What!!??

Over the last few days, there have been several news items that have spurred a resounding "WHAT!!!???" from me. Here are 2:

Associated Press
Man gets probation for mailing cow's head to wife's lover
NORRISTOWN, Pa. (AP) - A judge has sentenced a Pennsylvania man to probation and community service for mailing a bloody cow's head to his wife's lover.

Jason Fife's lawyer acknowledges his client stepped over the line, but says his frustration was understandable given the affair.

Police say Fife got the cow's head from a butcher shop, claiming he wanted the dried skull for decoration. Instead, he mailed the head while it was frozen. The box became bloody after sitting on the victim's doorstep on a warm day.

Fife must complete two years of probation and 50 hours of community service.

Fife's lawyer says the man and his wife have reconciled.

WHAT!? Ok, I understand the probation. But they've reconciled!! Would you reconcile with a man that mailed a cow's head to your lover? Let alone ANYONE!!!

Knoxville News Sentinel
Rock ruling lessens sentence
Boulder not considered destructive device, state appeals court rules
In a landmark decision Monday, a state appeals court has removed a rock from the list of weapons deemed under state law as destructive devices.

The ground-breaking ruling comes in the May 2004 death of Barbara J. Weimer, 69, who was slain when a 10-pound rock heaved from an Interstate 75 overpass smashed through the windshield of the van in which she was traveling.

The ruling does two things. One, it fills a gaping hole in a state law that made it a case of first-degree murder to cause a death by throwing a destructive device. Two, it cuts the prison term of Weimer's killer, Alford Lee Morgan, from a minimum 65-year prison term to 18. With credits for good behavior, Morgan could be eligible for release now in as little as six years.

"This is a great day for Alford Morgan," defense attorney Russell T. Greene said Monday. "This has been a four-year battle to finally get to the point we said we should have been all along."

Morgan and three other young men went out in May 2004 for what they would later tell Knox County Sheriff's Office Sgt. Jeanette Harris was a night of "redneck fun," tossing bricks, rocks and chunks of wood at cars, businesses and homes.

Weimer was on her way back from a wedding, riding in a van with her daughter, Malissa Grande, and son-in-law, Christopher Grande.

As the family's van approached the Brushy Valley overpass to I-75, Morgan decided to heave a 10-pound rock from that overpass onto passing vehicles. The rock smashed through the windshield of the Grandes' van, striking Weimer with such force her head was nearly severed from her body.

At Morgan's trial, Knox County Assistant District Attorney General Bill Crabtree cited a rarely used version of first-degree murder by destructive device, arguing that the chunk of rock Morgan tossed certainly should be classified as a weapon of destruction. Jurors agreed.

There was one problem: State law did not define exactly what the legislature meant when it deemed a killing by destructive device as first-degree murder.

Greene contended a rock could not qualify as a device. It has no moving parts and is not constructed by man, Greene argued. Crabtree countered that the rock at issue wreaked deadly destruction through its use and, therefore, rated billing as a device.

In its ruling, the appellate court sided with Greene.

"The definitions of destructive device all include some language that defines a destructive device as some sort of explosive or chemical weapon," Judge Jerry L. Smith wrote in the opinion.

Although the court opined that the behavior of Morgan and the others rated outrage, state law limits the price they must pay for their misdeeds.

"The actions of (Morgan) and his cohorts are nothing short of reprehensible. … Nevertheless, as repugnant as (Morgan's) conduct was, it does not, under current law, constitute a killing (by destructive device)," Smith wrote.

Attorney Wayne Ritchie II, who represented the Grandes in a civil lawsuit over Weimer's death, said Monday, "No court ruling can mollify the horror and loss this family has been forced to experience. The Grandes appreciate the continuing hard work and dedication of the Knox County Attorney General's office."

The state could ask the state Supreme Court to review the mid-level appellate court's conclusion. Crabtree could not be reached Monday for immediate comment. It would be up to the state Attorney General's Office to pursue an appeal.

Meanwhile, the midlevel appellate court is ordering Knox County Criminal Court Judge Mary Beth Leibowitz to dismiss the murder conviction against Morgan and instead impose an 18-year prison term for convictions of reckless homicide in the slaying of Weimer and related crimes involving the Grandes and a trucker whose rig was pelted with a chunk of wood thrown from the same overpass by a cohort of Morgan.

There remains one other appeal in this case involving the definition of a rock as destructive device. It's not clear yet whether the ruling in Morgan's case will benefit defendant Matthew J. Carter, the getaway driver convicted of second-degree murder in Weimer's slaying.

WHAT!? I'm sorry - but I disagree - loudly and wholeheartedly! Any item that is used as a weapon should be defined as a destructive device. He meant that rock to be destructive or he wouldn't have been tossing them at cars on the interstate. I understand that as of right now it does not match the law - I hope our legislators change that. This whole story just makes me so ANGRY!!!!!