Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on The Morning News


I am becoming increasingly convinced that Erica C. Barnett and Nicole Brodeur are the same person.

Posted by Greg | October 16, 2007 8:49 AM

I'm not sure I get the "Idiot Jury" thing - the article seems to be about the guy being found guilty and getting the maximum sentence?

Posted by Levislade | October 16, 2007 8:52 AM

Greg... They're not. I like Nicole.

Posted by Amelia | October 16, 2007 8:54 AM

@2 It seems he was convicted of sexual assault and unlawful imprisonment, but not rape. I think that's what ECB's referring to.

Posted by Gabriel | October 16, 2007 8:56 AM


But you don't like ECB? Why not? What's wrong with ECB? She's cool, and totally not Annie Wagner, who is all kinds of not cool.

Posted by Mr. Poe | October 16, 2007 8:59 AM

@3: Read this column, then get back to me.

Posted by Greg | October 16, 2007 8:59 AM

Annie is okay. I always get a kick of trying to figure out what she's saying. And fine, Greg, FINE. Admittedly, Nicole is lame, but I can only be bothered with hating one writer today.

Posted by Amelia | October 16, 2007 9:11 AM

Okay, I'll start previewing my posts...

Posted by Amelia | October 16, 2007 9:12 AM

Re: Birth Control: Lowers the abortion rate.

DUH! That fact alone exposes the "pro-life" movement for what it is. They aren't interested in reducing abortions, otherwise they would be all over birth control. They are pro-scarlet leter, anti-woman, anti-sex.

Posted by Mike in MO | October 16, 2007 9:16 AM

There is no better combination in the mornin' than rape and recipes!

Because really, who hasn't lost their appetite after reading these stories...?

Posted by UNPAID BLOGGER | October 16, 2007 9:26 AM

I'm somewhat inclined to agree with this guy: give ethanol a chance. Yes, it raises food prices in the short term, but what is the alternative at this point? Burning more liquid dinos, which could seriously affect crop yields in the future? Every economic transition is accompanied by these kind of stressful transitions, even when the transition is ultimately beneficial in the long term. Would the same folks complaining about the rising food prices complain about a carbon tax, which, while better reflecting the real cost of production, would also raise food prices for the poor?

Furthermore, while right now it seems that growing corn produces as much CO2 as burning oil anyway, that could change with improved technology.

Posted by tsm | October 16, 2007 10:24 AM

not just the maximum sentence -- he also falls under megan's law for the rest of his life.

Posted by infrequent | October 16, 2007 10:27 AM

shrimp is the cockroach of the sea.

Posted by and | October 16, 2007 10:30 AM

Oh, and another note to ECB: "Idiot Jury"? Of course we know you'd consider yourself more qualified to judge a case based on one short article about it than the twelve people who actually sat down and listened to the arguments in detail, but there is a reason we don't perform trials by media.

Besides, the guy got 10-20 years in jail for lesser charges anyway. Since when have you ever been inclined to pay attention to pesky details - e.g. what a defendant was actually charged with?

Posted by tsm | October 16, 2007 10:47 AM

@11 - there are lots of alternatives, and the only reason ethanol is being pushed is the huge corn lobby in this country. Ethanol is actually at least as bad as regular gas for the air, and ethanol from corn costs at least as much energy (much of it in the form of petroleum, amazingly) to make as we get out of it.

If it weren't for the heavy hand of corporate America (not to mention Iowa's disproportionately important role in electoral politics), corn-based ethanol would not be taken seriously for a minute.

Posted by Levislade | October 16, 2007 10:50 AM


That article was about 14 pages long. If you read it, you'll see that the jury only convicted the guy begrudgingly, for a rape committed against a woman who was ill and confined to her bed. According at least one of the jurors, the bitch was asking for it.

Posted by keshmeshi | October 16, 2007 11:02 AM


Oh, nevermind, I thought ECB linked to a longer article about it, the one I read yesterday. But, in that longer article, there were long-winded explanations for why the jury acquitted on most counts. The guy was charged with raping ten women and was only convicted on lesser charges for one rape. Even though Marsalis is pretty much a congenital liar, two juries took his word over the word of ten women.

Posted by keshmeshi | October 16, 2007 11:06 AM

nothing about ron sim's new taxes?

Posted by Cale | October 16, 2007 1:01 PM
Posted by Cook | October 16, 2007 1:09 PM

@19 I'm suspicious of any seed Ricky Martin wants to plant.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | October 16, 2007 1:14 PM

@17 yeah, i didn't get that at all from the articule ecb linked to. the linked article made it sound like 1) they gave the guy a strict punishment, and 2) that the women were satisfied. i wouldn't mind getting the correct picture; do you have your link handy?

Posted by infrequent | October 16, 2007 1:38 PM

@1 - Greg, they're not. I know them both. They're nothing alike.

Posted by Will in Seattle | October 16, 2007 3:36 PM


Here you go.

I am (sort of) happy that the guy got the maximum sentence. At least the judge was paying attention.

Posted by keshmeshi | October 16, 2007 5:17 PM

Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! nrytvzwuedzye

Posted by ughzfvbdmn | October 22, 2007 12:00 PM

Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! cinjbduyspuilg

Posted by lidzgofeno | October 22, 2007 12:00 PM
Posted by aggdjpnpsi | October 29, 2007 3:53 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).