Pedophiles and salmonella! Whee!

Breaking news this week: adorable chipmunks adopt an orphaned puppy, then build their new family a house out of taffy and peppermint sticks. The public is invited to stop by, gnaw on some candy windowsill, and get their faces licked clean by the puppy, who has giant, watery eyes and craps silver dollars. Silver dollars and sweet candy for everyone!
Sorry. I’m sorry. I’m supposed to be truthful around here, right? Right. I knew that. I just. it’s the world, people. The world is a bad place. I wouldn’t have to make up stories about money-pooping animals if people didn’t keep acting like schmucks. Case in point: UK judge Julian Hall, who handed down a horrifyingly lenient sentence to a rapist. A rapist whose victim was ten years old.
Why?
She was asking for it, friends.
No, seriously. He all but said it. Actually, he said it, period. He stated that because the ten-year-old “dressed provocatively”-and here, my God, he’s talking about her underwear, which apparently someone had to undress her to get at-that because she looked 16,”he faced a “moral dilemma” when it came to issuing the
sentence. (I’m using “quotes” to keep from “crying.”) “It is quite clear she is a very disturbed child and a very needy child and she is a sexually precocious child,” said the judge. Right, that makes it all better.
The ten-year-old girl was actually raped by two men–one has already been released after serving nine months in jail; the other was given two years, but with his time served he’ll be out in a matter of weeks.
Fortunately (and not surprisingly) there’s been an uproar over the decision, and Britain’s attorney general is reviewing the case for possible appeal. Given that this same judge, earlier this year, told a pedophile who shoved his hands down a six-year-old’s pants that his offense was “quite mild” and suggested that he buy his victim a bike to “cheer her up,” it’s staggering that he’s still walking around in society, much less working. Hopefully he won’t be for long. (Working, that is.)
My outrage is now mingled with queasiness, thanks to this news (and Liz; Hi, Liz!): there’s a nationwide recall in effect for Robert’s American Gourmet Veggie Booty. Veggie Booty, dubbed “Crack for Babies” by Salon, has been linked to 52 cases of salmonella poisoning. The victims were mostly children under the age of 3, whose parents were understandably enthusiastic about the healthy-seeming snack. I myself spent many years trying to cram the greenish puffs down Henry’s gullet, to no avail. Here I thought he was just plain willful, but maybe he knew something we didn’t.
The Robert’s company has dealt with controversy before; in 2002 it faced a $50 million class-action lawsuit when it was discovered that the fat content of Pirate Booty was grossly mislabeled (it had three times as much fat as
indicated). and in 2000, the FDA issued a warning to Robert’s for claiming that its “Fruity Booty” was mostly fruit. (It wasn’t, and isn’t.)
All Veggie Booty is being recalled, so dump your Veggie Booty today, no matter when you bought it. More detailed information, including salmonella symptoms, can be found on the official FDA recall page. You can call the Robert’s company for reimbursement or with questions at 1-800-626-7557.