By Chris Lane
By Jeff Balke
By Aaron Reiss
By Angelica Leicht
By Dianna Wray
By Aaron Reiss
By Camilo Smith
By Craig Malisow
Sex Cures Teen Crime
Only the right kind, though
By RICHARD CONNELLY
Worried about your teenaged son or daughter becoming a delinquent? Get them into someone's pants, quick.
A new study from the University of Texas says sex is the secret to solving delinquency. But before you get all riled up, understand that it's "romantic" sex they're talking about, not a bunch of random hookups.
"Sexually active teens in committed, romantic relationships are less likely to engage in delinquent behavior than teens who have casual sex," the study says.
Wait a second. In either scenario, teens are having sex! We thought Rick Perry was preaching abstinence!! Are you trying to tell us kids aren't listening?
Okay, you have to assume — just for the sake of argument — that there are possibly some kids who disagree with Perry on the wonders of abstinence. Given that, UT psychologists say, it's much better if you're doing it with someone you love/like/tolerate because you're getting laid than if you just go gallivantin' about.
The results "may suggest that teens who spend more one-on-one time with their boyfriends or girlfriends, and less time with their friends, have fewer opportunities to get into trouble," UT says.
"It can be difficult for researchers to understand how dating experiences in adolescence influence behavior because there can be pre-existing differences between teenagers who date versus those who don't," one of the authors of the study, with the slightly suggestive name of Paige Harden, says.
So the study looked at 519 same-sex twins from across the country and quizzed them on their sex and delinquency habits.
Among teens aged 13-15, "Genes related to impulsivity, extroversion and early puberty may influence young adolescents to have sex in non-dating relationships. These same genes may also put them at risk for adverse psychological outcomes," the study found.
A Messy Suit Over Crime-Scene Clean-ups
By John Nova Lomax
Who knew the crime scene/trauma clean-up business was so, um, cutthroat? If the allegations in a local civil court case are to be believed, only rival drug lords conduct their business more ruthlessly.
According to plaintiffs John DiGulio and K.P. Management, two area men and their respective companies have conspired to wreck his successful business through slander, business disparagement and deceptive trade practices. The plaintiffs say the defendants cloned their Web domain and resorted to slander most foul in a bogus Google review of their business.
The story begins in the summer of 2009. Back then, the suit says, a representative of defendant Garner Environmental Services reached out to one or more employees of plaintiffs Biohazard Services Corporation, a subsidiary of K.P. Management.
The Garner rep wanted to know everything about the crime-scene clean-up business, the suit claims, and wanted to take a meeting to find out more. According to the suit, "Plaintiff became suspicious of Garner's motives when they began questioning the type of equipment Plaintiff used." Plaintiff stopped taking Garner's calls at that point.
If the suit is to be believed, Garner was undaunted by this rebuff. They allegedly hired Big Splash LLC, the same Web design firm that built BSC's Web site, and came up with their own site. Since BSC was already using the domain www.biohazardsolutions.com, the new rival company went with www.biohazardsolution.com, the suit says.
And then, the suit claims, Garner and company really took the gloves off.
The suit claims that since they were having trouble competing with BSC, "rather than compete on a level playing field, Defendants decided to post a malicious review of Plaintiff's company. Specifically, [Web designer] Christopher Brown under the direction of Garner, and under the username 'jaydenbabyboy,' posted a false and slanderous review on Google that read:
'Mentally Scarred Family Member!
'Recently a member of my family committed suicide, it was very messy. I did not have relationship with them so I handled the clean up. Called biohazard solutions, big mistake. My aunt found pieces of her daughter after the clean up can you imagine, there are not words. The owner wont take our calls.'"
That review was posted last July, and it remains up today. In the suit, it's claimed that this was the number one search result for "Biohazard Solutions" for a year.
The Plaintiff denies that this scenario is even possible. The suit states that authorities remove all body parts before they are called in. They only clean up "material like blood or residual tissue," so there's no chance that anybody would find pieces of a daughter. They also claim that they never failed to return their customers' phone calls, though we imagine that's a lesser sin than leaving chunks of some poor soul's skull on the living-room ceiling.
The plaintiffs claim that the review was false and malicious and designed to sabotage their business, and, what's more, that it worked. They say that they have suffered a steep decline in new business and revenue since the review went up.
For the defendants' alleged slander, business disparagement, violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and conspiracy, the plaintiffs are asking for compensatory and punitive damages, actual and treble damages, interest, costs and fees.