[QUOTE=lowbrass]
You appear to be simply pulling that assertion out of your ass.
[/quote]
I see you’re ignoring the cites I provided. How nice.
And you’re also going to ignore the telephone privledges, personal cell and seperation from the general population? Selective arguing?
[QUOTE=Mtgman]
The more I see of this case the less I like it. Why did the court and prosecutor write in the “no house arrest” clause in the sentence? It’s within their bounds, of course, but how common is this type of clause and what are the guidelines for its use? The law is clear, if the Sheriff was given a sentence which specified no house arrest, then he should not have approved house arrest. On the other hand, if there were some questions about the appropriateness of including the “no house arrest” clause then perhaps the Sheriff did the right(not necessarially the same as legal) thing.
[/QUOTE]
From the L.A. Times article, this is apparently rather unprecedented:
The jist of the article is that this could set a dangerous precedent. If judges start insisting on full sentences for all their convictions, and there isn’t enough room to hold all these people, what will happen?
[QUOTE=lowbrass]
The jist of the article is that this could set a dangerous precedent. If judges start insisting on full sentences for all their convictions, and there isn’t enough room to hold all these people, what will happen?
[/QUOTE]
Celebrities might have to share cells with real people. :eek:
[QUOTE=lowbrass]
The jist of the article is that this could set a dangerous precedent. If judges start insisting on full sentences for all their convictions, and there isn’t enough room to hold all these people, what will happen?
[/QUOTE]
Restructure sentencing. Build more jails.
Or put their asses on barges. That’s what New York did.
[QUOTE=kidchameleon]
I see you’re ignoring the cites I provided. How nice.
[/quote]
No, actually I didn’t see them. Give me a break; it’s a long-ass thread; your cites were buried in the middle of all the other stupid hyperbole from other people. I promise I’ll read your cites as soon as I have time.
Well now who’s ignoring who? I addressed the seperation issue already. 
As for the phone thing, I haven’t seen a cite for what’s the normal amount of phone time allowed, and how what Paris was allowed compares to that. Of course, such things don’t seem to prevent people from making assumptions anyway.
[QUOTE=Biggirl]
Restructure sentencing. Build more jails.
Or put their asses on barges. That’s what New York did.
[/QUOTE]
I thought that they turned all of NYC into a prison. At least that was the claim of that documentary I saw some years ago.
[QUOTE=Biggirl]
Restructure sentencing. Build more jails.
[/quote]
The California voters have spoken again and again on that issue. Ballot initiatives show up almost every election for bond funds to build more prisons and are rejected time and again. We don’t want more prisons. We want the government to address the issue of why so many people need to be in jail, and come up with a solution besides just throwing more and more people in jail.
(Of course there is unfortunately another contingent of knee-jerkers who consistently vote for longer and longer jail sentences, which is how we got the ill-conceived “three strikes” law. So it’s a problem.)
This ain’t New York.
[QUOTE=kidchameleon]
Celebrities might have to share cells with real people. :eek:
[/QUOTE]
Yes, celebrities in jail account for the totality of the overcrowding problem. :rolleyes:
I don’t blame you for oversimplifying issues; I blame t.v. news. Teaching a whole generation to eschew critical thinking skills.
I think the misperception on some people’s part is because all they know relating to sentencing is what other celebrities have gotten. She may not be getting harsher treatment than Joe Sixpack, but she may be getting harsher treatment than the average celeb.
[QUOTE=Fish]
Personally, I think it’s disgusting that anybody gets out of jail until their sentence is completed. I don’t understand why we make up sentencing rules if we blatantly disregard them when they’re inconvenient.
[/QUOTE]
The jails in LA County, and nationwide for the most part, have twice as many inmates as the physical facilities and the staff is able to handle. When someone goes in, someone has to come out whether or not their sentence has been completed.
I don’t know how you stand on higher taxes but I think I could ballpark it. If we want all those convicted to serve the entire sentence we need to agree to pay a much higher county tax.
[QUOTE=lowbrass]
Sweetie, the story just broke. They don’t post transcripts of television commentaries on the internet the moment they are spoken. What is it you want? You’re so quick to impeach DtC because he “saw it on t.v.”, but as far as I’ve seen, NONE of you who are claiming it is customary for people who are caught driving on a license suspended for reckless driving to serve a full jail sentence have even that much to base your claim on. You appear to be simply pulling that assertion out of your ass.
[/quote]
Same response to you as to DTC read Post #281 I swear sometimes I wonder if this thing is on.
Then what about my cow-orker that spent 30+ for the exact same thing as PH?
The penalties are exactly the same for either offense. Penalties for reckless 23103 PDF with the penalties for drunk (section 23536). In fact if you get a second DUI arrest within 7 years, the law looks at it as a second offfense DUI cite section 23103.5 So from a legal point of view, the penalties are exactly the same. From an insurance point of view, insurance companies treat both offenses the same. AFAICT the only advantage to pleading this sucker down is you can honestly say that you have never been convicted of DUI.
We’re all adults here, and we know that money and clout go a long way in shortening the long arm of the law. We also know that every special interest out there sees this case as more than just a common person who committed a common crime. It’s the same reason why Michael Milken and Martha Stewart went to jail. The thought process is, that by seeing the high and mighty taken down, the common folks will see that the legal and judicial system is serious about this kind of crime. It doesn’t just happen with hotshots and celebrities. Clergy, teachers, and cops who commit crimes usually get the book thrown at them as well.
Paris is a big girl and has been in the public spotlight for some time. She should know, or her lawyers/advisors/parents/agent should know, that she’s been under scrutiny from a lot of people who are tired of hearing and seeing her. Therefore the time to have thought about how to change her behavior was way before now. I can’t believe her handlers - or Paris herself - didn’t come out with a big public apology, got her face in the news for doing some community service, or did something to get in front of this. Essentially, if you thought she was a spoiled bitch before, she’s done nothing to change that perception.
The best imaginable thing she could have done was to get some counseling, or something, to get ready and try to make it a week in jail. Yes, going to jail sucks. But it isn’t like she didn’t have time to get used to the idea. Hell, if she got special perks in jail, I think most people wouldn’t care one way or the other. Some people have claimed she’s pretty smart in how she handles her image… not so much this time. I feel a twinge of sympathy for her - it’s pretty crappy to be sent home, and then called back to court in handcuffs, and sent back to jail, all with cameras recording every second. But I hold a position of trust in the community, and I know that just as I might get a break day to day because of what I do and who I am, if I mishandle that privilege, a lot of people are going to take an interest in seeing me taken down a notch.
If PH is unaware that she’s viewed as a spoiled airhead bimbo, she’s well and truly far beyond the realm of reality. But I’ve never seen her do anything to refute that image. In fact, that’s the problem with her, Lindsay Lohan, and the other swathe of young adult jackasses. They’re completely absorbed in their own worlds, and while they’re happy to keep their names in the papers and on the news, they’re not smart about building up goodwill in their public image. I’d bet if George Clooney or Angelina Jolie got into trouble with the law, there’d be a lot of sympathy and they’d probably be treated pretty well. But they’re two celebrities who care about their public image, and they’d probably at least attempt to make it look as if they were not trying to curry special favors because of their fame.
On the other hand, PH with a rampant case of butt herpes is probably something that none of us needed to ever hear. :eek:
[QUOTE=Hippy Hollow]
We’re all adults here
[/QUOTE]
What do you mean “we,” mammal?
That’s better.
[QUOTE=Uvula Donor]
Mostly, what we’re thinking is “Evil Faptor let his membership lapse, but we just *knew *that a thread about an attractive chick in prison would bring that fucking one-trick-pony back.”
[/QUOTE]
And how ARE things in the snarkpit, asshole?
[QUOTE=Hippy Hollow]
We’re all adults here, and we know that money and clout go a long way in shortening the long arm of the law. We also know that every special interest out there sees this case as more than just a common person who committed a common crime. It’s the same reason why Michael Milken and Martha Stewart went to jail. The thought process is, that by seeing the high and mighty taken down, the common folks will see that the legal and judicial system is serious about this kind of crime. It doesn’t just happen with hotshots and celebrities. Clergy, teachers, and cops who commit crimes usually get the book thrown at them as well.
Paris is a big girl and has been in the public spotlight for some time. She should know, or her lawyers/advisors/parents/agent should know, that she’s been under scrutiny from a lot of people who are tired of hearing and seeing her. Therefore the time to have thought about how to change her behavior was way before now. I can’t believe her handlers - or Paris herself - didn’t come out with a big public apology, got her face in the news for doing some community service, or did something to get in front of this. Essentially, if you thought she was a spoiled bitch before, she’s done nothing to change that perception.
The best imaginable thing she could have done was to get some counseling, or something, to get ready and try to make it a week in jail. Yes, going to jail sucks. But it isn’t like she didn’t have time to get used to the idea. Hell, if she got special perks in jail, I think most people wouldn’t care one way or the other. Some people have claimed she’s pretty smart in how she handles her image… not so much this time. I feel a twinge of sympathy for her - it’s pretty crappy to be sent home, and then called back to court in handcuffs, and sent back to jail, all with cameras recording every second. But I hold a position of trust in the community, and I know that just as I might get a break day to day because of what I do and who I am, if I mishandle that privilege, a lot of people are going to take an interest in seeing me taken down a notch.
If PH is unaware that she’s viewed as a spoiled airhead bimbo, she’s well and truly far beyond the realm of reality. But I’ve never seen her do anything to refute that image. In fact, that’s the problem with her, Lindsay Lohan, and the other swathe of young adult jackasses. They’re completely absorbed in their own worlds, and while they’re happy to keep their names in the papers and on the news, they’re not smart about building up goodwill in their public image. I’d bet if George Clooney or Angelina Jolie got into trouble with the law, there’d be a lot of sympathy and they’d probably be treated pretty well. But they’re two celebrities who care about their public image, and they’d probably at least attempt to make it look as if they were not trying to curry special favors because of their fame.
On the other hand, PH with a rampant case of butt herpes is probably something that none of us needed to ever hear. :eek:
[/QUOTE]
Yes, I feel that this is a very valid point. I agree that she isn’t being treated as a normal person would, but I’m not sure that’s because she’s a celebrity. Your idea of George Clooney or Angelina Jolie is a very good one. Those two tend to have a squeaky clean public image. Paris on the other hand is loathed by so many people, but the worst part is the disrespect for the law that brought her to this conclusion in the first place.
She had many opportunities to hire drivers, and she even drove the day after she was sentenced. She simply didn’t feel that the law applied to her. Those who have gotten off more lightly never had the ability to hire a driver for their daily needs. She could have easily done this.
[QUOTE=lowbrass]
The California voters have spoken again and again on that issue. Ballot initiatives show up almost every election for bond funds to build more prisons and are rejected time and again. We don’t want more prisons. We want the government to address the issue of why so many people need to be in jail, and come up with a solution besides just throwing more and more people in jail.
(Of course there is unfortunately another contingent of knee-jerkers who consistently vote for longer and longer jail sentences, which is how we got the ill-conceived “three strikes” law. So it’s a problem.)
[/QUOTE]
Sadly, they’re probably both the same people … don’t build more jails, throw more people in. It’s retarded I know, but remember, we are living in the country that elected Dubya president … twice! (Granted, Karl Rove fudged the number pretty good in both elections.)
[QUOTE=Rick]
Same response to you as to DTC read Post #281 I swear sometimes I wonder if this thing is on.
Then what about my cow-orker that spent 30+ for the exact same thing as PH?
The penalties are exactly the same for either offense. Penalties for reckless 23103 PDF with the penalties for drunk (section 23536). In fact if you get a second DUI arrest within 7 years, the law looks at it as a second offfense DUI cite section 23103.5 So from a legal point of view, the penalties are exactly the same. From an insurance point of view, insurance companies treat both offenses the same. AFAICT the only advantage to pleading this sucker down is you can honestly say that you have never been convicted of DUI.
[/QUOTE]
The reason she’s in prison is not DUI, it’s DUR, Driving Under Revocation. As I understand it, the DUI case is not even revelant.
[QUOTE=Evil Captor]
And how ARE things in the snarkpit, asshole?
[/QUOTE]
Truth hurts, huh Faptor?
[QUOTE=lowbrass]
Sweetie, the story just broke. They don’t post transcripts of television commentaries on the internet the moment they are spoken. What is it you want? You’re so quick to impeach DtC because he “saw it on t.v.”, but as far as I’ve seen, NONE of you who are claiming it is customary for people who are caught driving on a license suspended for reckless driving to serve a full jail sentence have even that much to base your claim on. You appear to be simply pulling that assertion out of your ass.
[/quote]
I’m not looking for a commentary. Editorials are not really a cite unless they back it up with a statistic That’s what I want. Hard data. Not someone telling me to turn on my television and listen to some blowhard talking head.
Customary, but apparently not accepted. From your post, the judges don’t seem to be happy about the early release. That means Paris at least isn’t getting treated worse because she’s a celebrity. A judge has just had it with people getting released early. Not to mention that she wasn’t released due to overcrowding issues. She was released for a medical reason that was never backed up to the judge. That’s why the house arrest was tossed. Baca never backed up his reason, so the judge tossed it.
Not so much. Remember that he would’ve spent the full thirty in prison had he not spent the remaining twenty-five in rehab. He certainly wasn’t released to his house, as Paris was.
She also got a warning instead of prison for her first violation. Then she violated it again with the warning in her glove compartment. She also never signed up for her classes. That would be another violation. Top that off with her apparent disdain for the law (planning a release party to celebrate her “release,” not wanting to even go to the courtroom for her most recent hearing) and I think you’ve got pretty good cause to give her a stricter sentence.
She’s not being punished for being a celebrity. She’s being punished for breaking the law repeatedly.