They should all immediately go file for unemployment tbh. Even if it’s just for that week, it’s considered a layoff and they can file. It means they’ll be able to start collecting unemployment a week earlier than they would if they wait for the actual “you’re fired” message.

My buddy stuck a paper clip in an electrical socket while we were in the cafeteria. Because his cousin had told him it would shoot sparks across the room. All it did was make him scream real loud, then the power to half of the cafeteria went out when the breaker blew.

Another friend “accidentally” stapled his homework to his hand, to try and get out of going to music class. Apparently his plan was to ham it up and go to the nurse instead. The teacher laughed, called him an idiot, and sent him to music class with a band-aid.

Kids have always been fucking stupid. The only difference is that now every kid has an internet-connected camera in their pocket, so their stupidity is more visible.

It was a victim impact statement, not subject to the rules of evidence. The shooter had already been found guilty, and this was an impact statement from the victim’s sister, to sway how the shooter should be sentenced. The victim’s bill of rights says that victims should be allowed to choose the method in which they make an impact statement, and his sister chose the AI video.

I agree that it shouldn’t be admissible as evidence. But that’s not really what’s being discussed here, because it wasn’t being used as evidence. The shooter was already found guilty.

The victim impact statement isn’t evidence in the trial. The trial has already wrapped up. The impact statement is part of sentencing, when the court is deciding what an acceptable punishment would be. The guilty verdict has already been made, so the rules surrounding things like acceptable evidence are much more lenient.

The reason she wasn’t allowed to make a scene during the trial is because the defense can argue that her outburst is tainting the jury. It’s something the jury is being forced to witness, which hasn’t gone through the proper evidence admission process. So if she makes a scene, the defense can say that the defendant isn’t being given a fair trial because inadmissible evidence was shown to the jury, and move for a mistrial.

It sounds harsh, but the prosecutor told her to be stoic because they wanted the best chance of nailing the guy. If she threw their case out the window by loudly crying in the back of the courtroom, that wouldn’t be justice.

Hotels also tend to have banquet rooms, which means they have public restrooms for banquet attendees.