Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WXII)   Lawyers for former Miss Carolina say judge is obsessed with seeing her topless photos, no longer impartial   ( divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

19463 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Oct 2003 at 6:30 PM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

218 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

2003-10-07 02:16:32 PM  
There's two of us believe it or not.
2003-10-07 02:21:45 PM  
How about a link?
2003-10-07 02:45:53 PM  
Three. And I'm ready to believe.
2003-10-07 02:50:43 PM  
Well, there's a big difference between "artistic" photos and photos of you wearing a "hot lunch," so to speak...
2003-10-07 02:57:53 PM  
This story is completely useless to me without the pictures.
2003-10-07 03:04:10 PM  

This story is completely useless to me without the pictures.

Motion seconded. We need the evidence (in this case) before we can render our decision. We need the evidence and five minutes alone.
2003-10-07 03:04:56 PM  
Here she is saying "Oh boy! I can't wait for my boobies to be posted on FARK!"

[image from too old to be available]
2003-10-07 03:14:13 PM  
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that only Barry Nakell will be able to provide said pictures.
2003-10-07 03:27:35 PM  
I require a beaver shot as well before I can render an impartial decision
2003-10-07 05:57:42 PM  
witholding evidence from a judge?
slamming him in public?

dont they expect to see him again?

''your honor, my client has a complaint about xyz''

''okay, lets see the evidence''

''sorry your honor, cant show you the evidence, but my client is real honest, trust her''

course most cops use this approach for speeding tickets
2003-10-07 06:11:43 PM  
Seriously, though, whether or not the photographs exist is not the point of the lawsuit. It's the behavior of the pageant officials based on the alleged existence of the photos.
That said, she should pose for Playboy for a million if she can't have the crown.
2003-10-07 06:36:03 PM  
I believe these photos are vital to this case, and must be presented immediately for consideration!
2003-10-07 06:37:19 PM  
[image from too old to be available]
/make that 4
2003-10-07 06:37:56 PM  
And this worthless piece of crap judge is making pots of dough while decent folks go unemployed.
2003-10-07 06:38:04 PM  
let me be the judge of that...
2003-10-07 06:38:37 PM  
I already got them off Kazaa. But I won't share them. That would be unethical.
2003-10-07 06:38:42 PM  
If the arbitrator can refrain from fapping in her presence, I see no reason why he should not see the pics.

2003-10-07 06:39:12 PM  

and just what's the point of having power if you cannot abuse it?
2003-10-07 06:40:52 PM  
Well it's understandable. That judge is gonna have fun.
2003-10-07 06:40:54 PM  
That's about as low as I've ever seen an attorney go. First, denying the judge access to the direct evidence involved in a case that he's adjudicating, and then making slanderous accusations about the judge. He must not want to win this case, or stay on the bar.
2003-10-07 06:41:16 PM  
No link to the photos?

No smoking gun?

What is this, the USSR circa 1982?
2003-10-07 06:42:12 PM  
What.. is that so wrong??
2003-10-07 06:43:01 PM  
The pictures may be relevant. Until the judge can't stand up when asked, this should be considered as evidence.

Presonally, I'm more interested in the home movies. Please let there be home movies!
2003-10-07 06:43:25 PM  
Ring Toll, let me guess you are unemployed.
2003-10-07 06:44:12 PM  

2003-10-07 06:45:18 PM  
Without the tit I can't commit!
2003-10-07 06:45:28 PM  
Did he ask for them to be brought to his private bathroom along with a box of kleenex?
2003-10-07 06:46:24 PM  

/where's the damned link with pics anyway?
2003-10-07 06:46:45 PM  
As the decision is a matter of interpetation of the contest rules, there is no way the judge can make a proper ruling in this case without seeing the pictures. The specific rule in question:

Rule 10.708a
No candidate for Miss Carolina will have nude photos taken representing herself as a "Slut", "Ho bag", "Cum Sponge", or "Crack Whore" without written approval of the board.
2003-10-07 06:47:27 PM  
6 here what the fark no pics?!?!
2003-10-07 06:47:49 PM  
errr... adjucate!
2003-10-07 06:48:00 PM  
Hey isn't this sort of stuff covered by the Freedom of Information act?
2003-10-07 06:49:58 PM  
Bailiff, wack his pee-pee!!
2003-10-07 06:50:21 PM  
I don't want to go against the grain here, but there is no reason why the judge should have to see these pictures in order to make a ruling. Reminds me of Pete Townsend looking at child pornography in order to do "research". nonsense. A judge in a case like this should choose to not see the photos.
2003-10-07 06:50:33 PM  
They want to try this guy for taking topless shots of his exgirlfriend but nobody is allowed to see the pictures? How do we know these pictures exist then? Nobody has seen them.
2003-10-07 06:51:06 PM  
Just wondering who submitted the link...WXII is in my hometown of Winston-Salem, NC.

Any Camel City Farkers there?
2003-10-07 06:52:06 PM  
Sex! I mean, six!
2003-10-07 06:52:58 PM  
Representin G-boro here.

Yea, I was shocked to see WXII. I hate them...damn Cameron Kent.
2003-10-07 06:54:07 PM  
A 56 year old man who's never seen boobies.

I hope that doesn't happen to me

/crosses fingers and prays
2003-10-07 06:54:40 PM  
I went over to Rob's Celebs and alas: no,luck. Sorry guys, the kittens will live on.
2003-10-07 06:55:03 PM  
Any Camel City Farkers there?

I hear there's a camel-toe lurking around here.
2003-10-07 06:55:17 PM  
The lawyers claim Judge Conley Ingram, of Georgia, has become obsessed with alleged topless photographs taken of Rebekah Revels by her former boyfriend Tosh Welch.

"Alleged topless photos"???

2003-10-07 06:55:38 PM  
If she is hot, why would she think the judge would be impartial against her? Does she have a thrid nipple or something?
2003-10-07 06:56:48 PM  
Hmm, well, my sister posed for some nudes when she was 20 yrs old. She was completely nude but showed NOTHING. It was rather tasteful. I think that the whole "nude" thing is probably open to interpretation.
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2003-10-07 06:57:32 PM  
The article said "arbitrator". He's not a judge. The lawyers don't have to kiss his ass. Of course, they may lose if they don't and you generally can't appeal an arbitration decision. So bring out the pictures!
2003-10-07 06:58:15 PM  

"Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)"
Adjudicate Ad*ju"di*cate, v. t. imp. & p. p. Adjudicated;
p. pr. & vb. n. Adjudicating L. adjudicatus, p. p. of
adjudicare. See Adjudge.
To adjudge; to try and determine, as a court; to settle by
judicial decree.
2003-10-07 06:58:15 PM  
She was completely nude but showed NOTHING.

WTF? Is your sister designed like a Barbie doll?
2003-10-07 06:58:56 PM  
If the photos are what led to her disqualfication.Why is it out of the ordinary to ask to see the "alleged" photos in whole?
2003-10-07 06:59:49 PM  

you forgot - CUMDUMPSTER!

please excersize complete and factual information next time

/now googling
2003-10-07 07:02:09 PM  
What the fark is up with her eyebrows in that first picture?
Displayed 50 of 218 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.