« Had An Urget Memo To Pull These Off The Shelf... Don't Know Why | Main | Karebear Enters The Craft Show, A Wild Bitch Appears! »



Regular assault. The guy grabed the nearest object and had no intent on any sexual advances.

This is my own opinion and I am not a lawyer by any means.


In the context of the situation I would call it regular assault & battery. But I'm also not a lawyer of any kind.


Well, I'm not a lawyer either, but I am a future LEO. This is a simple battery case. There is no sexual intent, his intent was to wang te guy across the face.

However since they banned him from the store, they likely won't pursue any charges against him unless he tries to come back.


720 ILCS 5/11-1.20 outlines sexual assault and 720 ILCS 5/12-3.05 outlines battery; both of these are for Illinois, but I can't imagine other states being much different. I'm not giving legal advice, but look here or in your state statutes, all of which can be found online, for your answer.

By the way, your coworker's husband is a moron.


i'd say it would be regular assault and battery... if it was taken infront of a jury i bet they'd snigger when they found out it was a dildo... or that might just be my sense of humour


So what was the reason behind the "no"?


lol, the comment at the end was meant to be funny more than anything. I know it was just regular. I was just making a joke at the fact he used a sex toy as the object of his assault.

And I don't know. He never found out what the 'no' was for, and he's perma-banned, so he'll never know now.


Simple assault. That said despite being drunk there is no valid reason to tell someone no when they want their property back. I would have considered dong slapping the guy as well if he refused to give me back my property, but would have done the right thing and threatened to call the cops instead.


Am I the only one who finds the term "Assault and battery" hilarious in the event of a dildo attack?

Anyway sexual assault requires there to be a sexual motivation. Clonking a guy round the head with the nearest object is not sex assault, regardless of the dildo. Unless it somehow penetrated... 0_o


If it was a vibrator, would it have been assault with a battery? ;)


If they were somewhere else, on the bus or something, and he just randomly pulled out a dildo and started beating on him with it... then I could actually see a lawyer making a case for sexual assault. Or a viral Youtube video at the very least.


When I asked him about it, he followed up with 'First thing I thought when I was out of there was 'Ewww, I touched that'.'

I told him it was clean, because they don't take returns and all. He said it hadn't even been in a package, it was just a dildo on the counter.

I thought a moment and said 'Try before you buy?'

'Well, they do have fitting rooms.'


The story is pretty funny, but I am maddened by wondering what the "no" was about. It's eating my brain with curiosity.


I doubt it mattered, I don't think I can see someone calling the cops and saying they were slapped in the face with a dildo. And if they were, that would make them one of the types we like to skewer around here :)



"his intent was to wang te guy across the face."

*collapses in a fit of giggles*


*joins WMDkitty in the fit of giggles* Yeah, I'd say he successfully wanged the guy. *adds 'wang' (verb form) to her inner dictionary*


Me: "Assault with a friendly weapon"?

The comments to this entry are closed.


Become a Fan