But ... but ... TITAN! (*cries*)

That is an interesting point. I know Donna Reed famously cooked in pearls and pumps, but were those pumps 4” high? Surely not.

Eh, it doesn’t sound any crazier to me than a lot of other food combinations. Mixing sweet with savory is pretty much always vile. Once you put grapes in chicken salad, or syrup on bacon, how far away are you from jelly on your pizza and marshmallow cream on your salmon?

I am a lawyer, so I don’t need the law explained to me. This victim hasn’t been held to a higher standard than the alleged abuser - if he had failed to appear, he would have been subject to jail time too. And it’s hard to say that the judge was acting irrationally when the sentence she imposed was within the statutory…

Off with your head!

The victim did not provide any proof of a diagnosed mental condition. Her testimony about anxiety is similar to her saying, “I didn’t come to court because I had just had a heart attack,” without providing any medical evidence.

A person who violated the law should be able to sue the judge who sentenced her? Seriously?

The day a judge bases her rulings on TV shows is the day I pretty much give up on the world.

Oh, my god, me too. I was choked once, at age nineteen, and now 22 years later I still can’t even have my bedsheet resting on my neck. It takes tremendous will not to react when my daughter has her hands or arms on my throat. Sigh. I'm sorry for your struggles.

Jailing a person for contempt is legal and common. Did this victim present any evidence of her mental issues, or did she just claim to be really upset and anxious? Because her own assessment of her mental state is not a diagnosis.

The reason they make you go in person is because the constitution guarantees the right to confront one’s accuser.

If the victim isn’t in court to testify to how she got her injuries, and there are no witnesses to the offense, there’s a limit to what the prosecutor can do. Usually, “proceeding without the victim” means nolle prossing the case.

Whoa whoa whoa. Evidence-based prosecutions are not possible in the majority of cases, no matter how much work the prosecutor puts in. Which is usually a fuckload. For an evidence-based prosecution, you need evidence outside of the victim’s testimony, like an eyewitness (quite unlikely), or a confession, or certain…

Yikes. That poor teenage daughter. You know she’s got some stories.

This is the greatest family fight I've ever heard of. Do you live in 1583 England? Can I come be a part of your family? I'm devoted to the true religion and I can weave and spin.

God, it's fucking always Ben Franklin. 😠

What an awful kid. Yes, I can understand a fierce refusal to have bangs after that. For me, it's just a dispassionate acknowledgement that bangs are more flattering. Same reason I don't wear skinny jeans or deep v-necks - just doing the best I can with what I've got.

High-five. You wear them well.

That wasn’t very nice. :-(

I have been in a similar situation. Try to take comfort in the fact that there's nowhere to go but up. :-)