Did he only buy it because he realized he was going to get in trouble once the video got out? Pretty sure his original intention was to leave it there, like a lot of the copycats did.
The surveillance on the frozen asile is probably not extensive enough to confirm whether he bought the same carton he licked and put back in.
The guy created this hoax deliberately. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
2 Likes
This is a stupid policy.
1 Like
Because of jackasses every product has a stupid plastic ring around the top and now the entire ocean is full of plastic.
2 Likes
If that is really the reason, we need to send over some adults to the US.
2 Likes
Please do.
1 Like
I can’t help but think that some of Rob’s offense over the jail sentence for this hoax is because this kind of stunt is something he would do, or at least wishes he could do. Rob really loves tweaking people.
Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2020/03/05/texas-ice-cream-licker-gets-ja.html
…
3 Likes
Gross, sure – but does it really deserve a sentence of 30 days? Does this actually rise to the level of violent crime that we should be separating people from society for?
3 Likes
See, he’s a recidivist… a repeat offender!
Anderson could have been sentenced to up to a year in jail and fined $4,000 for misdemeanor criminal mischief.
Not being a lawyer my question is, is “misdemeanor criminal mischief” one of those laws for when we don’t have a specific law for this but we want to punish this person still. I guess I’d love to see the judges comments on the sentencing for this as it might shed a bit more light on reasoning for the sentence. With that said, there are too many questionable videos out there of people doing things that are borderline if not wholly criminal just for clicks on their vids.
Devils Advocate: on the other hand I’m pretty sure there have been rape cases reported on by BoingBoing in the last few years where the pile of human excrement didn’t go to jail and only got parole.
2 Likes
You know, right as a significant virus outbreak is occurring? I’m OK with it.
1 Like
Important detail Xeni omitted: HE BOUGHT THE FUCKING ICE CREAM.
6 Likes
So the dude isn’t even stupid-edgy, he’s FAKE stupid-edgy? Definitely worth an arrest! If you’re going to be stupid-edgy, own it!
2 Likes
I can’t help but think that if he were white, he would have only gotten probation. 
1 Like
He’s actually the second copycat, fake stupid-edgy ice-creamer licker.
(There was a massive campaign to find the first woman who was caught on camera licking ice cream and putting it back. While they were looking for her, they caught a copycat. Then a month later this guy - the third ice cream licker - thought it sounded like a good youtube bit.)
1 Like
He also posted the video of him licking the ice cream and putting it back. He created hoax himself. The fallout and consequences are all on him. It’s his own fault.
4 Likes
No. It’s got relatively clear requirements: under the particular prong under which the dude here was charged, the state has to prove that the defendant (1) intentionally or knowingly (2) tampered with tangible property (3) owned by another (4) causing pecuniary loss or substantial inconvenience to the owner or a third person. The class of the misdemeanor is governed by the amount of pecuniary loss suffered (so mere substantial inconvenience would be punishable only by a fine). Damage of more than $750 but less than $2500 is a class A misdemeanor, which is what this guy was charged with, because the store had to destroy the entire freezer full of ice cream.
And, though intent is sometimes hard to prove, here, the defendant filmed himself doing the dumb thing and then posted the dumb film on the interwebs. Also he pleaded guilty.
1 Like
Thank you for adding some info on the charges, it’s appreciated.
1 Like
THANK YOU! It seems the harm would still be the same: general panic about food safety (as opposed to specific panic about food safety), but legal issues would be more complex.
Though he could argue more convincingly that he was commenting on food safety than a fire yeller could make the case about commenting on building codes.
Hey, no kink shaming.
Don’t know why this is in response to @gatto, but I can’t seem top fix that.
1 Like
