A woman in Los Angeles is suing Victoria’s Secret over a defective thong. Um, one could argue, they’re all defective, after all, we’re talking about paying for a permanent wedgie here.  But seriously, 52-year old Macrida Patterson is taking the lingerie line to court because she claims a “design problem” caused a metallic decoration on her “V-string” to come loose.  When she went to put the panties on, the ornament hit her in the eye causing damage to her cornea. Eye-yi-yi, there is just an ever growing number of reasons why we love coverage! [Smoking Gun and CNN]

You don’t have to throw out your Space Jam soundtrack! After six years, two stalled trials due to medical emergencies, and an impossible hunt for jurors who have never watched MTV,  R. Kelly was amazingly acquitted of 14 counts of child pornography.  The Chicago courtroom hummed with the rhythm of Robert Kelly’s Church-like chants of “Thank you, Jesus!” as he was declared innocent of raping his goddaughter.  The singer/songwriter, who has beat more than just a bad rap, hugged his four lawyers. The defense dream team found a big hole in the prosecution’s case: no mole. R. Kelly has one that’s about a square inch on his back.  In the sex tape, no mole appeared to be visible. R&B’s R. Kelly is free—his only crime? Creating Trapped in A Closet.  But alas Hip Hoperas aren’t punishable by law, or Beyoncé would have already been in the clink for Carmen.  [CNN]

Lately virginity has seemed trendier than skinny pants. But just like the slim slacks, chastity also doesn’t fit everyone’s style.  When our cool Catherine posted about Australian FHM’s poll where 28% of men said they hoped to marry virgins, we all shrugged—a guy can dream can’t he? We here at The Frisky have been enjoying the sexual revolution, and we thought the dudes of the world were too. Alas, no. This week, a French Court annulled a Muslim couple’s marriage because the bride wasn’t a virgin on her wedding night. When the man, in his 30’s (?!), didn’t have blood-stained sheets from his wedding bed to show his family, they decided to take her to court. While plenty of girls lose their hymen nowadays from activities like gymnastics, the bride confessed she had lied because she didn’t think he would marry her if she told the truth. So, under an antiquated French law that protects the “essential quality” insisted upon by the groom, the marriage was null and void. Boo! This verdict has enraged feminists around and the world as well as the Prime Minister of France and the rector at a Mosque in Paris who all see the ruling as reverting women to being commodities for men. Although, something good has come out of all this—this poor woman was saved from a lifetime sentence with a seriously unrealistic and demanding husband. [Yahoo News]

I’ve had a crush on Bill Murray since I saw Groundhog Day and his studliness was further proved by the depressing lothario he played in Lost In Translation. So it’s with a sad heart that I report that Murray may not be the sensitive moper the world thought him to be. According to divorce papers filed by Murray’s soon-to-be-ex-wife, Jennifer Murray, the actor’s “adultery, addiction to marijuana and alcohol, abusive behavior, physical abuse, sexual addictions and frequent abandonment” led to their split. Apparently he also told her “she was lucky he didn’t kill her.” [The Smoking Gun]

By now you’ve probably heard about Michael Buday, the guy who wanted to take the last name of his wife, Diana Bijon, when they married in California. It took two years, a sexual discrimination suit, and a change in California law before he was able to do so. While women have an easy time taking their husband’s last name, there is no place on the marriage license application, and driver’s license, for the groom to choose the bride’s surname. Clearly, this is ridiculous and there’s not much more to say about that, except good for Mr. and Mrs. Bijon for taking their fight all the way. But it got me thinking about the notion of changing your last name in marriage anyway—is this something guys would actually consider? I posed the question to the guys on my IM and, needless to say, they probably won’t be taking your last name anytime soon. Check their responses, after the jump.

Last week we wrote about Wal-Mart employee Debbie Shank, who was struck by a truck and suffered severe brain damage and whose medical expenses were covered by her Wal-Mart insurance. The chain sued for reimbursement of $400,000+ after Shank won a settlement against the truck company which was responsible for her accident. Today the mega-chain finally dropped their suit. Wal-Mart, you (finally) did the right thing. But we’re still going to shop at Target! [St. Louis Today]

Target is awesome, and not just because they have cheap, cute clothes designed by normally-out-of-our-price-range big names like Jovovich-Hawk and Luella Bartley. They also rule because they don’t screw over their employees in the most evil way possible. Wal-Mart, which, frankly, has some of the worst clothing you could possible buy at a megastore, won a suit against a former employee for $470,000. For what, you may ask? The awful truth, after the jump.

Earlier this week, we told you about the bikini model whose breasts got her acquitted of property damage.  Then on Japanese television, Serena Kozakura proved her 44-inch bust makes one heck of a doggy door stopper. The truth, unlike a good bra, will set you free! [You Tube]

The Girls Next Door’s Kendra Wilkinson claims getting fake breasts were her “best investment” and a pin-up girl in Japan couldn’t agree more. Serena Kozakura claims, “It was my breasts that helped me win in court.” Last year, the ample-chested bikini model was found guilty of property destruction after a man accused her of jealously kicking in a door when she found him in bed with another woman. Kozakura appealed the case, using her 44-inch bust as her defense, saying that she is too chesty to have crawled through the hole in the door to the house. On Monday, the Tokyo High Court happily examined the evidence and threw out her guilty verdict. Ta-ta-riffic! [Yahoo]

Jane Fonda better wash her mouth out with soap! The Federal Communications Commission is trying to impose stricter regulations for what they call “fleeting expletives”—like when the Barberella star dropped the c-word on The Today Show a couple weeks ago and the world freaked out. Thus far, the Appeals Court has been stalling and put the case, brought by networks like Fox to stop the FCC from being able to fine an unscripted curse, on hold.  So the FCC is running to the daddy of all courts, The Supreme Court, to get a quicker and more finite ruling. If the Court agrees to take the case, they could hear arguments as soon as the Fall. Better bite down on your legwarmers next time, Jane. [FMQB]

You think Charlie Sheen would try to avoid going to court…again. But this time the case isn’t against him!  The TV star took his baby mama Denise Richards to trial over a reality show she wants to tape with their two toddlers. He is fighting the good fight, trying to keep his kids from the cameras—after all who better than Charlie Sheen to know what happens to celebrity kids. But unfortunately, the La-La land courts sided with Denise. She really knows how to put the ex in exploitative. Hey, if she plays her cards right, maybe she can get a spin off slot for her kids on Celeb Rehab! [TMZ]