Normally if a person is convicted of a crime they serve a sentence and the matter is finished. Or they get probation. Break probation and you serve whatever sentence the judge originally imposed.
There is a finite period that the judicial system punishes a person for a specific crime.
The Lindsay Lohan case has me puzzled. Her DUI’s (she had two within a short period) were in 2007. Had she been given a normal jail sentence the matter would have been settled back in 2007. She was sent to Rehab 3 times back then.
The quote below gives details.
This thing has dragged on for three years. She’s appeared before the judge multiple times for not complying with probation. She was finally jailed last month. Now more rehab. There doesn’t seem to be an end in sight. :dubious:
Wasn’t the jail term the final card the judge could play? Break probation - go to jail. Why does the judge still have control? When does the legal process end?
Please, let’s avoid any drawn out discussions of a fallen celebrity.
My questions is focused on the limits of the court. Normally you get convicted, serve time and it’s over. In this case the judge is playing the role of a parent. It must be costing a fortune to keep this case in the courts.
Is this normal for substance abuse cases? Do the cases just drag on and on as the people shuttle in/out of rehab programs and short jail terms?
I took Criminal Justice in college years ago. We didn’t talk about anything like this.