being in downtown
In the end I have made predictions: While David Carroll must know that he doesn’t stand an ice cubes chance, his lawyer will again fight that he cannot get a fair trial in
And kudos to the judge in this case for not abusing his power (and speaking ability) and completely going overboard with the obligatory verbal spanking each judge gives a convicted criminal. The diarrhea of their judgmental mouth has always annoyed me
Filed under: Life in Cincinnati, Squawk Box on February 22nd, 2007




Leave a Reply