@bluebears: I definitely agree about clarity. This is clearly a nebulous and relatively new area of law, and hopefully we will see some clarity in coming years.

@BlueJeans: I agree, and I'm purely thinking hypothetically about this, since there are so few details about this case. I was just thinking it's possible that both parties were too drunk to consent to sex, and then both parties raped each other. Obviously, this would not be the typical situation, but it could happen,…

@Kemperboyd: As I understand it, a person can be too drunk to consent but still be seemingly willing to engage in intercourse.

@bluebears: Definitely true. Voluntary intoxication is not a defense for any crime (except crimes where a specific intent is required - forgot about those).

This is sad. It doesn't seem like she wants to be on TV.

@ronniedobbs: I recall something Nick Cannon once said about Perez Hilton (paraphrasing): "I don't like him, but I admire his hustle."

@PommeDeReinette: Just tried in Safari, Firefox, and Chrome. Mysterious.

Can anyone else not see this? My work doesn't have a firewall, so I don't know why I can't.

@TGIJockstrap: The problem is that nothing she said about the incident would be admissible after her death. One of the basic tenets of our Constitution and our legal system is that a defendant has a right to confront his accuser and defend himself. With her dead, no confrontation could occur. Therefore, everything she…

@elyseface: I think those are two separate issues, because the prosecutor's office and the universtiy are two separate entities.

@PerinealFavorite: So what's the worst that can happen if you say no? They'll search your car anyway. It's the same effect. Why not say no?

@Deeba: I couldn't agree more. Wouldn't it be cool if they published some special article to help women know their legal rights? I forget the exact statistic, but the vast majority of people consent when a police officer asks if he can search their vehicle. Even when they have contraband! The answer should be no…

@LuckyFrog: Yeah, Wikipedia does not exactly explain the nuance of the requirement. If you used a battering ram in a case like this, any evidence found would be excluded and the suspect/criminal would go free. Also, the taxpayers would have to pay for a new door. So no, no battering ram.

@LuckyFrog: Are you familiar with the knock and announce requirement? I definitely don't think a domestic violence shooting is sufficient to waive the requirement.

@UnicornZiva rides again!: This is probably true for a person one the street, but a higher standard applies to one's home.

Both of the exceptions to the warrant requirement that you mention require a certain temporal proximity to alleged crime. It would appear that some time passed between the shooting and the police showing up at the door, so the police probably needed a warrant to enter the house.

@LouWhoo: I am honestly wondering if it's a painting. Everyone looks strange. Even Lamar Odom.

Whitney Port's nose job is perfection. I honestly never would have guessed she had rhinoplasty, and it still has so much character.

@ModernMindOfM: Honeymoon in Vegas. I know it's not a popular choice, but try not to watch it when it's on cable. Just try.

@ms.windupbird: Who's already been twice? (Not that I'm bragging.)