Print Columns   |   Web Chats   |   Blog Archives   |  

Supersized, Now With Free Loogie

Man drives up to a Taco Bell and orders an iced tea. Sorry, we're all out of tea, comes the reply. Ok, then, give me a Mountain Dew, says the man.

Pretty ordinary transaction so far, right? But before he got his Dew, the man complained to the manager of the joint on Garrisonville Road in northern Stafford County, Virginia, that this Taco Bell, which the man visited three or four times a week, had been running out of tea all too often of late. Apparently, this complaint did not go over well inside the fast food place.

When the man began to drink his Dew, he noticed something floating in it: A loogie. Just to be sure, he touched it. Yep. Bodily substance.

Now, the worker who served up the mucus-laced Mountain Dew has been sentenced to serve six months in the clink for assault and battery, obstruction of justice and filing a false police report. Shaleesheya Ford, an 18-year-old high school junior, is now in the Rapahannock Regional Jail, where she will have plenty of time to mull over the line between funny prank and assault on another person.

Initially, she was charged with a felony--adulteration of food--but prosecutors knocked that down to misdemeanor assault because they couldn't show that Ford intended to "kill or injure" the customer.

The creative bit of the sentence is a three-year ban on Ford working in the food industry or entering any Taco Bell in Virginia (though why the judge limited the ban to one particular fast food chain isn't quite clear.) But the six months in jail does seem a trifle excessive. There are so many violent crimes, jam-packed with evil intent, that don't draw prison time that this seems like a rather cavalierly supersized sentence.

Some of you will surely argue that this is a relatively harmless prank; after all, virtually every college, high school and summer camp is replete with tales, apocryphal and not, of kitchen workers who spiced up the soup, juice or stew with some specially crafted bodily fluid of one sort or another.

Three points: 1) That is an unusually disgusting prank. 2) There is a difference between what kids do to one another in a camp kitchen and what a major corporation serves its customers in the drive-thru. 3) While Ford probably did not intend that any harm come to the man who dared to complain about the fine selection at Taco Bell, she obviously did intend to get back at him for his supposed violation of the You'll Take What You Get relationship between eatery and eater.

Ford did plead guilty and the ban from Taco Bell is a nice touch. Maybe a weekend in jail would have delivered the message that this is unacceptable behavior. (In the closest other case I could find, a 20-year-old Burger King worker in Indiana worked out a plea in which he paid a fine of $500 and did 60 hours of community service for spitting in police officer's soda cup. The young man also wrote an apology to the cop. But the judge in the case said he really would have preferred jail time.)

Anyone think Ford deserved more or less than a weekend in jail and a ban from fast food joints?

By Marc Fisher |  May 30, 2006; 7:29 AM ET
Previous: Hey, On-Demand Media Consumer! (Yeah, You) | Next: Collective Sleuthing, Neighborhood Style


Please email us to report offensive comments.

I think a weekend in jail and community service (preferably someplace in health in sanitation where she could learn the potential impact of her prank) is appropriate but - OH NO - I can't stuff my butt into polyester pants and serve folks who complain about a place that prides itself on its dollar menu - and corresponding low wages. That IS rough.

Posted by: x cap girl | May 30, 2006 9:12 AM

Sounds about right to me. It was a spiteful and disgusting act. Frankly, I'd prefer to be punched in the mouth than ingest somebody's loogie. Yeach!

Posted by: Herndon | May 30, 2006 9:21 AM

I agree with the weekend in jail. And maybe some community service feeding the homeless. What struck me in looking at other sentences onlineis that some serious crimes get pled down to the 6 month to one year level.

Posted by: Pete | May 30, 2006 9:40 AM

Given that most illnesses that Ford had could have been caught by the drinker, 6-months is not execessive (in my opinion). She is 18 years old and an adult. If she can't act like it and puts somebody's health at risk, put her jail.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 30, 2006 9:52 AM

Can we please bring back the stocks? How about public flogging? I remember school--both elementary and middle--as being fairly safe places where the teachers were in charge and the kids terrified of the vice principal and his paddle. Just the threat of it kept many would-be criminals in line (at least until high school). I clearly remember the names and faces of the three boys who "got it" and the hush afterward in the classroom. It was administered right outside the classroom for maximum impact (hahahaha). I am so glad that I pack my lunch every day! Hey--maybe Americans aren't getting fat on fast food, but the unauthorized additions of bodily fluids! Anyone know the caloric count of snot? Six months seems excessive--maybe he could serve HER a meal!

Posted by: oldenoughtoremember | May 30, 2006 9:54 AM

What she did was hateful and disgusting. If this an indication of the attitude that she has chosen, she should never be allowed to work in the food industry again. Six months in jail is a justifiable punishment. People that does this could be spreading AIDS, hepatitis, and other diseases.

Posted by: Lyn | May 30, 2006 9:57 AM

she may be an adult legally, but she's still in high school and obviously her actions show she has a lot of growing up to do. the ban from taco bell is a nice touch, but what is 6 months in jail going to do for her? piss her off more? discourage her from finishing school? a weekend, with a fine, a written apology, and some community service in the health/human service industry sounds much more like a punishment that would certainly get the message across and hopefully leave her a better person than what she would be at the end of her 6 month stint in the clink.

Posted by: nat | May 30, 2006 9:57 AM

6 months? That's excessive! A weekend plus community service would suffice. I'm not condoning her behavior, but 6 months is ridiculous.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 30, 2006 9:58 AM

Some jail time is warranted--maybe one month--but six sounds too harsh. Too long in the clink and she'll probably come out embittered and more dysfunctional than when she went in. Long enough for her to think about and realize her error, but not long enough for resentment over an excessive sentence to set in.

Posted by: Vienna, VA | May 30, 2006 10:02 AM

Excessive. There is nothing you can catch for eating someones booger. Definitely not AIDS, as one commenter mentioned.

Posted by: youarenotascientist | May 30, 2006 10:22 AM

I think 6 months is a fair punishment. Of course, the ultimate punishment would have been to have the clerk drink the tainted beverage. Now THAT would have been a lesson not soon forgotten.

Posted by: Fairfax, VA | May 30, 2006 10:22 AM

Several weekends in jail, like they do for drunk driving, would have been more appropriate. Six months is excessive, and I'll bet it gets reduced on appeal. High School or not, she is an adult. Obviously, if she is 18 and only a junior in high school, she is not the sharpest tool in the shed. BTW, did you see her mug shot on TV. Pure attitude!! Total "FU" pose.

Posted by: fry boy | May 30, 2006 10:26 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 30, 2006 10:33 AM

I think each case should be different. Depending on the person's attitude. Was she sorry for what she did? Maybe that is why she got 6 months. Kids nowadays don't care what will happen. They are getting away with too much, because teachers and parents cannot punish them. She could have passed a disease to him and if he already has a weakened immune system, it could have been fatal. If he died, would 6 months be enough?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 30, 2006 10:34 AM

I can't read the article. The title was enough to turn my stomach. Yuck!

Posted by: Jennifer | May 30, 2006 10:43 AM

Just reading the story has me about to toss my cookies. Six months isn't too much. Unfortunately, from the way it sounds, at this point it's too late for this girl. Jail her for 6 months and she comes out a hardened criminal; slap her wrist and she is likely to see what else she can get away with. She should be banned from working in any establishment that serves food at all, in any state, but how would you enforce that?

Posted by: ajsmithva | May 30, 2006 10:44 AM

I think she should have to serve 3 years or so. I don't know what I would have done since she's a woman. I obey all laws, am as law-abiding as they come. But I have been in this conversation before and decided long ago. If I see it in mine, I will be the one getting arrested. No doubt, no way, my reaction will be violent if someone spits in my food or otherwise alters it and I'm aware of it. I know I'm radical, and that's just me. Don't expect people to jump on the bandwagon and say yes, they deserve a beating. I guess I'd be faced with a quandary if the guilty party were a juvenile or a woman. If it were a man, I wouldn't hesitate I would go right behind the counter after the person. I don't do drive throughs, so I'd be inside to start with. I'm old school, so personally I don't think fisticuffs between adult males should warrant a response from law enforcement unless it goes beyond just a fight. If I jumped the counter and ended up getting the worst of it, which is doubtful, I wouldn't cry to anyone. Likewise, I think if you're an adult male and you leave a loogie in someone's drink and the next thing you know your eyes are watering, your nose is bleeding and hurts like hell, you should suck it up and take it like a man.
This kind of behavior in unacceptable. She should do way more time in my opinion. I don't feel any sympathy for her.
yes, I know I'm going to hear how my behavior would be unacceptable if I jumped the counter, and blah, blah, blah. But it would be my call, not yours, and I'd have to lay out thousands for a lawyer I'm sure. Gotta draw the line somewhere. My line just happens to be in a different place than that of most.

Posted by: Glen | May 30, 2006 10:55 AM

Six months is not enough. She should do hard time. Every bite of that delicious prison food can remind her of what she did to get there. To those who think jail time is excessive, what if the customer caught a food-borne illness because of Shaleesheya's "smoker loogie"? What if some punk hocked one into your drink? Do you think that's justified for merely asking the manager to make sure there's enough iced tea on hand?

Posted by: Ivan Tokstig | May 30, 2006 11:12 AM

Vile. That's the only word I can think of. I spent over 10 years in the restaurant business and there is never, ever a reason or excuse for that behavior. She's a disgusting human being and should be treated as such.

I disagree with her sentencing. In addition to writing a letter of apology she should work one 12-hour shift every weekend serving food at a homeless shelter. Jail won't teach her the lessons she needs.

I wonder how she would have handled this situation if it was her drink. Can you imagine the uproar against Taco Bell if a young black woman claimed someone spit into her soda?

Posted by: asta | May 30, 2006 11:14 AM

Right sentence, what if she had AIDS or hepatitis c or herpes or some other disease and he contracted it, would not be so funny then would it?

Posted by: PATRICK | May 30, 2006 11:17 AM

I grew up with a VA State Trooper for a father. My dad was strict- fighting was absolutely forbidden, unless we were spit on. That is the line my dad drew for me when I was young. You can do a lot of things to me but spit on me and it is on. She might as well have spit in the victims face. I don't think a few months in jail is enough, she should have to serve the entire sentence. I hope she gets out and violates parole as soons as possible so she can go back and serve the rest of her time. What a disgusting act.

Posted by: Troy | May 30, 2006 11:20 AM

I used to occasionally eat at that particular Taco Bell and can't bring myself to do so now. I think it's absolutely the right sentence--how much harm has come to that food outlet in particular because of the publicity? How would you feel if you were the owner of the franchise and your business fell off precipitously because of it? Six months may send a message to other food servers who think it might be amusing to try a similar "prank" and harm a business as well as expose the public to illness.

Posted by: Stafford Resident | May 30, 2006 11:40 AM

I think the chiquita should be forced to sit through an all you can eat loogie fiesta, perhaps with 'lemonade' on the side. I personally would want a loogie adder to spend a quick period on death row, followed by very slow, painful lethal loogie injection.

Posted by: Greg | May 30, 2006 11:43 AM

Isn't all of Taco Bell's food just a giant loogie? How many people have died from the poison in fast food? The soda was waaaaay worse for the guy than the woman's snot.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 30, 2006 11:45 AM

A friend totally believes this happens all the time, black kids do it to whites, white kids do it to whoever.... He won't eat in a fast food place he's not familiar with. NOW he knows he is right. I knew it was a joke, and i assumed it had to have happened, but if it happened to me.....I'm not sure I could deal with it peacefully. Six months of weekends in jail would have been fair.

Posted by: Joe | May 30, 2006 11:46 AM

Only you Marc could paint the aggressor as the victim in this story. How do you know Ford's intent? She spat in a customer's drink. What do you think her intent was?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 30, 2006 11:57 AM

It seems like a fair sentence, the 6 months.

AIDS and other diseases can be present in saliva, and it is pretty serious what she did.

Saliva in food is a fast food or restaurant cliche that almost never happens, but even one time is too much. It is a cowardly way to get back at a customer. By having this record, the lady will be less likely to work in fast food again. unpleasant as fast food is to work in, they do have a position of trust, they serve food that people place inside their bodies.

The young lady thought the customer was her problem-her problem was with her self.

As for the customer, was it worth the aggravation he went through, I doubt it. Better to make nice when eating take out.

Posted by: eater | May 30, 2006 12:01 PM

This is one of several reasons I will not use a drive-thru. Get off your butt and go inside if you must eat fast food. I am not saying you should eat it there...just get your order, and get it RIGHT by watching them assemble your order, and take it to your car. McDonalds always passes off its old, cold, french fries on the drive-thru customers. How many times have you taken your drive-thru order home only to find out it is not the right order.

Posted by: no drive-thru | May 30, 2006 12:08 PM

No, I do not agree. I'm certain that Taco Bell, like every other corporation, deserves its sales and stock protected from bad pr due to the actions of its own employees.

No doubt consumers need some level of protection too, but let's focus on the real issues here.

Posted by: Mark | May 30, 2006 12:09 PM

Anybody remember Dexter Manley? How many years in the clink should he have gotten for spitting on another football player?

Posted by: ds | May 30, 2006 12:20 PM

Says in the article that the loogie-hocker was charged with "...filing a false police report." Isn't lying to authorities a big offense (ask a couple of past Presidents of the U.S. -- they will tell you). So, maybe six months is appropriate, but only for the lying. Any thoughts?

Posted by: Morris21654 | May 30, 2006 12:21 PM

Well I made the mistake of reading this story during lunchtime, so thanks for the mental image of the tainted Mountain Dew. I think this has killed Taco Bell and Mountain Dew for me forever - much to my healthful benefit!!

Posted by: Adam | May 30, 2006 12:24 PM

I applaud the judge and his sentence. I think a weekend in jail would of made the person more upset than remorseful. This sentence gives her time to sit there and think about it and hopefully clean up her act.

Posted by: Elle | May 30, 2006 12:30 PM

Did this idiot have a lawyer? Did the idiot lawyer have a law degree? Obviously, the six months is not just for the loogie, but for lying to the police about it instead of just fessing up.

Anyway, she's banned from fast food, but all you well meaning bleeding hearts want her to work in health or human services? OK, she can take care of YOUR mom or dad if you think that's such a good idea.

The jail sentence doesn't bother me, but the only reasonable alternative I can think of would be 6 months of daily twelve-hour shifts at a major municipal garbage dump. She can spend six months living in the rest of the world's sh*t - that's a moral lesson.

Posted by: Mr. Derp | May 30, 2006 12:32 PM

oldenoughtoremember: Before you start calling for the stocks, try to remember what that punishment really entailed: The day spent pelted with rotten vegetables was a breathless respite; the real terror was at night, when anyone (and everyone) could spend some time behind the stocks. Think about it--oddly similar to modern US prisons, no? Commit a serious-enough crime and your anus becomes a traded commodity among the criminal class.

Glen: Totally agree with your attitude--if you can do the time, do the crime if your self-respect demands it (this is also the essence of civil disobedience). But don't jump the counter, inconsiderately making your beef (if you can call it that in a fast food PLACE) everyone's. Some people are trying to eat, furchrissake! Like at a house party, wait until he's on the street.

Anon: True that. Mountain Dew and a loogie? Does it have to be Mountain Dew?

The Lock'er Up folk: Punitive incarceration may make you feel better--and take a potential looch out of your soda for a bit--but will it eventually diminish crime and better society? As fry boy highlighted, she's an 18-year-old junior; she will serve this sentence during summer break but she needs to be in summer school, and i doubt that VA's penal system is up to it. Without her diploma she will have a much more difficult time putting this behind her. She may not have earned it anyway, but keeping her in the loop will be much cheaper.

At least this victim of Taco Bell-located misservice didn't have to brave the putrid Ganges to purify himself.

Posted by: so many things going on? | May 30, 2006 12:33 PM

Anyone wanna bet that the 6 months the "spitter" spends in jail will be 6 months longer than the Whitman HS kids who are charged with armed robbery (if they're found guilty, of course).

This was a repulsive act, definitely deserving some form of harsh punishment. But if this kid were white, she wouldn't be going to jail.

Posted by: Junior | May 30, 2006 12:44 PM

HELLO, you went to the place, they didn't have the product you wanted. So you still did business with them? Later that week, they yet again didn't have your product: but you still transacted business with them? Why, exactly?

Having said that: it'd be great to have audio/video of the tone of the (whining?) complaint...

Posted by: Blaming the victim | May 30, 2006 12:53 PM

Junior - you're probably right, but that doesn't necessarily mean six months is too harsh a sentence for the crime (and it was, in fact, a crime).

To all you people who think she should've gotten a weekend in jail, community service and a letter - that wouldn't actually change her behavior. The six month sentence probably won't change her general outlook on life, either, but at least she (and others) will think twice the next time she thinks about messing with someone's Dew.

Posted by: Shouldn't have clicked the link | May 30, 2006 12:56 PM

so many things going on, she is 18 years old and only a junior in high school. Do you really think summer school would help her? I think she has already chosen her life's path. Attitudes like that can't be adjusted.

Posted by: Lyn | May 30, 2006 1:07 PM

Sorry no sympathy here, 6 months is not enough, at least a year, plus 3 years probation, plus counseling on her personal life, why is she 18 and still in high school.

This would definitely force change and save her life, if she wants change.

Posted by: Frankey | May 30, 2006 1:45 PM

To those who think the punishment was too much--REMEMBER that she was sentenced to a total of six months on the basis of THREE charges: the "loogie" assault; obstruction of justice and a false police report. Certainly, depending on the facts of the case, obstruction of justice and the false police report can get you six months without the phlegm "vitamin-boost".

Posted by: Bill | May 30, 2006 2:13 PM

I don't believe that 6mos is too harsh. It is my general belief that today's youth, for the most part, fail to recognize the conequences of their actions. When hear of incidents like this, I often wonder if the perpetrator ever entertains the likelihood of being caught. Obviously, the possiblity never occurs to them (much less the probability of being caught). So, when he/she is caught, then an example should be made. They are at the mercy of the conequences. Some life lessons need to be taught and learned hard.

Posted by: gregc | May 30, 2006 2:16 PM

I think a weekend to a week in jail, with a couple of years' probation and ban on working in kitchens, would have been more appropriate.

She did violate a trust we expect to be honored by even those low-wage workers who subsidize our lifestyles. Even though it's a rough job, we're all in the same boat.

Posted by: matt | May 30, 2006 2:27 PM

I am glad she was caught and I am glad she got jail time. She abused the public trust! This kind of thing makes me sick!

Posted by: Fred | May 30, 2006 2:34 PM

I think she should have been sentenced to six months of eating Taco Bell food.

Posted by: CT | May 30, 2006 3:09 PM

Just curious - has anyone responding here spent more then, say a weekend in a large city jail or state facility?

Posted by: John In Houston | May 30, 2006 3:35 PM

Because, what you're going to get with your revenge punishment is someone who did something stupid, associating with other people that are older, teaching her how to do more virulent things.

And what you are also going to get is someone who did something stupid, that at the end of the day, will not be able to work at any meaningful job, ever, because of her record.

Put those two things together, and think of what the cost to society will be because we get our revenge on the stupid, loogie hocking girl.

There are better punishments then jail, and more effective to society for stupid crimes.

Posted by: John In Houston | May 30, 2006 3:38 PM

I'm shocked at how many of you feel that one weekend in jail is sufficient punishment! She deserved every bit of the six month sentence.

Posted by: Steve B | May 30, 2006 3:58 PM

Accountability: learn it. All of the people here who say it's a prank and it's not serious are fooling themselves. I'm sorry she had to work at Taco Bell- hey wait a minute, she did not have to work there. And the person who trashed the guy for suggesting they stock more iced tea???? Come On.... another blame the victim comment. How would you have reacted if it were you?

Posted by: Cj | May 30, 2006 4:05 PM

I have this to say:

Posted by: h3 | May 30, 2006 4:20 PM

In reference to Mr. Derp's question as to whether or not she had a lawyer, Ford was represented by the Public Defender's office. I guess you get what you pay for.

Posted by: WB | May 30, 2006 4:29 PM

If ice tea was on the menu, the Taco Bell joint should have had ice tea on hand. Repeated incidents of not having the tea seems like either laziness or poor management. If it was a matter of just changing the tank, someone should have done it. Or they needed to stock more tea. Overall, fast food places usually don't run of something too often.

If this loogie incident would have happened to me, I would have walked into the store and flicked the loogie out of the cup and into her face. But I'm not sure if I would have done that before or after I beat her a** to the floor.

Posted by: SLM | May 30, 2006 4:45 PM

A weekend in jail would have been suitable provided that the judge ordered her to drink a Dew with the victim's piss in it.

Tainting food like that is not cool. Period.

Posted by: P | May 30, 2006 4:54 PM

I think if nothing else, this sentence is useful in that word may get around amongst fast food workers that spitting or whatever else they might do is not a game or joke and has serious consequences. Perhaps this sentence will be used in the brief training that employees get.

Posted by: Greg | May 30, 2006 5:07 PM

There is too much bad behavior today that is either overlooked and looked upon as cute or acceptable. Six months in jail for a loogey may be a little excessive, but it is preferable to no sanctions at all. People need to see where the line is drawn.

Posted by: DonnyBoy | May 30, 2006 5:44 PM


Most kids do turn 18 before they finish high school, unless they either started school early, skipped a grade, or have a birthday that falls in the summertime. admittedly, most high school students turn 18 during their senior year; still, it seems likely that this girl's only a year behind, so it seems unfair to write her off completely based on her age.

As to whether or not the punishment is appropriate, the problem is that not everyone reacts to punishments the same way. Spank one kid for talking back at the dinner table, and he'll never do it again; spank another kid for the same type of behavior, and it only makes things worse.

Posted by: Kevin | May 30, 2006 5:56 PM

Who brought this girl up anyway? Im not going to generalize and say that this entire generation of kids is dysfunctional because of absentee parents or passive-aggressive parenting. No. This is an individual case of someone who doesn't have enough common sense or impulse control to act out. Jail isn't going to change her behavior. Nothing will. In 5 years, I can see the Metro page headline about the now 23 yr old ex-loogie con, working at another restaurant oblivious to her past misdeed, acting out once more, maybe yelling at a customer or worse.

Posted by: bonzo | May 30, 2006 6:02 PM

Death. Or, public flogging. Making the taxpayers pay Ford's way for six months while she continues to contribute nothing to society can't be the answer.

Posted by: Paul | May 30, 2006 6:11 PM

bonzo, five years from now, she probably will have popped out three babies, lied her way through the welfare system, and found a sucker to take of her while her baby-daddy's are in jail.

Posted by: WB | May 30, 2006 8:51 PM picked up the story. Here's the link to the comments there.

I wonder what her sentence would have been if she was a blonde cheerleader.

Posted by: Pete | May 30, 2006 9:22 PM

So much for the vaunted liberal blogosphere.

Really, what kind of behavior do we expect from someone with a minimum wage McJob? Get a clue, all. She behaved badly, but 6 months?!?!?! You really want to pay for her upkeep all that time? You really want her to associate day and night with far more dangerous offenders? You really want her to come back to society unable to get even a minimum-wage job? You really want her to occupy expensive prison space when crack-dealers and repeat-offenders are given the revolving-door treatment?

Pack your own lunch tomorrow- so you know what you're eating- and think about the consequences of knee-jerk revenge.

Posted by: Mark | May 30, 2006 9:28 PM

Meant to write:
Pack your own lunch tomorrow- so you know what you're eating- and think about the consequences of knee-jerk revenge. She'll have months to do it, you folks who think 6 months is a just and wise sentence might consider spending your 1/2 lunch break the same way.

Posted by: Mark | May 30, 2006 9:34 PM

I was KIDDING when I said bring back the stocks. I was not joking, however, when I said I think paddling kids is not the worst thing that could happen to them. But as for her sentence, it could be too much, maybe not. I do not agree with some posters who believe that she should be locked up simply because her attitude sucks. If that were true there would be more people inside that out!

Posted by: oldenoughtoremember | May 31, 2006 8:31 AM

I hope every fast-food joint around here cuts out the print article and shows it to their staff.

Posted by: Dave | May 31, 2006 12:50 PM

That is not a minor offence -- it is an assualt on another person. And she could have made the customer very sick. Six months was correct. The fact that other major offenses get no jail time -- though they should! -- should not be an excuse for not doling out jail time whenever it is justified.

Posted by: Disgusted | May 31, 2006 1:00 PM

According to the news article, the victim called 911 when he saw the loogie. Isn't 911 supposed to be for life-threatening emergencies? A disgusting "prank," indeed, but should the victim have used an emergency phone line because they were mad, or maybe just too damn lazy (or cheap) to call a regular number? Should the police have had to use their time on this case? How about public health department instead?

Posted by: Steve | May 31, 2006 1:39 PM

These young black punk thugs need a good spanking from someone in authority.

Posted by: Sam | June 1, 2006 3:28 PM

All you people speculating about what could have been in the spit sound like idiots (especially those that think that AIDS is transmitted by drinking a loogie...the odds are so astronomically against that happening, it's idiotic to type it).

The fact is, nothing happened at all. The guy didn't even drink the loogie. So, this is more like attempted battery. As for lying to the police, that seems like just the thing an irresponsible brat would do if caught in the act of something as silly as this. Sentencing her to six months will only hamper her ability to finish high school on time, expose her to harsher criminal elements, and probably make her want to find that guy and do more than serve him a loogie...

It's a pretty sick act, but a weekend in jail and a few hundred hours of community service would do the trick much better...hell, she might learn what it actually means to SERVE the with bad attitudes are different from hardened criminals...if she put some chemical substance in the drink, by all means lock her up, but a loogie? sounds like something influenced by an eminem video (i forget the song, but anyone who used to watch MTV saw it).

Posted by: 6 Months Is Idiotic | June 5, 2006 4:18 PM

These old racist blog commenters need a good spanking from a minority.

Posted by: Sam Is A Racist | June 5, 2006 4:19 PM

6 months is a hell of a lot of time, but the kid brought it on herself.

she wasn't bad enough to tell the guy to his face what she thought of him, but she was bad enough to spit in his drink, then lie about it when it was found...and she then probably tried to blame it on someone else.

And she won't do the 6 months in *jail* anyway.

Posted by: cc | June 8, 2006 12:00 PM

I agree with the first comment about a weekend in jail and community service. Yes it was digusting and she should be punihed however I know people who have served six months for drug abuse or selling drugs certainly it wsan't that serious.

Posted by: DeAnna | June 26, 2006 11:54 AM

I think that what she did was very very disgussing yet, six months was a little extreme

Posted by: Chantel | June 26, 2006 11:55 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.


© 2010 The Washington Post Company