Maybe she’s also being punished for concocting some made-up “medical condition” in order to be released early. She certainly was well enough to go to some big gala the night before she went to jail. I don’t know what “condition” she supposedly has, but I can’t think of anything that would prevent her from staying in jail. I think the judge is probably pissed off about that, too, which would explain the longer sentence.
I still find myself confused that the sheriff can just let a prisoner out. “Medical reasons”–was she examined by a prison doc? QtM, where are you? Do sentences mean nothing if you can just get out like that?
What exactly can go so wrong that she cannot handle jailtime? She doesn’t appear to have an anxiety disorder or similar (IANAPsychiatrist). She does (again, IANAP) appear to be a very narcissistic person, and being placed in a role or position that does not match their own view of themselves can cause emotional anguish. I have trouble empathizing with narcissistic people-they are such assholes to others, but I digress.
I have no sympathy for her at all. As to whether “justice” has been done–I doubt it. She is perhaps being too harshly punished. But for all those who are falsely convicted etc, I say let Paris pay.
I’m not usually so harsh, but I think this might be something that Paris needs (in a weird self-growth sort of way–if she’s even capable of that)
I only wish I lived in California. It’d be nice to see my taxes used for a cause I support.
Exactly! Just the fat, toothless, incestuous skanks who prance around in short-shorts on Jerry Springer’s stage, screaming “Y’ALL JUST JEALOUS!” at the howling audience. It’s just jealousy, plain and simple. You got us!
You know what? It doesn’t matter if she doesn’t get the standard sentence… It’s called karma. I’m not totally aware of how karma is meant to technically work, but my opinion is that if you spread shit around, you will eventually get burned. That’s obviously why she’s being made an example of. There’s a reason why the judge is allowed to make the sentence 45 days. It’s because she has obviously flaunted the law and made a mockery of everything we stand for. She was obviously driving the entire time. There were numerous photographs of Paris driving, even AFTER she was sentenced.
I’ve driven under the influence before, but never with the idea that I was too important, or too connected to get away with it if I got caught. I am not proud of it, but I never at one point took it as lightly as she did.
Why is she getting this treatment? Because her shit attitude turns all of our values as Americans upside down. She does nothing and has all of the luxuries that she does. Also, she doesn’t even appreciate all of the shit that she does have. She’s the perfect example of wasted opportunity and arrogance that is wrong with our country. It sucks that she has to be made an example of, but sometimes making an example of someone is needed.
I think justice is being served here. The law is very flexible for a reason. Parole violation carries certain penalties. If you don’t like the maximum sentence for it, then do something about it. If she were a single mother going to pick up her sick child from school, she might get a warning, but her actions are totally different.
It’s no secret that she is being treated differently. But on the other hand she got lucky by being given that statement saying that she wouldn’t drive. She was given a more than generous chance and she didn’t care enough to take it.
Secondly, why else is she being treated differently? She doesn’t have to drive. First she has no job (not in the conventional sense) and she could have certainly afforded a driver. If you lose your license, you are expected to make do even if you can’t. A lot of people who would have done such a thing would have been busted doing the things that are required to survive. Yet she doesn’t even need to do so! She could have very easily hired a driver. So her actions, in general amount to a general shitting-on of the justice system.
She abused her status thinking that she’d never be taken to task, well, one judge did so. I applaud him, because if she will ever be reformed, then this will do it. The status quo doesn’t apply to her for various reasons.
I’ve gotta side with DtC on this. He heard legal experts on network news shows. That’s a valid cite in my mind. You haven’t offered anything to back up your opinion other than you “didn’t hear anyone say that”. The question isn’t whether 23 days is excessive; the question is whether it’s normal for non-rich or non-famous people to be treated as Paris is being treated, and the consensus among experts seems to be that no, ordinary people aren’t treated as harshly.
That’s immaterial. If Paris were a duck she would quack. The fact is, she did break the law, and NOW we’re discussing whether the same consequences would apply to an ordinary person who DID THE SAME THING THAT PARIS DID.
But it wasn’t her decision to be released; it was the Sheriff’s. She doesn’t get to decide when she does or doesn’t get released, so it would make no sense to punish her for something outside of her control.
When did we start talking about her sex video?
[nitpick] it’s flout, not flaut[/nitpick]
What I take away from this is that the justice system is not impervious to public outcry or pressure–for good or ill.
I don’t understand the argument that I am jealous of Paris somehow so I want her to go down. 
I also don’t think we treat DUI seriously enough in this country. Yes, we’ve all done it. Commonality doesn’t make it right or diminish the potential lethality of doing it.
She’ll get the automatic good time, presumably.
From an earlier post:
Though I heartily disagree with your point of view here, I can understand most of your arguments, but this, Dio, is frankly nonsense. A person does not need to be cited or convicted of anything for an offense to be a probation violation. The violation was documented and that’s all it takes.
She’s not showing a hell of a lot of respect for the justice system here, in my view. She’s violated twice (thrice if you count the alcohol class), she’s been late for court, she screams in the courtroom. Maybe she’s gonna have to serve a little above the average, so what? She’s earned it.
Why should she pay for others who are falsely convicted? Let her serve the time her actions have earned her, no more and no less.
Screw that. I’m not her daddy. I don’t give a shit about her “self growth.” She was a danger to society with her drunk and reckless driving. We have, as a society, put laws in place to punish that behavior to disocurage it. Let her fulfil the punishment set forth in those laws and then be set free. I don’t care if she avoids the behavior in the future because she’s internalized the “My behavior was endangering my fellow citizens” lesson or if she just doesn’t want to deal with privation again. It’s six of one and half a dozen of another as far as I’m concerned. If she breaks the law again, throw her ass back in jail again. It’s a straightforward relationship and spelled out in black and white in the law.
Enjoy,
Steven
Multiple Paris threads, so I’ll be posting this elsewhere, too…
Radar reports there was a potential conflict of interest between the Hilton family and the LA sheriff who released Paris that may be worth examining:
Paris Hilton refused to come to court this morning, and had to be forcibly brought in by a deputy dispatched to her home, according to the New York Times.
I would suggest that was sufficient reason to re-impose the full 45 days.
You’re right. Most ordinary people don’t flout the law as Paris has. But some do. Some people flout the law exactly as Paris has. Some people don’t sign up for the classes, and do drive after having legally promised not to. The question is not “What happens to most ordinary people?” but “What happens to those ordinary people who’ve made the same screw-ups as Paris Hilton?”. Based on what I’ve read and seen during this bizarre feeding frenzy, the answer appears to be “Absolutely fuck all. Doodley squat. Nothing or next to nothing.” I have to agree with Dio, the only reason the judge is being such a hardass is because he’s trying to make a name for himself as the People’s-hero-who-knocked-Paris-Hilton-down-to-size[sup]TM[/sup]
Send me a check for a quarter if you like. Everyone in the country is screaming to put Paris Hilton in jail. Meanwhile, the meth lab/chop shop across the street from me is still going strong and the LA County Sheriff has to be bullied into coming to my neighborhood on a call.
I may need someone to kick me in the pants, I’m starting to feel sorry for the poor little rich bitch.
And why is that a bad thing???..
As I mentioned before, for me the problem is not the poor ones that got a similar treatment like Paris, but the ones that got or get worse treatment than her. You bet they (and their families) will scream bloody “murder” when they realize they are not getting the same breaks as her.
I think the previous post just reemphasizes the basic question that keeps this argument going:
What breaks, if any, is Paris Hilton really getting?
Some people have support for their point of view. For others, it’s simply a visceral reaction. For still others, it’s a visceral reaction based solely on other aspects of Paris’ life.
For something as supposedly black and white as the law, it’s surprising that this state can persist. But I guess that’s what happens when imperfect humanity gets involved.
(FWIW, I’m starting to feel a little sorry for her as well. I mean, I don’t see WHY she needs to be “taught a lesson” or “made an example of.” If her criminal offenses were considered in a vacuum, without all the other stuff about her antics and personality, I doubt that the feelings would run so strongly.)
And yet, later stories indicated that it was a feud between the judge and the sheriff’s department, not any ducking the issue by Hilton, that caused the delay.
I suspect that everyone who gets near celebrity tends to go a bit nuts.
Actually, tomndebb, I don’t see any reason why the judge should do anything but re-state the official sentence.
The good-behavior sentence reduction was from the sheriff’s office. Why should the judge uphold it? The official sentence was 45 days, no more or less.
If the judge now announces a 23-day sentence, then assuming it’s standard practice that the prisoner serves 50% of that, suddenly she’s only in jail for 12 days, when she was sentenced to 45 and would’ve served 23.
Are you kidding? Right now she is not, but when you have a sheriff going over the decision of a judge, I thought many reasonable people would call that a break, and a suspicious one too.