From the "crazy b!tch" files...

[Publius pro tem]

Well, here's another one from the "crazy b!tch" files...

I remember when this first hit the news - now the rest of the story comes to light.
Be careful about "unfriending" party sluts until you're safely outta town.

Woman Allegedly Accuses Man With Arabic Surname Of
Terrorist Plane Threat After He Ends 4-Day Fling

December 30, 2011

LOS ANGELES (CBS) — A 45-year-old Temple City woman is accused of
providing false information to an airline in order to take revenge on a male
passenger with whom she had a four-day fling.

Lizet Sariol is expected to plead guilty Tuesday in a federal court.

She is charged with a single felony count of conveying false and misleading
information, specifically, implying that a United Airlines flight was endangered,
according to a signed plea agreement filed Thursday in Los Angeles federal court.

The charge stems from an anonymous call Sariol reportedly placed Sept. 25
to a United Airlines call center in Detroit. It is alleged that she said a
Frenchman and his friends, all of whom have Arabic surnames, posed an
unspecified threat to a plane set to depart that day from Los Angeles
International Airport to Las Vegas and then on to Paris, according to court papers.

FBI agents were dispatched to LAX to intercept the group.

During questioning, the Frenchman, Adnen Mansouri, said he expected to be
detained by airport authorities because he was being “harassed” by Sariol,
with whom he had a four-night affair, according to court papers.

Mansouri said he had broken off the relationship just hours before arriving at LAX.

The Frenchman and his friend, Salim Oumahdi, told FBI Special Agent David
Gates they had received threatening texts and Facebook postings from the
woman for hours, Gates wrote in an affidavit.

Mansouri said he believed Sariol was angry because he “un-friended” her on
Facebook, the affidavit states.

One text Sariol allegedly sent said, “Don’t even try to get on the plane (I)
called the fbi Sucks to be all of you hope you all have good attorneys,”
according to court papers.

Investigators who interviewed Sariol in early October said she “freaked out”
when her ex-lover kicked her out of the Beverly Hills house where he was
staying the night before he was due to fly back to France.

“I’m very sorry,” Sariol told the FBI interviewer, according to the charging document.

Sariol faces up to five years in prison or probation, a three-year period of
supervised release and a possible fine of $250,000, according to the U.S.
Attorney’s Office.

She is scheduled to plead guilty Tuesday before U.S. District Judge John F.
Walter, who will set a sentencing date.


Woman Allegedly Accuses Man With Arabic Surname Of Terrorist Plane Threat After He Ends 4-Day Fling « CBS Los Angeles

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, eh?
She'll be having a happy new year in federal prison...

.​

 

[Roberteaux]

Not the brightest bulb in the lamp, that's for sure. But you're right about that "hell hath no fury" thing, too.

I once rejected a woman's proposal of marriage, and the enraged lady then tried to set me up on a felony beef in Louisiana. The cops were more than pleased to investigate, of course, but part of their detail involved a medical invesigation of her person, to assure that the nasty crimes I supposedly committed did indeed take place.

Long story short: the girl balked at the idea of a free examination of that sort. And so the police investigator-- a female detective from the New Orleans police department-- mentioned to the overwrought lady that if the examination turned up negative, then she would actually be charged with a lil' felony all her own. At that point the alleged victim was asked if she was SURE that I had done all the terrible things she had accused me of, and the poor girl replied, "Well... maybe not. But he IS a jerk!"

NOPD advised her that the crime she accused me of carries a mandatory life sentence, and that Louisiana doesn't like to send boys away forever simply because some woman is pissed off at 'em. They could have charged her then and there, but they had me on ice a few doors down and so came and asked me if I'd be sore if they just told her to get the hell out of town instead of charging her. I shrugged about it, and that chick was gone within the hour. Adios, amiga!

To this day, I'm not sure if I should have pushed the issue or not. It later occurred to me that she might have gone on to successfully hurt some boy, and that I might have done the Right Thing by sticking her with an arrest record for falsifying police reports (conviction or acquittal notwithstanding, the arrest record would stand)... but at the time it seemed to me that both the police and myself had better things to do than mess around with some angry kooky-bird.

Anyway, there are some girls out there who really will fly that far off the handle if you don't exactly fall for their... uhm... "graces"...

You boys out there-- you better look out!

--R

 

[duck2k]

Anyway, there are some girls out there who really will fly that far off the handle if you don't exactly fall for their... uhm... "graces"...

You boys out there-- you better look out!

--R

I know - my ex is one them "crazy byotches." But she has no contact with me now (been over two years) - she knows better.

 

[purevilpleasure]

Fry the Hoebag...........way too many crazy women out there.....and they get a better car insurance rate than us......stupid.

 

[Jakeislove]

They're all crazy!

Just gotta find the kind of crazy you can live with.

 

[Byron999]

Damn, I guess I was lucky to have not rejected any psychos back in the days of my 'Love'em and Leave'em'. Acually it was more of the "Can't we be just friends" discussion when they wanted more involvement.

 

[Publius pro tem]

Yeah Byron - I always thought the "Can't we be just friends" discussion was a bunch of sh!t.

My question for them was something like;
"Do you usually fxck your friends?"
A couple times I played along for awhile until something more steady came along...

A friend of mine once told me;
"Sex with the psycho b!tches is the BEST - just can't let 'm know where you live!"
This was before the proliferation of cell phones and the internet.

He's right ya know...

.​

 

[Rawhdney]

Oh those damn crazy broads...

Which gender kills their spouses at a rate of 4x the other?

 

[Publius pro tem]

Cite your source.

Then tell us which gender assaults their spouse/significant other the most.

(Which, by extension, gets law enforcement involved and men disproportionately arrested...)





Then apologize for seagulling the thread.

.​

 

[442 SLASH]

I dated a crazy once..... I said the wrong thing and then next thing I know I'm holding my arm because I was stabbed 3 times with a fingernail file. Moral of the story; don't piss off a crazy bitch while she's filing her nails.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Oh those damn crazy broads...

Which gender kills their spouses at a rate of 4x the other?

Neither:

During the 10 years from 1976 to 1985, a total of 18,417 people are estimated to have been killed by their spouses in the United States (Maxfield, 1989:677; see also Mercy and Saltzman, 1989). Estimated numbers of victims were 10,529 wives and 7,888 husbands. Hence, for every 100 men who killed their wives, about 75 women killed their husbands.

 

[Strato]

I must have got lucky. Haven't had much trouble with the one I have. The X I had ended up dying of the cancer so she's no trouble.

 

[Rawhdney]

From the FBI's Supplimentary Homicide Report, 1976-2000.
2005 data is from the CDC.

Muder Victims of an Intimate Partner

Male Female

1976 1,357 1,600
1980 1,221 1,549
1990 859 1,501
1993 708 1,581
2000 440 1,247
2005 325 1,181

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

From the FBI's Supplimentary Homicide Report, 1976-2000.
2005 data is from the CDC.

Muder Victims of an Intimate Partner

Male Female

1976 1,357 1,600
1980 1,221 1,549
1990 859 1,501
1993 708 1,581
2000 440 1,247
2005 325 1,181

Those numbers include homosexual intimates.

 

[Publius pro tem]

Those numbers include homosexual intimates.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!


Er... I mean, really?


Wow.


Way to cite stats, eh?

And to what end? I'm not sure where some of these folks are trying to go with their "argument."

.​