The Lassiters were out with their children when Isabelle Lassiter was hit by water. She is quoted in this article as saying “It peed on me…basically, out of his… wee wee area.” James Lassiter insisted that “It was a sexual style assault on my wife.”
At first, I thought that this was a hoax but it has appeared on NBC and FOX and other sites. It is reported that police declined to make an arrest and appeared in disbelief over the sensitivity of the Lassiters.
Here is an interview with the Lassiters.
30 thoughts on “Couple Call Police After Wife is Squirted By Toy At Japanese Steakhouse”
Also that couple should never visit Brussels, Belgium. A very dangerous sexual assaulter named Manneke Pies awaits them
Yesterday Mr. Trump stated that the Geneva Convention on Warfare is outdated and needs to be changed. Since that treaty is US law I had expected some commentary from Mr. Turley on how Presidents can or cannot change treaties. After all the US Supreme court has dealt with that issue. Instead I get this absolute nothingness. What a downer!
Nick S. – now THAT was funny!!
this can’t make any sense at all
“Many of us have been in Japanese Steakhouses when the chef pulls out and squeezes the little rubber toy of a boy.”
Well, clearly you run in different circle than I do. The lawsuit sounds pretty ridiculous, but, at the same time, I prefer to go to restaurants whose service does not include squirting toys.
Porkchop – what you said.
OMG! Get a life…..
A ‘sexual style assault’ gives me the mental image of a forced unwanted makeover.
WE GON’ PUSH UP YO’ TlTS AND GITS EM NICE! MAKE DAT HAIR PURDY! DO THEM EYELASHES ALL FLITTY LIKE!!
They were pissed off because they were pissed on. Off with the doll’s head!
smw – they did investigate and decided they were wasting their time.
Darren, I think that a report of a sexual assault needs to be investigated, even if it’s “just” over the phone or however the woman made her report. Without an investigation there is no way to determine how serious it is. The investigation would turn up the facts. The cop gives a shake of the head upon learning that the assailant was a peeing doll, apologizes to the restaurateur for her time and give a stern lecture and warning to the woman for making a frivolous report. I thought she might have been offended by seeing a penis but the doll didn’t have one. smh
People pay good money to get peed on.
Tell the bitch to sue the doll.
Lucky this sexual assault did not happen on a college campus.
Many years ago an elderly neighbor called the police and complained that a neighbor’s cat entered her house. She had left her door open while working in the yard, and the curious cat walked right in. She was given a stern warning by the responding officer about making frivolous police calls and warned that if it happens again she could be cited and/or fined. I think the same result would be appropriate here.
The accusation made by these reporting parties is so preposterous, it is not worth investigating much less contacting the restaurant as an official police act.
For me I consider the legality of contacting the public by law enforcement or government officials is not absolute. When the contact is investigatory in nature there are issues such as temporarily detaining an individual, bringing a stop to business operation, or the requesting of identification which can be considered a seizure.
I believe a standard should be set that helps address whether police are permitted to investigate a person. In this case the matter generates from a report from a civilian so the standard should be as follows:
The police may investigate and lawfully contact an alleged suspect only when in a light most favorable to the reporting party an element of a crime is alleged to have been or is going to be violated by a suspect without lawful permission or is constitutionally protected.
Since in this case, the act alleged is so clearly not in violation of the state’s sexual assault statute, under my recommended standard the police should not investigate the act for this crime. Maybe in this state such an act could be at a de minimis level an assault. I don’t know. But I highly, highly, doubt it.
Unless this doll had a fire hose attached to it the couple seriously needs some self-reflection on whether or not they possess sufficient fortitude to go outdoors.
But some good came out of this event, the restaurant surely benefited from the free publicity and advertisements.
Hmm, a Texan couple dining in middle Tennessee – nuff said already. White trash looking to make money. I hope the restaurant turns around the sues them!
That’s funny, Squeekey
If this continues restaurants will require their patrons to sign waiver/releases/assumption of risk agreements before ordering their meals!! DMD
Gosh! A steady stream of lawsuits! Hmmm. I wonder how you calculate damages???
Comments are closed.