MAN CONVICTED OF DROPPING TV ON NEIGHBOR'S HEAD AND STABBING HER 54 TIMES

When Nena Grace asked me if I had heard about what Lashon Hollman did, I almost laughed. Not because I thought it was funny, but because it just  sounded funny. It's no laughing matter though, and the jury who only deliberated 15 minutes before finding him guilty didn't think so either.

Authorities say that the 21-year old from Saginaw, Mich. dropped a "fatback TV" on his neighbor Cassandra Nelson's head then stabbed the 27-year old in the back and neck area 54 times before leaving her for dead back in February 2012.

Details are scarce, and although Hollman maintains that he didn't kill Nelson, his DNA was found on a bloody bread knife that was found underneath her mattress and a beer can near the body. Hollman admitted that he was in Nelson's home with Nelson and another man. He left for a few minutes and when he returned, the other man was assaulting Nelson. Hollman also told investigators that he sat with Nelson for 10-15 minutes while she begged him to not let her die.

but he never called for help

Quamay Henne, listed as Hollman's best friend, was visiting from out of town and told detectives that Hollman confessed that he "stabbed the *expletive* out of her". However, on the MLive website, a friend of Hollman's who isn't named, made some comments that may have been useful to the police:

 and why were you not at his trial defending him?

This "friend" goes on to say: 

 









so you have a letter from the one person who said that Hollman confessed to killing Nelson saying how sorry he is for lying and you're not doing anything more than defending your friend's "honor" on websites?

In the words of my 18-month old son, "Really?"

Hollman was convicted of first-degree premeditated murder, felony murder, torture, larceny, and carrying a dangerous weapon with unlawful intent, but whoever dropped the TV on that woman's head and stabbed her 54 times had to have been pretty damn mad. After the TV on the head, that should've been it. How tiring must it be to stab some over 50 times?

The TV alone did her in, according to the medical examiner, and the 54 stabs were overkill...literally.

Read More

TENS OF THOUSANDS LOSE BENEFITS AS TOUGHER WELFARE LAWS GO INTO EFFECT FOR MICHIGAN

Today, two laws redefining Michigan's welfare system go into effect. Last month, Governor Rick Snyder signed a bill that places a 48-month lifetime welfare cap for recipients. This means that a person who signs up for welfare can receive benefits for four years, period. It can be consecutive or off and on. Once the 48 months are up, that's it.

Sadly, those who have been on welfare for 48 months or longer are getting kicked off of welfare...today. Governor Snyder is trying to restore cash assistance to what it is originally intended for, temporary assistance. He feels that people are getting too complacent with their benefits and not trying hard enough to stand on their own feet.

As each day goes by, a new set of people will be kicked off of welfare. It's expected that roughly 41,000 adults and 30,000 children are expected to lose benefits today alone.

Of course there will be some exemptions. Those who have a disability and can't work will receive and extension (to the limit, which is not specified), those caring for a disabled child or spouse, and those over 65 who don't qualify for Social Security benefits.

Governor Snyder also signed a bill that will terminate a recipient's cash benefits if their child is truant in school. Children up to the age of 15 will be considered truant if he or she has 10 or more unexcused absences a year.

Some feel that this is a bit harsh and that some type of notice should be sent out before the actual termination. I'm here to tell those folks that if you don't know if your child has missed 10 or more days of school, then something is severely wrong with you.

There are progress reports and report cards that have the attendance for that period on it. Oh, and you can call or visit your child's teachers too. So if a letter informing you of the cancellation of your welfare is what you need, then that's really too bad. Besides, wouldn't it already be too late?

According to Snyder, this is an attempt to add responsibility and accountability to welfare recipients. Adding a stipulation such as this should be an incentive to those receiving benefits to make sure their children go to school, as if that wasn't something that should already be done. It should also help the recipient to appreciate their assistance.

What do you think? Is Governor Snyder too harsh with his welfare reform? What about kicking parents off of welfare if their children are truant? What about the 48-month lifetime cap? Is he a genius for saving the state $60 million a year with this one program alone?

Read More

MAN CONVICTED OF ORALLY RAPING AND KILLING 15-WEEK-OLD DAUGHTER

The longer I live, the more disturbed I am at people and what they do with children behind closed doors. Steven Deuman, 26, of Michigan was convicted of doing one of the most horrible things I've ever heard of involving a baby.

In August of 2010, Deuman allegedly sexually assaulted and killed his 15-week-old daughter, a helpless individual, by orally raping her mouth. When she was found, she lay lifeless with the condom he used stuffed in her mouth and down her throat.

I can't imagine what he was thinking when he did this, and he couldn't possibly have been thinking about safety when he put the condom on and raped his daughter's mouth. Maybe it was to prevent DNA evidence or something, but that still didn't help the fact that he was there alone with her.

Instead of calling 911, Deuman called the mother, Natasha Maitland, and told her that he went outside to smoke a cigarette. He said that when he returned, the baby (who was lying in the bed and not quite old enough to roll over or crawl) was on the floor and not breathing. He didn't mention the other part.

This means that she fell to the floor, found a condom, opened it up with her non-working fingers and thumbs, unrolled it, shoved it down her throat, and suffocated in the process.

 I'm not trying to give advice on how to cover up killing a baby, but simply removing the condom and leaving out the part where he said she fell out of the bed could've opened the door for a SIDS defense. An autopsy showed no evidence of the baby falling, and that she died from suffocation.

 Deuman stuck by his story that that death was an accident. Witnesses for the prosecution included people who said they, as children, were molested by Deuman. Despite testimony from a forensic pathologist put on the stand by the defense saying that there's no proof that Deuman raped or killed his daughter, the jury convicted him of first-degree murder and sexual assault in less than an hour last week.

Because the incident occurred on an "Indian" reservation held "in trust" by the federal government, it made the case a federal one. Deuman is expected to be formally sentenced to mandatory life without parole. A date has not been set.

Read More

87-YEAR-OLD MAN CAUGHT WITH 104 BRICKS OF COCAINE

#insaneasylumblog - Michigan State Police say a man from Indiana was stopped by one of their guys after he made an illegal lane change on the highway, coming through the city of Chelsea.

When the Trooper asked 87-year-old Leo Sharp for permission to search his vehicle, he refused. The Trooper then called for a K-9 unit for backup.

The dog, Trooper Apollo alerted to possible drugs inside the vehicle, which gave reason to do a search. Once inside, they found 104 bricks of cocaine in black bags hidden in the bed of his pickup. That equates to about 229 pounds of cocaine with an estimated street value of about $3 million.

Here's the part that grinds my gears

Sharp was arrested and charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine. At the bond hearing, old man Sharp said he was forced at gunpoint to traffic the drugs, obviously convincing the judge to set the bond at $10,000.

Okay, this guy was out of jail in a heartbeat, paying the 10% of his $10,000 bond like it was a parking ticket. If he's convicted of what he's being accused of in November, he could get 10 years in prison. 10 YEARS IN PRISON? I know dread-heads doing more time for less marijuana in Michigan, and this guy gets a $10,000 bond and possibly 10 years? Seriously?

Did he show his AARP card for a discount? Maybe his "I'm an old white man" card. I don't know, but that kind of time and the size of the crime doesn't match.
What do you think?

Read More

MAN SUES WALGREENS FOR WRONGFUL TERMINATION

A former Walgreens pharmacist is suing for wrongful termination after they fired him for shooting a gun while his store was being robbed. Jeremy Hoven was working the overnight shift on Mothers Day, when two men wearing masks walked in with handguns and took a floor manager hostage in Benton Township, Michigan. Security tapes show one of the men leaping over the counter and pointing his gun at Hoven.

Hoven then drew his gun and fired several shots. The men took off and no one was injured.

At a press conference in Grand Rapids, he said "I feared for my life. The gunmen repeatedly attempted to fire upon me. In self defense, I fired my weapon."

A week after receiving praise for his act of bravery, he was fired for their zero-tolerance "non escalation policy." The 36-year-old said that in his five years and three months of working there, he never heard of such policy. Hoven said he was exercising his right to defend himself and his fellow employees and his right to carry a concealed weapon. He said his firing violates his constitutional right to bear arms.

In response to the wrongful termination lawsuit, Walgreens denied he was fired over the policy because they claimed there was never a robbery, but surveillance video released by Hoven's attorneys, shows the incident took place.

The suit challenges Walgreens' decision to fire him for exercising his right of self defense. The store issued a statement saying store employees receive training in robbery procedures and that its policies "in this area are designed to maintain the maximum safety of our customers and employees...these policies and training programs are endorsed by law enforcement, which strongly advises against confrontation of crime suspects. Compliance is safer than confrontation. Through this practice, we have been able to maintain an exemplary record of safety."

Hoven says he obtained a permit to carry a concealed weapon after the same Walgreens was robbed while he was working in 2007.

Read More

FL. GOV. RICK SCOTT MANDATES DRUG TESTS FOR WELFARE RECIPIENTS, STATE EMPLOYEES, ACLU SUES

[editor's note: We don't intentionally pick on Florida, all the good stuff just happens there.]

While campaigning in 2010, Florida Governor Rick Scott vowed to mandate drug testing for state workers and welfare recipients.  In March, he signed an order requiring the testing of state workers and pressed his Government to require drug tests for applicants to Florida's Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program.

This isn't sitting well with some Floridians and advocacy groups.

For starters, the company that will be doing the drug screening is a company Scott owns.  Before Scott was inaugurated, he tried to avoid violating ethics laws by putting the business in his wife's name under the Frances Annette Scott Revocable Trust.  

Earlier this year, Gov. Scott said that he’d been trying to sell his health clinic since November, citing lack of time to focus on it, not due to any conflicts of interest.  The governor also said the company wouldn't do any business with the state.  He then said he found a buyer, the company's minority shareholder, private equity firm Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe of New York. The deal was expected to close on April 29, 2011 according to Scott spokesman Brian Burgess, but hasn't happened.  Personally, if he transferred the company to his wife, shouldn't she be trying to sell it or not allowing the company to do the screening? 

I've always asked the question, "should welfare applicants/recipients undergo drug testing", and I've always said they should.  Far too many people are turning their monthly benefits into cash and using the cash to buy drugs.  The ACLU has disagreed with my position for years despite the many people I've personally witnessed abusing the system.  I know of at least three families in Michigan that raked in around $3000 a month in benefits, only to use that to use and sell drugs.  They were making $60,000 a year doing nothing, while I worked hard for 2/3 less.  In 1999, Michigan began drug-testing all welfare recipients, prompting the ACLU to sue. In 2003, a federal appeals court ruled that universal drug testing was unconstitutional, so the ACLU and the state reached an agreement that allowed drug tests of welfare recipients only if there was reasonable suspicion that the person was using drugs.  

Now, the ACLU of Florida is suing Gov. Scott to stop random drug testing (to be administered by his company that he doesn't own) of state employees.  Announcement of the lawsuit came the day after he signed the bill requiring drug tests for welfare applicant/recipients.  Insiders say the ACLU is expected to challenge that policy very soon.

The state-employee lawsuit was filed on behalf of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and Richard Flamm, a 17-year state employee from St. Petersburg who works for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission as a researcher. Attorneys argue that the new policy, which calls for random drug testing of more than 100,000 state employees, violates the U.S. Constitution's ban on unlawful searches and seizures.

I don't think that employees should be subject to random screening, just once at the time of hire is good enough.  If there's an incident at work, I agree with giving one to determine if the employee was under the influence of any drugs, but anything more than that would be redundant and costly.

Observing Governor Rick Scott as an outsider leads me to believe that he signed that executive order so his business can get the state contract...even though he's trying to cover it up.

Do you think welfare applicants and recipients should get drug screened?  What about random tests for state employees?

Read More

RESTAURANTS SERVE ALCOHOL TO TODDLERS

I'm sure by now we've all heard the story about the toddler who was given alcohol in his cup at an Applebee's restaurant in Madison Heights, MI. If not, let me recap it for you late-comers.

15-month-old Dominic Dill-Reese was dining at the restaurant on 14 Mile Road with his family one Friday evening. His mother ordered him a kid's meal and asked for apple juice as the beverage. His mother noticed that moments after he started drinking it, he appeared sleepy. He put his head on the table and dozed off. When he woke up, he was REALLY happy and the child refused to eat his food. Before leaving, Mrs. Dill-Reese tasted the toddlers drink and was surprised to find a margarita drink inside. The manager apologized and said he just didn't know what to do... (Really?) Well, Mrs. Dill-Reese demanded something be done and the police were called and the child was taken to the hospital. After being examined, doctors told the child's mother that had the child drank the whole cup, he would've died. The Applebee's corporate office issued a statement saying that any situation like that is unacceptable, that they take it very seriously, and that they are conducting their own investigation to assess what exactly happened. Well, I can tell you what happened exactly... Alcohol was given to a 15-month-old in your restaurant.

Now, if that's not enough, a more recent incident of a similar nature has occurred at an Olive Garden restaurant in Lakeland, FL. on Hwy 98, where Sangria was served to a two-year-old. The child's mother claims that orange juice was ordered with the child's meal and the drink was brought to him in a plastic cup with a lid. The child drank most of it and began behaving rowdily, climbing on furniture and being noisy. The mother's first thought was that he was just behaving badly but then the manager and waiter came over and admitted that they had served the child alcohol by mistake. When she asked what was in the cup, she was told it was Sangria. The child was rushed to the hospital where he was given IV fluids and has made a full recovery.  In both cases the parents are planning to take legal action against the restaurants. I don't blame them either. I also agree with the mom in the second case who wants to know, how can your bar be so disorganized where you will serve a child alcohol and not realize it until a half an hour later. I think these were both cases where someone was being negligent and inattentive when it came to their job performance. I don't know...I just wish that one day they would slip up and put alcohol in my cup so I won't have to pay for those expensive watered down drinks. I'm just saying...



Deuces, Smooches
Nena Grace

Read More

TO SAVE MONEY AND PREVENT OVERCROWDING, STATES SHOULD SEND THEIR PRISONERS TO THE MILITARY

Due to major economic problems across the country, states are making cuts in a big way.  In order to save money across the board, Governors are reducing unemployment benefits, slashing public sector jobs, and shutting down prisons and prison camps.


The correctional system in my home state of Michigan takes up 22% of the state budget. In 2009, they looked to their prison system to make $120 million in budget cuts for FY 2010. Because of this trend, many community prisons across the country face the threat of closing.


Do you remember the post I wrote about the guy who saved $11,000 in wages from the inmate work program over 21 years? If you do, then you remember that the state of Illinois is trying to take his money to put toward the $455,203.14 it has cost  to house him so far.


Local economies throughout the nation are threatened with collapse when facilities close. While the state moves to close prisons, they're at the same time trying to please citizens by crowding prisoners into other prisons instead of finding other solutions. Michigan on the other hand is trying to reduce the prison population through early release. For them, this saves the state money.


Why put prisoners back on the streets? They're gonna get out, and on top of not being able to get a job because of their record, there won't be any jobs to try to get. What next? A life of crime that's gonna land them back in prison?  Only to be released or not even processed because of the cuts.  What a vicious cycle. Why overcrowd the prisons? There will more violence and less care per prisoner. It's gonna turn into a huge humanitarian crisis that's just gonna cost more money to fix.


Instead of worrying about how much it costs to house a prisoner for X amount of years, and instead of putting them back on the streets, just send them to the military. It's the perfect solution. I'm not talking about people in the county jails (although they're overcrowded also), you know, people with DUIs and marijuana charges and whatnot. I'm talking about murderers, pedofiles, people who rob banks, bad ass gang members etc. It's really up to the government who they should send over there. I shouldn't have to think of everything. I just came up with the greatest idea in the world, do they expect me to tell them how to make it work?


If you're worried about putting guns in the hands of killers, think about the number of people who join the military as a last resort. Think about the people who were in and out of jail anyway. What about the people whose families didn't want them around anymore because they were a danger to society and themselves?  They went to boot camp, got some type of rehabilitation, some leadership skills, eventually some money and status as a productive member of society.  This shouldn't be any different with prisoners that are sent to the military in lieu of a prison sentence.    

Read More

UNIONS AND PENSIONS WILL BE A THING OF THE PAST (part one)

It's no secret that I don't like labor unions, and in case you missed it, I had the chance to hit a striking union member with my car. So when Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker proposed a bill that would reduce the bargaining power of labor unions. I was slightly pleased. You can make this a partisan issue if you want, but this is damn-near common sense. There's just no use for unions anymore.

There are laws in place now that protect employees on many levels. I don't have to tell you that a company can't deny employment to a handicapped person on paper. A company can't not hire a person because of the color of their skin on paper. A company can't discriminate against you because of your religion or sexual preference. We have the unions to thank for that. The only thing unions are any good for nowadays is wage negotiation, and the Governor was spot-on for recognizing that.

Since the Governor's decision, protests have sprouted all over the country. It's nice to see people exercising their right to free assembly, but it shows how superficial Americans are. People around the world are protesting for their freedom and here we are over here crying over money. These are the very same slackers that do the bare minimum to keep their jobs. They take days off and get fake doctor notices like we can't see them on television.

I used to work for a company delivering windows and doors in the 90's. This was a non-union job that paid every Friday. We we're judged on our merit and our work spoke for us. There was no annual wage increase or cost of living increases. And I did just fine, getting 2 raises a year for the 4 years I was there. When I got my first government job, it was union.  We got paid every two weeks, we paid dues every pay period, but it seemed like there were too many ways for people to get paid without working. And I know I should have been supervisor sooner.  There were people working in the same records room for 20 years with no desire to move up. We got our annual raises, but I was doing things veterans needed authorization to do. That's when I realized that the unions protected slackers. They're not forced to churn out max production, and as long as they don't physically hurt someone, they had a job. Hell, even if they did, all they had to do was cry EAP.

From the government's point of view, if you're not producing you need to find another job. I'm not trying to pay you more than you're worth, I'm not trying to pay you after I fire you, I shouldn't feel forced to supply your medical insurance (especially if my business isn't a medical insurance provider) and I shouldn't feel forced to pay you after you retire. And I've always wondered about pensions and such. How dare we think we should get paid to do nothing.  People don't want taxes to be raised, but they don't want their pensions to be taxed either.  All around us, stuff is falling apart.  I wonder if the protesters remember that we're in a recession?  Soon, the dollar is going to be worth as much as a band-aid that won't stick anymore.  They need to act like it and be happy that they have a job.  This social revolution is far from over, and I predict an infusion of socialism as time goes on.  At least until the one-world government is established.

to be continued...

Read More

MICHIGAN JUROR WHO WAS OUSTED FOR POSTING "GUILTY" VERDICT ON FACEBOOK, CHARGED AND SENTENCED

"Do not discuss this case to anyone, including the media."  That's the one rule every juror in America gets.  Apparently Hadley Jons of Michigan didn't think Facebook was included in the caveat.  She hopped her happy self on the social media website and posted, "actually excited for jury duty tomorrow...it's gonna be fun to tell the defendant they're guilty. :P"  She eventually deleted it, but not before the son of the defense attorney saw the post.

The next day, when Judge Diane Druzinski asked Jons about the Facebook post, she denied it.  When the Judge began reading the post aloud, Jons just dropped her head.  She was ordered by the Court to pay $250 in fines and write an essay on the 6th Amendment of the Constitution.

What do I have to do?  Put on a pink tutu and run around with a megaphone?  Stop putting everything on Facebook.  I don't care what you're having for dinner, I don't care about your head hurting.  Maybe all the radiation from your computer is causing it to hurt.  You should turn it off.

Personally, the Judge should have made an example of Jons.  I wonder if it was fun for her to read that post aloud.

Read More