I don’t know. I’m always drawn to underdogs, I guess. I always feel compelled to defend people I think are getting piled on unfairly.
I sympathize, but that’s probably the first and last time she’ll ever be called “underdog.” Other kinds of dog, yes, but…
Nah. I’m sorry, some people did get really angry about this, but I think most of them were just people with Internet access and too much spare time. She’s not OJ.
That all sounds pretty chickenshit to me and the legal expersts seem to agree.
One. She was only formally cited for one violation (at least according to Fox News).
Do you know more than all the legal experts I keep seeing on the News networks who all keep saying that no ordinary person would get 45 days for the totality of her offesnses?
Most ordinary people do not flaut the law as Paris has. If Paris had acted like an ordinary person and signed up for her classes and not driven after she signed a friggen document saying she wouldn’t, then this could all have been avoided.
I’ve known habitual drug and DUI offenders who haven’t spent that much time in jail. That is why I think it is unfair. I would think that no matter who it was. Yes, she is annoying, but I will never understand why people get so het up about her.
And if life was actually fair, a lot of us would be in jail right now instead of sitting at our computers. Pretty much everyone I know has driven under the influence of something at LEAST once in their life. Had I gotten caught back in my party days I would probably still be sitting in jail. That might not have anything to do with Paris, but some are acting like they’ve never done a thing wrong in their life. It is ridiculous all of this arguing over Paris Hilton.
That makes no sense. It is implied in the comparison that the hypothetical “ordinary person” would have done the same thing Paris did.
And I have known non-habitual drug users do 2 months for a bag of weed. I have known a person who spent 2 weeks in jail and was never convicted of a damn thing. So?
It’s not her, it’s what she represents. Like I said before, she’s an example that needs to be made.
On a different note, did anyone catch Bill O’Reilley on Fox just now? He kept saying, “and now she has to do 23 days”.
Did they change something, or is he still commenting on stories he knows nothing about?
And I’ve heard others that say her sentence was similar to others under similar conditions, and, of course, there’s the fact her attorneys post sentencing screamed ‘we’ll appeal this outrageous sentence’, then dropped the appeal, and, of course, 30 year experience watching what sentencing judges do.
and Dio please, pretty please address the fucking point about the ‘cited once’ . Repeating yourself doesn’t address it. she had three distinct and different violations of the terms of her (conditional) release for the original charge. One prior to her sentencing, one shortly after, and the third is ongoing as far as I can tell.
And, by the way, ‘chickenshit’ violations term doesn’t apply when the violation is for doing something in the same class as the original violation. I’d agree that if the only violation was for failing to sign up for the classes as ordered, that I’d be surprised by a jail sentence. But she was on fucking probation for being a menace on the roads, and two of the violations were for driving again.
Have to agree with that. I could never understand the people who idolized the worthless idiot, but the sheer amount of hatred being thrown at her seems equally bizarre.
The legal experts all keep saying that even WITH the probation violation that most people would not got to jail unless they had priors.
Without knowing anything else, I think history would strongly suggest the latter.
Nope. She was sent back to jail today.
Fox kept saying she was only formally cited once. You keep saying she had these other violations but if she wasn’t cited for them, it’s like they never happened (if traffic cop lets you out of a speeding ticket with a warning, it doesn’t count as a citation even though it was a violation).
I think you’re trying inflate the real severity of the crime just because you don’t like her. She was on probation for a DUI, not for “being a menace on the road.” I think DUI’s are bad news and should be prosecuted more severely, but most people don’t go to jail for their first one even IF they do violate the terms of their probation.
Plus, let’s be real, here. How many of us can say we’ve never once in our lives operated a vehicle when we knew we shouldn’t? Most of us just don’t get caught. It doesn’t make us all evil or “menaces.”
“You put the dumb blond in,
You take the dumb blond out,
You put the dumb blond in…”
I feel sorry for her. I do. The In/Out business borders on ‘cruel.’ It’s certainly unusual.
Anyway…I’ll put $50 that says that there’s no fucking way, not a fuckin chance, that she does 40 more days. Ain’t gonna happen.
In fact, I’d guess the over/under to be about 10 days total.
Should we start a pool? Better make it quick. Cally-fo-nya is known for weird judicial practices.
That wasn’t the part that O’Reilly got wrong, it was the amount of time (she got 45 days, he said she got 23).
um, we know. I think the ‘wrong’ part of O’r’s quote is the amount of time.
wrt to “experts thinking it was harsh”
according to this timeline:
She hired a new attorney after the sentence, one who specializes in DUI’s, so, I’d tend to believe an attorney who specializes in that sort of case would be pretty spot on for typical sentences for issues w/the same. And he (apparently) advised her to drop the appeal of the sentence.
Yeah, I get it, people don’t like vapid rich girls. But that’s not exactly a criminal offense. Yes, I get it, she violated her probation, but I don’t think 40 days in jail is a fair punishment for that. You think they should throw the book at her, and it appears that is what is happening right now. I’m still going to think it is a bullshit sentence and I’m still going to believe that the only reason she is back in jail is because of the public outrage over letting her out.
Plenty of people who aren’t Paris Hilton get out of jail and go on house arrest. It is a good alternative to jail and it puts money back into the system because the prisoner has to pay out.
This is such a bullshit waste of taxpayer money. All for what - so everyone can see the little heiress cry? I’m no fan of the pampered heiress set, but this is total BS.
and once again you don’t address what I said. If a cop lets you out of a speeding ticket, there’s nothing written. The cops in the January driving incident had her sign a statement, there’s written evidence she violated the terms of her conditional release. they chose not to charge it more formally. and again you fail to address the alcohol classes. I knew a probationer who was ordered to do daily breathalyzers by 9 am each day. He went to his PO w/his sheet proving compliance, but on 10 occaisions over the month, he wasn’t there by 9 am (most were 9:05, 9:02 etc, one was as late as 10 am) his PO hauled him in front of the judge (your ‘cited once’) but it was for “10 violations”. Fox is making the same mistake you are. She’s been cited for “probation violation”. But violated that probation in more than one time/way. That’s how it’s presented in court the gazillion times I’ve seen in. The single charge “probation violation” can (and almost always does) contain multiple violations.
A. “don’t like Paris”? I don’t give two shits about her. B. She was on probation for the DUI, which is ‘being a menace on the road’. you seem to acknowledge that they’re ‘bad news’ so why beef at ‘menace on the road’? She was. She drove under the influence, was caught speeding around at night w/o her lights on, driving w/o a valid license twice. What threashold do you use for being a menace on the roads? 'cause gotta tell you, that does it for me.
and as for the “most people don’t go to jail for their first one even IF they do violate the terms of their probation” Bull fucking shit, IME (remember, 30 years?) See it all the damn time.
Raises hand. And certainly not in the last 20 years when it’s become more of an issue.