Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox 13 Tampa Bay)   Uber Eats Asshole   (fox13news.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Pasco County, Florida, Rain, Flood, 35-year-old Heidi Schmutz, Steady rains, Panorama Avenue, NEW PORT RICHEY, Driver's license  
•       •       •

5431 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Aug 2019 at 8:29 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Copy Link



30 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
ArkAngel [TotalFark]  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (22)  
2019-08-16 7:19:00 PM  
I suppose that make a better headline than: "Uber Tongue Punches Fart Box"
 
2019-08-16 8:33:58 PM  
You've got something on your face.
 
MBooda  
Smartest (5)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-16 8:34:05 PM  
FTA: Schmutz told investigators she had agreed to give the man a ride in exchange for cash. But when he didn't have money to pay her, she decided to make a false report and exaggerated the claims to make them sound more believable.

Uber continues to become less and less distinguishable from prostitution.
 
2019-08-16 8:34:21 PM  
"he eventually admitted that she had made the story up."

"However, it will be up to the state attorney's office on whether charges against the man will be dropped."

Sorry guy, she made it up but you still have to stay in jail until the DA gets to your file.
 
2019-08-16 8:34:27 PM  
A little Schmutz or something...
 
2019-08-16 8:36:00 PM  

HoratioGates: A little Schmutz or something...


Dreck und schiess
 
rummonkey  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (5)  
2019-08-16 8:36:50 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Sir Castic  
Smartest (10)   Funniest (1)  
2019-08-16 8:38:30 PM  
Yeesh, that's a rough 35...
 
Boo_Guy  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-16 8:45:01 PM  
An uber rimjob?

Some people pay a lot of money for that sort of thing.
 
2019-08-16 8:45:56 PM  

HighlanderRPI: "he eventually admitted that she had made the story up."

"However, it will be up to the state attorney's office on whether charges against the man will be dropped."

Sorry guy, she made it up but you still have to stay in jail until the DA gets to your file.


I mean... yes?

Once the story holds up to the point that the DA has filed charges (meaning several days have passed usually, whatever the maximum to hold without charges in your state are) then the DA has to officially drop the charges for them to go away.  Do you really want to live in the alternate universe where the moment anyone produces even a scrap of exculpatory evidence every random murderer or whatever immediately gets to walk out of custody?

There has to be an actual judgement on whether a piece of exculpatory evidence breaks the case or alters the flight risk or not.  I mean... obviously this will and the guy was probably released from physical jail within hours of this story going up and just told not to leave town, and will be cleared probably within an hour of the courthouse opening on monday or whenever, but the procedure is that way for a number of reasons.  It's not their fault the media just happened to be having their one official day of actually paying the slightest attention to anything whatsoever in the period between those two things.

// Mostly that organized crime and even random criminals manufacture this kind of recanting from witnesses so easily it's basically a matter of routine.  In this case that's obviously not what happened, but that's what you're asking for with your "the accuser recanted so he should be able to walk with no further review" theory.
 
Kevin72  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (1)  
2019-08-16 8:47:50 PM  
Heidi Schmutz

Perfect hybrid between Schmuck and Putz. Surprised no one ever thought of that before. Probably because both terms sound great in their original glory.
 
Insain2  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (1)  
2019-08-16 8:48:47 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


Total headscracher?!?!?!?
 
2019-08-16 8:51:17 PM  

Insain2: [Fark user image 262x394]

Total headscracher?!?!?!?


The Aristocrats, albeit a bad summary.
 
jtown  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (1)  
2019-08-16 9:00:55 PM  
What a Schmutz.
 
gar1013  
Smartest (7)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-16 9:10:47 PM  

Jim_Callahan: HighlanderRPI: "he eventually admitted that she had made the story up."

"However, it will be up to the state attorney's office on whether charges against the man will be dropped."

Sorry guy, she made it up but you still have to stay in jail until the DA gets to your file.

I mean... yes?

Once the story holds up to the point that the DA has filed charges (meaning several days have passed usually, whatever the maximum to hold without charges in your state are) then the DA has to officially drop the charges for them to go away.  Do you really want to live in the alternate universe where the moment anyone produces even a scrap of exculpatory evidence every random murderer or whatever immediately gets to walk out of custody?

There has to be an actual judgement on whether a piece of exculpatory evidence breaks the case or alters the flight risk or not.  I mean... obviously this will and the guy was probably released from physical jail within hours of this story going up and just told not to leave town, and will be cleared probably within an hour of the courthouse opening on monday or whenever, but the procedure is that way for a number of reasons.  It's not their fault the media just happened to be having their one official day of actually paying the slightest attention to anything whatsoever in the period between those two things.

// Mostly that organized crime and even random criminals manufacture this kind of recanting from witnesses so easily it's basically a matter of routine.  In this case that's obviously not what happened, but that's what you're asking for with your "the accuser recanted so he should be able to walk with no further review" theory.


The accuser admitted she lied.

I don't care if it's 2am, wake up a farking judge and get him out of jail. Full stop.
 
2019-08-16 9:26:16 PM  
Just let the world burn.
Humans aren't fit to exist.
See you on the other side.
First round is on me.
 
2019-08-16 9:29:33 PM  

HighlanderRPI: "he eventually admitted that she had made the story up."

"However, it will be up to the state attorney's office on whether charges against the man will be dropped."

Sorry guy, she made it up but you still have to stay in jail until the DA gets to your file.


He'd better hope they dont have a light load of cases and need to use up their funding.
 
Jixa  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (2)  
2019-08-16 9:32:06 PM  

gar1013: Jim_Callahan: HighlanderRPI: "he eventually admitted that she had made the story up."

"However, it will be up to the state attorney's office on whether charges against the man will be dropped."

Sorry guy, she made it up but you still have to stay in jail until the DA gets to your file.

I mean... yes?

Once the story holds up to the point that the DA has filed charges (meaning several days have passed usually, whatever the maximum to hold without charges in your state are) then the DA has to officially drop the charges for them to go away.  Do you really want to live in the alternate universe where the moment anyone produces even a scrap of exculpatory evidence every random murderer or whatever immediately gets to walk out of custody?

There has to be an actual judgement on whether a piece of exculpatory evidence breaks the case or alters the flight risk or not.  I mean... obviously this will and the guy was probably released from physical jail within hours of this story going up and just told not to leave town, and will be cleared probably within an hour of the courthouse opening on monday or whenever, but the procedure is that way for a number of reasons.  It's not their fault the media just happened to be having their one official day of actually paying the slightest attention to anything whatsoever in the period between those two things.

// Mostly that organized crime and even random criminals manufacture this kind of recanting from witnesses so easily it's basically a matter of routine.  In this case that's obviously not what happened, but that's what you're asking for with your "the accuser recanted so he should be able to walk with no further review" theory.

The accuser admitted she lied.

I don't care if it's 2am, wake up a farking judge and get him out of jail. Full stop.


I just heard the "dunkdunk" from Law and Order.
 
Coconice  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-16 9:53:21 PM  

Jim_Callahan: HighlanderRPI: "he eventually admitted that she had made the story up."

"However, it will be up to the state attorney's office on whether charges against the man will be dropped."

Sorry guy, she made it up but you still have to stay in jail until the DA gets to your file.

I mean... yes?

Once the story holds up to the point that the DA has filed charges (meaning several days have passed usually, whatever the maximum to hold without charges in your state are) then the DA has to officially drop the charges for them to go away.  Do you really want to live in the alternate universe where the moment anyone produces even a scrap of exculpatory evidence every random murderer or whatever immediately gets to walk out of custody?

There has to be an actual judgement on whether a piece of exculpatory evidence breaks the case or alters the flight risk or not.  I mean... obviously this will and the guy was probably released from physical jail within hours of this story going up and just told not to leave town, and will be cleared probably within an hour of the courthouse opening on monday or whenever, but the procedure is that way for a number of reasons.  It's not their fault the media just happened to be having their one official day of actually paying the slightest attention to anything whatsoever in the period between those two things.

// Mostly that organized crime and even random criminals manufacture this kind of recanting from witnesses so easily it's basically a matter of routine.  In this case that's obviously not what happened, but that's what you're asking for with your "the accuser recanted so he should be able to walk with no further review" theory.


All that you said is true. Post conviction is even worse.

I've heard it said that actual innocence is insufficient grounds to overturn a guilty verdict. I think I might dig out some history and read. I may have just interested myself. Mental masturbation on a Friday night!
 
Coconice  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-16 9:54:33 PM  
Also, I've added, "I'll be right back. I have to take a schmutz" to my vernacular.
 
SoCalChris  
Smartest (2)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-16 10:15:02 PM  
How far has your life gone off track if you're ordering Uber Eats from Denny's at 3am?
 
2019-08-16 10:57:59 PM  
Hey Schmutz

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
PunGent  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-16 11:11:04 PM  

Coconice: Jim_Callahan: HighlanderRPI: "he eventually admitted that she had made the story up."

"However, it will be up to the state attorney's office on whether charges against the man will be dropped."

Sorry guy, she made it up but you still have to stay in jail until the DA gets to your file.

I mean... yes?

Once the story holds up to the point that the DA has filed charges (meaning several days have passed usually, whatever the maximum to hold without charges in your state are) then the DA has to officially drop the charges for them to go away.  Do you really want to live in the alternate universe where the moment anyone produces even a scrap of exculpatory evidence every random murderer or whatever immediately gets to walk out of custody?

There has to be an actual judgement on whether a piece of exculpatory evidence breaks the case or alters the flight risk or not.  I mean... obviously this will and the guy was probably released from physical jail within hours of this story going up and just told not to leave town, and will be cleared probably within an hour of the courthouse opening on monday or whenever, but the procedure is that way for a number of reasons.  It's not their fault the media just happened to be having their one official day of actually paying the slightest attention to anything whatsoever in the period between those two things.

// Mostly that organized crime and even random criminals manufacture this kind of recanting from witnesses so easily it's basically a matter of routine.  In this case that's obviously not what happened, but that's what you're asking for with your "the accuser recanted so he should be able to walk with no further review" theory.

All that you said is true. Post conviction is even worse.

I've heard it said that actual innocence is insufficient grounds to overturn a guilty verdict. I think I might dig out some history and read. I may have just interested myself. Mental masturbation on a Friday night!


Yep.  SCOTUS-wart Scalia.  He was analyzing Due Process regarding an appeal, iirc.
 
GreenSun  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-17 2:09:39 AM  
False kidnapping and sexual assault accusation.

Women know they have the upperhand  against men as long as they play the sexual assault victim card.
 
ArshesNei8  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-17 9:34:05 AM  
Schmutz meaning:  a filthy or a similar unpleasant substance.

In the world of water treatment, schmutz = scum.

Yeah, that last name fits her well.
 
rnatalie [TotalFark] [OhFark]  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-17 9:37:55 AM  
img4.bdbphotos.comView Full Size

WIth a name like Schmutz....

 
2019-08-17 11:14:31 AM  
Given that Fark veers LW, what's with all the RW Fox/NY Post McFascist links?
 
Priapetic [BareFark]  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-17 12:29:14 PM  

gar1013: Jim_Callahan: HighlanderRPI: "he eventually admitted that she had made the story up."

"However, it will be up to the state attorney's office on whether charges against the man will be dropped."

Sorry guy, she made it up but you still have to stay in jail until the DA gets to your file.

I mean... yes?

Once the story holds up to the point that the DA has filed charges (meaning several days have passed usually, whatever the maximum to hold without charges in your state are) then the DA has to officially drop the charges for them to go away.  Do you really want to live in the alternate universe where the moment anyone produces even a scrap of exculpatory evidence every random murderer or whatever immediately gets to walk out of custody?

There has to be an actual judgement on whether a piece of exculpatory evidence breaks the case or alters the flight risk or not.  I mean... obviously this will and the guy was probably released from physical jail within hours of this story going up and just told not to leave town, and will be cleared probably within an hour of the courthouse opening on monday or whenever, but the procedure is that way for a number of reasons.  It's not their fault the media just happened to be having their one official day of actually paying the slightest attention to anything whatsoever in the period between those two things.

// Mostly that organized crime and even random criminals manufacture this kind of recanting from witnesses so easily it's basically a matter of routine.  In this case that's obviously not what happened, but that's what you're asking for with your "the accuser recanted so he should be able to walk with no further review" theory.

The accuser admitted she lied.

I don't care if it's 2am, wake up a farking judge and get him out of jail. Full stop.


Vito Knuckles and Muscles Marinara have made many an accuser recant.
 
JuggleGeek [OhFark]  
Smartest (0)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-17 2:54:15 PM  

gar1013: The accuser admitted she lied.

I don't care if it's 2am, wake up a farking judge and get him out of jail. Full stop.


Even more, they have video evidence that she lied.

Which means you have an innocent party in jail, and should be busting butt to fix that.
 
JuggleGeek [OhFark]  
Smartest (1)   Funniest (0)  
2019-08-17 3:00:19 PM  

Coconice: I've heard it said that actual innocence is insufficient grounds to overturn a guilty verdict


Antonin Scalia said "This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent.  Quite to the contrary, we have repeatedly left that question unresolved, while expressing considerable doubt that any claim based on alleged 'actual innocence' is constitutionally cognizable."

https://www.businessinsider.com/antonin-scalia-says-executing-the-innocent-is-constitutional-2014-9

Thankfully, Scalia is dead.   And if God exists, roasting in hell.
 
Displayed 30 of 30 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.