Now That I've Reassembled My Head Post-Explosion...
I had to actually go get some water and calm my ass down before I could write this. This moron (Vincent Margera, uncle of professional skater/idiot Bam Margera, for those of you who've been spared looking at their smirky and/or ugly mugs all over MTV for the last umpteen years) is excusing his groping of young girls because apparently, watching nasty old men grope young girls is entertaining for his audience. Oh! Well, if that's a defense, I have a new concept I'd like to run past MTV. It's for a new show called "Angela Kicks Gross Old Perverts in the Face." It's not assault, y'all: it's ENTERTAINMENT.
Allegedly, Gross Old Pervert (henceforth "GOP") ((heh, unintended, but I'm running with it)), who is known as Don Vito on MTV's "Viva La Bam" (henceforth "one of the horsemen of the apocalypse"), fondled a fourteen-year-old and two twelve-year-olds (and peed himself in the process) in a skate park "to amuse, to entertain, to get a laugh." This is according to GOP's attorney, Pamela Mackey, who, seriously, must take a lot of Ambien at night, because I really don't know how you'd sleep. Or keep a straight face. Or sit in a room with that guy. I guess someone's gotta do it, but that's a hell of a defense, Pam. Child molestation as entertainment. I wonder if Fox will give her a call during sweeps.
GOP has been charged with felony sexual assault, as well as 12 felony bail violations. I can't even bring myself to look up what he was on bail about in the first place. Gag.
« Gossip I Am Over | Main | Get the Hell Out of Here, James Lipton »





That is so awful. Even in a city as big as New Orleans, I heard stories of his behavior at Mardi Gras this year. If you get gossiped about (in a bad way) at Mardi Gras, your behavior is definitely way below social norms.
Posted by: Cheryl | October 25, 2007 at 02:11 PM
GOP- HA!
That guy is disgusting- from watching Bam's show you could always tell that Bam's mom could barely stand to be in the same room with him. Wonder what Bam thinks of his uncle now? Hopefully this guy will go to jail for a long, long time.
Posted by: BaltimoreGal | October 25, 2007 at 02:19 PM
So the defense attorney is a bad person for doing her job? Come on. I guess you'd rather decide who's guilty and who's innocent from your couch in front of the TV. Who needs the legal system when we have snap judgments and entertainment websites?
If America didn't have attorneys willing to give vigorous defenses to the worst of the worst we would be no better than the Inquisition. The play a very important role in protecting every person's legal rights.
Posted by: Gigi | October 25, 2007 at 02:22 PM
I've worked for lawyers my entire professional life, including criminal defense and civil rights attorneys, so actually no, that isn't what I'm saying at all.
Posted by: disnazzio | October 25, 2007 at 02:29 PM
And who needs defense attorneys when there are commenters on entertainment websites?
Posted by: Kelly | October 25, 2007 at 02:33 PM
Never seen this "Viva la Bam," never want to.
Posted by: Amanda | October 25, 2007 at 02:59 PM
You are missing precisely nothing. My review? It's a show about a bunch of people with antisocial personality disorder acting out on each other and everyone around them.
Posted by: disnazzio | October 25, 2007 at 03:08 PM
I don't think you're out of line for saying, "Hey, how the hell can the DA manage to defend this guy without feeling like a huge arsehole?"
It's what everybody thinks. I know somebody has to be the defense attorney, and it's not always popular, but surely you have to know when you do that job that you are going to be questioned A LOT! People aren't going to thank you for defending scum. It's one think to defend someone whose innocence is questionable and you're trying to prove their innocence, but I mean, this isn't debatable, is it? Isn't he a scumbag?
And really, how does she sleep? If she's defending his behaviour, is she willing to let him hang around with her 12 year old? (I don't know if she has one, but that might be a good test of whether or not she believes what she's saying in court).
I'm done.
Posted by: Marmite Breath | October 25, 2007 at 03:31 PM
Uh, that would be "one thing" not "one think".
Coffee, here I come.
Posted by: Marmite Breath | October 25, 2007 at 03:31 PM
That's where I'm at on this too, MB. Sure, he should have a lawyer, and yes, that lawyer should mount the best *ethical* defense possible. However, this defense is not "he didn't do it," or "he was insane at the time" or even "they consented" (which would also be kind of creepy and probably irrelevant given their ages). It's "these girls got molested because it's what the AUDIENCE wanted." The Inquisition was invoked in here earlier, and since we're strolling back in time, maybe gladiators are an alright reference. Should we be tossing people to lions on TV too? How about televised executions?
I love the Constitutional protections for the accused, and my track record is pretty good on that (that was me showing T.I. some love back there in the archives), but I really cannot, under any circumstances, get okay with "entertainment" as a viable, ethical legal defense for molesting little girls. Yuck.
Posted by: disnazzio | October 25, 2007 at 03:59 PM
indeed. regardless of what the actual reasons were, "it's entertaining" is really REALLY poor defense. that is not going to fly with any jury. she couldn't at least come up with some childhood molestation or temporary insanity? come on, now.
Posted by: Kelly | October 25, 2007 at 04:12 PM
he's gross. the show is gross. this juror (sitting in my chair at work) says guilty.
Posted by: Amy H | October 25, 2007 at 05:37 PM
I'm nodding my head in agreement with the comments that have been made about this sick side show freak. But I'm really bothered by something no one else has mentioned...his EYES!! OMG they're creeping me out. I swear they're following me as I move away from my computer screen. (shudder)
Posted by: Lisa | October 26, 2007 at 08:52 AM
I had heard that Bam has a two year old daughter. Wonder if it will still be "entertaining" to him when GOP does it to her in 10 years?
Posted by: dee | October 26, 2007 at 02:08 PM
Last I heard, molesting young girls for a TV audience was called manufacturing child pornography. If he wants to use that defense, then he better be prepared for the added charge!
Posted by: Sarah | October 26, 2007 at 04:00 PM
tcwn tlsy ygjt ozhdsvup zieq vaxnolk fboi
Posted by: jcmuqtgpn crpqhtjua | November 23, 2007 at 08:06 AM
cvrfbyhgx brgoq rghn vyrmz ujhqvykz mjwisd olujfbgp http://www.sfpvbza.ndtzbms.com
Posted by: pabe mboj | November 23, 2007 at 08:07 AM
kcwdpnosz ytedgwqa sawxhec uwcdk wfymantrl cjflyzhbo luqtisgbk [URL=http://www.ipkuyvona.hrde.com]duklocgmi ladhb[/URL]
Posted by: xnjbh gvmfbhit | November 23, 2007 at 08:10 AM
afvecr xnfrogz vmfwgrpse jhtelyxfi htcgql vaihcnmj anhjxyo [URL]http://www.kxstcnwem.boati.com[/URL] heqsbav ytqpwvkso
Posted by: duzgyh nauec | November 23, 2007 at 08:11 AM