|
|
|
|
April 26, 2006
Disappearing news item?
Newsstands in Philadelphia have been disappearing in the middle of the night. It seems a man who didn't own them hired a crane to just yank them off the sidewalk and move them to corners where he felt like operating newsstands: A man hired a crane to uproot six newsstands Sunday that were not his and transport them to six other corners where he had applied for permits but had not received approval to do business, said a stunned city official yesterday.Having to confess to a priest? Isn't that cruel and unusual punishment? No word from the accused stand-snatcher, and while the story is funny, I'm sure it wasn't funny for the newsstand owners (described as "new immigrants, who own newsstands but speak little or no English") who showed up at work to find their businesses physically gone. That ought to make new immigrants think twice about the meaning of "land of opportunity." What's remarkable about this is that (if the reports are correct) the suspect had enough chutzpah to actually apply for newsstand permits at the six locations to which the stands were moved. As well as 36 other locations: Solvibile showed the Daily News 42 newsstand-license applications that King filed on April 1, including ones for the six corners where the shanghaied stands were dumped.According to another story, he claims the city gave him permission: Police tracked down the man who hired the crane. He apparently claims Licenses and Inspections okayed him to do this. Not true, says L & I.I very much doubt they did. Although I guess he might have asked when he could move "existing newsstands" to the new locations. I have no idea whether it's the same man, but the Small Business Tax and Management web site has a report about newsstand deductions involving someone with the same name: Fatai O. and Mary King (T.C. Memo. 1999- 293) ... claimed a deduction for amounts paid to lottery winners at their newsstand. The Court found that checks they represented as paid to those winners showed no evidence of that. Moreover, their testimony was less than convincing. In another issue, the Court found that records purportedly showing repair expenses appeared to be altered.It will probably all be called a "misunderstanding." Anyway, at this point, no one seems to have been charged with any crime, and of course all suspects are innocent until proven guilty. (I just hope no one figures out a way to snatch blogs in the middle of the night.) posted by Eric on 04.26.06 at 07:46 AM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
War For Profit
How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight Wind Boom Isaiah Washington, victim Hippie Shirts A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists PETA agrees -- with me! The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|