Rule of law . . . even for the wealthy

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Lemon law
She managed to get the 45 days cut in half--and then tried to do much better than that by getting out in five---and her reward for all her continued hard work is back to 45 days
and the book thrown at her. The question is will she keep trying or just take her lumps? But one thing for sure---after she gets out she will relive all her trauma in tear jerking detail in every media outlet she can find-- and make a fortune doing it.-------some celibs have to die to get that much free publicity.

As she should. If she is being singled out for a harsher punishment because of her celebrity, she should also be able to profit from it. I bet the attention whore judge who sentenced her is shopping for a book deal right about now.

You don't know squat. Hilton got what every one else gets for what she did. The judge did to her what everyone else who did what she did gets. Geez, aren't you paying attention?
Or do you worship the rich and famous and want them to be treated differently?
Or was it /sarcasm?

Actually you don't know squat. Mark Gherigos was on Fox, and he said most people who are sentenced to 60 days serve no time in jail, and get much less than 60 days of electronic monitoring. Seeing how he's a lawyer in LA who does these cases all the time, he knows a lot more than you do. The judge is clearly grandstanding and singling her out by blocking the Sheriff from giving her the same treatment any other detainee gets. Clearly you are as blinded by your hatred of the rich and famous as the loser judge.

But do most people show up the judge by arriving late and have their mother come in and make comments and laugh during hearings? 2 people you never disrespect, police officers and judges.

Looks like the judge is on a powertrip. If he can't control his anger, he should recuse himself.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Lemon law
She managed to get the 45 days cut in half--and then tried to do much better than that by getting out in five---and her reward for all her continued hard work is back to 45 days
and the book thrown at her. The question is will she keep trying or just take her lumps? But one thing for sure---after she gets out she will relive all her trauma in tear jerking detail in every media outlet she can find-- and make a fortune doing it.-------some celibs have to die to get that much free publicity.

As she should. If she is being singled out for a harsher punishment because of her celebrity, she should also be able to profit from it. I bet the attention whore judge who sentenced her is shopping for a book deal right about now.

You don't know squat. Hilton got what every one else gets for what she did. The judge did to her what everyone else who did what she did gets. Geez, aren't you paying attention?
Or do you worship the rich and famous and want them to be treated differently?
Or was it /sarcasm?

Actually you don't know squat. Mark Gherigos was on Fox, and he said most people who are sentenced to 60 days serve no time in jail, and get much less than 60 days of electronic monitoring. Seeing how he's a lawyer in LA who does these cases all the time, he knows a lot more than you do. The judge is clearly grandstanding and singling her out by blocking the Sheriff from giving her the same treatment any other detainee gets. Clearly you are as blinded by your hatred of the rich and famous as the loser judge.

But do most people show up the judge by arriving late and have their mother come in and make comments and laugh during hearings? 2 people you never disrespect, police officers and judges.

Looks like the judge is on a powertrip. If he can't control his anger, he should recuse himself.

Why don't you answer my question?

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Lemon law
She managed to get the 45 days cut in half--and then tried to do much better than that by getting out in five---and her reward for all her continued hard work is back to 45 days
and the book thrown at her. The question is will she keep trying or just take her lumps? But one thing for sure---after she gets out she will relive all her trauma in tear jerking detail in every media outlet she can find-- and make a fortune doing it.-------some celibs have to die to get that much free publicity.

As she should. If she is being singled out for a harsher punishment because of her celebrity, she should also be able to profit from it. I bet the attention whore judge who sentenced her is shopping for a book deal right about now.

You don't know squat. Hilton got what every one else gets for what she did. The judge did to her what everyone else who did what she did gets. Geez, aren't you paying attention?
Or do you worship the rich and famous and want them to be treated differently?
Or was it /sarcasm?

Actually you don't know squat. Mark Gherigos was on Fox, and he said most people who are sentenced to 60 days serve no time in jail, and get much less than 60 days of electronic monitoring. Seeing how he's a lawyer in LA who does these cases all the time, he knows a lot more than you do. The judge is clearly grandstanding and singling her out by blocking the Sheriff from giving her the same treatment any other detainee gets. Clearly you are as blinded by your hatred of the rich and famous as the loser judge.

But do most people show up the judge by arriving late and have their mother come in and make comments and laugh during hearings? 2 people you never disrespect, police officers and judges.

Looks like the judge is on a powertrip. If he can't control his anger, he should recuse himself.

Why don't you answer my question?

Because it's irrelevant. If judge felt so strongly about her being late, he should have held her in contempt and held a separate hearing about it, not take out his fat aggression on her during the sentencing. Clearly he was prejudiced and should have recused himself.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Lemon law
She managed to get the 45 days cut in half--and then tried to do much better than that by getting out in five---and her reward for all her continued hard work is back to 45 days
and the book thrown at her. The question is will she keep trying or just take her lumps? But one thing for sure---after she gets out she will relive all her trauma in tear jerking detail in every media outlet she can find-- and make a fortune doing it.-------some celibs have to die to get that much free publicity.

As she should. If she is being singled out for a harsher punishment because of her celebrity, she should also be able to profit from it. I bet the attention whore judge who sentenced her is shopping for a book deal right about now.

You don't know squat. Hilton got what every one else gets for what she did. The judge did to her what everyone else who did what she did gets. Geez, aren't you paying attention?
Or do you worship the rich and famous and want them to be treated differently?
Or was it /sarcasm?

Actually you don't know squat. Mark Gherigos was on Fox, and he said most people who are sentenced to 60 days serve no time in jail, and get much less than 60 days of electronic monitoring. Seeing how he's a lawyer in LA who does these cases all the time, he knows a lot more than you do. The judge is clearly grandstanding and singling her out by blocking the Sheriff from giving her the same treatment any other detainee gets. Clearly you are as blinded by your hatred of the rich and famous as the loser judge.

But do most people show up the judge by arriving late and have their mother come in and make comments and laugh during hearings? 2 people you never disrespect, police officers and judges.

Looks like the judge is on a powertrip. If he can't control his anger, he should recuse himself.

Why don't you answer my question?

Because it's irrelevant. If judge felt so strongly about her being late, he should have held her in contempt and held a separate hearing about it, not take out his fat aggression on her during the sentencing. Clearly he was prejudiced and should have recused himself.

No, its not irrelevant. It shows poor character in the defendent if they screw up probation two times and then show up late to court. If I'm a judge and the defendent is basically playing games and not taking this serious, I give them a max sentence so they can think about it.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Lemon law
She managed to get the 45 days cut in half--and then tried to do much better than that by getting out in five---and her reward for all her continued hard work is back to 45 days
and the book thrown at her. The question is will she keep trying or just take her lumps? But one thing for sure---after she gets out she will relive all her trauma in tear jerking detail in every media outlet she can find-- and make a fortune doing it.-------some celibs have to die to get that much free publicity.

As she should. If she is being singled out for a harsher punishment because of her celebrity, she should also be able to profit from it. I bet the attention whore judge who sentenced her is shopping for a book deal right about now.

You don't know squat. Hilton got what every one else gets for what she did. The judge did to her what everyone else who did what she did gets. Geez, aren't you paying attention?
Or do you worship the rich and famous and want them to be treated differently?
Or was it /sarcasm?

Actually you don't know squat. Mark Gherigos was on Fox, and he said most people who are sentenced to 60 days serve no time in jail, and get much less than 60 days of electronic monitoring. Seeing how he's a lawyer in LA who does these cases all the time, he knows a lot more than you do. The judge is clearly grandstanding and singling her out by blocking the Sheriff from giving her the same treatment any other detainee gets. Clearly you are as blinded by your hatred of the rich and famous as the loser judge.

But do most people show up the judge by arriving late and have their mother come in and make comments and laugh during hearings? 2 people you never disrespect, police officers and judges.

Looks like the judge is on a powertrip. If he can't control his anger, he should recuse himself.

Why don't you answer my question?

Because it's irrelevant. If judge felt so strongly about her being late, he should have held her in contempt and held a separate hearing about it, not take out his fat aggression on her during the sentencing. Clearly he was prejudiced and should have recused himself.

No, its not irrelevant. It shows poor character in the defendent if they screw up probation two times and then show up late to court. If I'm a judge and the defendent is basically playing games and not taking this serious, I give them a max sentence so they can think about it.

Seems like he is letting his personal dislike for Paris influence his decision making. Not only did he give her a harsher sentence, but he is pursuing it to the point of telling the Sheriff how to do his job and to make sure that the Sheriff treats Paris differently from other inmates who are generally released on to home arrest under these circumstances. The judge is clearly biased and is trying to make a name for himself and needs to recuse himself or be removed from this case.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Seems like he is letting his personal dislike for Paris influence his decision making. Not only did he give her a harsher sentence, but he is pursuing it to the point of telling the Sheriff how to do his job and to make sure that the Sheriff treats Paris differently from other inmates who are generally released on to home arrest under these circumstances. The judge is clearly biased and is trying to make a name for himself and needs to recuse himself or be removed from this case.

How is looking to see if someone shows remorse for what she did equates to personal bias? It's a big part of a judge's job to see if the person who violated the law shows any remorse and is likely to commit the crime again. Huge part of the sentencing is dependent on that judgment. By the way, it's funny you quote Mark Geragos who defended Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson. He is media whore and will say anything that will put him in the media.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: senseamp

Seems like he is letting his personal dislike for Paris influence his decision making. Not only did he give her a harsher sentence, but he is pursuing it to the point of telling the Sheriff how to do his job and to make sure that the Sheriff treats Paris differently from other inmates who are generally released on to home arrest under these circumstances. The judge is clearly biased and is trying to make a name for himself and needs to recuse himself or be removed from this case.

How is looking to see if someone shows remorse for what she did equates to personal bias? It's a big part of a judge's job to see if the person who violated the law shows any remorse and is likely to commit the crime again. Huge part of the sentencing is dependent on that judgment. By the way, it's funny you quote Mark Geragos who defended Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson. He is media whore and will say anything that will put him in the media.

He also practices law in L.A, so he knows what he's talking about.
It's OK for him to be a media whore, but when a judge is getting his 15 minutes of fame by his vendetta against Paris Hilton, that is a problem.

 

[compuwiz1]

I have no use for that twit. If I was the Judge, I would have thrown the book at her, just like an ordinary citizen who breaks the law. An example needs to be made, and that example is, we the people do not care who you are, what your status is, you will be punished on the same level as anyone else who breaks the law.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: senseamp

Seems like he is letting his personal dislike for Paris influence his decision making. Not only did he give her a harsher sentence, but he is pursuing it to the point of telling the Sheriff how to do his job and to make sure that the Sheriff treats Paris differently from other inmates who are generally released on to home arrest under these circumstances. The judge is clearly biased and is trying to make a name for himself and needs to recuse himself or be removed from this case.

How is looking to see if someone shows remorse for what she did equates to personal bias? It's a big part of a judge's job to see if the person who violated the law shows any remorse and is likely to commit the crime again. Huge part of the sentencing is dependent on that judgment. By the way, it's funny you quote Mark Geragos who defended Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson. He is media whore and will say anything that will put him in the media.

He also practices law in L.A, so he knows what he's talking about.
It's OK for him to be a media whore, but when a judge is getting his 15 minutes of fame by his vendetta against Paris Hilton, that is a problem.

If you have read anything about this judge you would have learned a few things.

He's not one who cares one bit for your "fame"
He's not one to flip off, because if you do he'll call you on it.


He could have given her MORE than he did. You're just so infatuated by her that you can't see she asked for this with her behavior. For my part if she were flipping burgers, and showed such disregard for the safety of others and showed no remorse, then she should have gotten the same thing.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Oh and while your lamenting for Paris' plight look at her hero and that department

Too bad she was treated more harshly than Gavira

:roll:

 

[Lemon law]

According to Yahoo news, Paris has now decided not to appeal the sentence---and will now learn and grow. Given the Leona Hemsely nerve she touched, its probably best all around because any appeal would be legally toxic.

 

[Narmer]

Question: Why did the judge increase her sentence back to 45 days when it was 23 days before? I ask because her release from jail was made by the Sheriff and not her (She didn't escape from jail but was let out by an officer). Is that how the law works? If anything, that part isn't fair.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: senseamp

Seems like he is letting his personal dislike for Paris influence his decision making. Not only did he give her a harsher sentence, but he is pursuing it to the point of telling the Sheriff how to do his job and to make sure that the Sheriff treats Paris differently from other inmates who are generally released on to home arrest under these circumstances. The judge is clearly biased and is trying to make a name for himself and needs to recuse himself or be removed from this case.

How is looking to see if someone shows remorse for what she did equates to personal bias? It's a big part of a judge's job to see if the person who violated the law shows any remorse and is likely to commit the crime again. Huge part of the sentencing is dependent on that judgment. By the way, it's funny you quote Mark Geragos who defended Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson. He is media whore and will say anything that will put him in the media.

He also practices law in L.A, so he knows what he's talking about.
It's OK for him to be a media whore, but when a judge is getting his 15 minutes of fame by his vendetta against Paris Hilton, that is a problem.

If you have read anything about this judge you would have learned a few things.

He's not one who cares one bit for your "fame"
He's not one to flip off, because if you do he'll call you on it.


He could have given her MORE than he did. You're just so infatuated by her that you can't see she asked for this with her behavior. For my part if she were flipping burgers, and showed such disregard for the safety of others and showed no remorse, then she should have gotten the same thing.

And would have been out of jail in no time. Let's say her behavior got her the 45 days sentence. Fine. But Geragos point was that people who get 60 days serve no time and are routinely released to home monitoring for much less than the 45 days that the Sheriff wanted her to be under house arrest. But in this case, the judge made an exception and dragged her back in jail. To me, the reason is clearly that he is influenced by the media and is on a power trip. The Sheriff on the other hand is clearly not influenced, because he was willing to take the heat from the media for releasing her early, just like would happen with most inmates who got her sentence. The point is if Paris wasn't a celebrity, she would not be in jail now, even if she got the 45 day sentence. The Sheriff should still go ahead and release her. He has authority under federal order to relieve overcrowding, and he should tell the judge to go pound sand.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Oh and while your lamenting for Paris' plight look at her hero and that department

Too bad she was treated more harshly than Gavira

:roll:

Wow, that's horrible! I bet Michele Malkin is outraged.:roll:

Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, who was responsible for deciding to release her to home confinement, told reporters Friday night, "The purpose of the release was the fact that her medical condition was deteriorating."

He did not elaborate except to say, "she was not taking a particular medication when she was in our custody, and thus her inexplicable deterioration [became] a great concern."

Sauer said Friday he never received information about a medical problem and had not changed his sentence.

What's wrong with these people? A jailbird was not taking her medication and then inexplicably deteriorated?

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Narmer
Question: Why did the judge increase her sentence back to 45 days when it was 23 days before? I ask because her release from jail was made by the Sheriff and not her (She didn't escape from jail but was let out by an officer). Is that how the law works? If anything, that part isn't fair.

Neither is jail time for an offense no one else goes to jail over. It's called being disliked, that is a criminal offense punishable by jail, especially if people in this thread had their way with the criminal justice system.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: senseamp

Seems like he is letting his personal dislike for Paris influence his decision making. Not only did he give her a harsher sentence, but he is pursuing it to the point of telling the Sheriff how to do his job and to make sure that the Sheriff treats Paris differently from other inmates who are generally released on to home arrest under these circumstances. The judge is clearly biased and is trying to make a name for himself and needs to recuse himself or be removed from this case.

How is looking to see if someone shows remorse for what she did equates to personal bias? It's a big part of a judge's job to see if the person who violated the law shows any remorse and is likely to commit the crime again. Huge part of the sentencing is dependent on that judgment. By the way, it's funny you quote Mark Geragos who defended Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson. He is media whore and will say anything that will put him in the media.

He also practices law in L.A, so he knows what he's talking about.
It's OK for him to be a media whore, but when a judge is getting his 15 minutes of fame by his vendetta against Paris Hilton, that is a problem.

If you have read anything about this judge you would have learned a few things.

He's not one who cares one bit for your "fame"
He's not one to flip off, because if you do he'll call you on it.


He could have given her MORE than he did. You're just so infatuated by her that you can't see she asked for this with her behavior. For my part if she were flipping burgers, and showed such disregard for the safety of others and showed no remorse, then she should have gotten the same thing.

And would have been out of jail in no time. Let's say her behavior got her the 45 days sentence. Fine. But Geragos point was that people who get 60 days serve no time and are routinely released to home monitoring for much less than the 45 days that the Sheriff wanted her to be under house arrest. But in this case, the judge made an exception and dragged her back in jail. To me, the reason is clearly that he is influenced by the media and is on a power trip. The Sheriff on the other hand is clearly not influenced, because he was willing to take the heat from the media for releasing her early, just like would happen with most inmates who got her sentence. The point is if Paris wasn't a celebrity, she would not be in jail now, even if she got the 45 day sentence. The Sheriff should still go ahead and release her. He has authority under federal order to relieve overcrowding, and he should tell the judge to go pound sand.

Apparently you haven't read how non stars are treated by that department. You also want the sherrif to go and explain that Paris can't be kept in a vacant solitary cell because on person in a one person cell is too many? Heh, yeah let's see how that supposed authority works for that one.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Narmer
Question: Why did the judge increase her sentence back to 45 days when it was 23 days before? I ask because her release from jail was made by the Sheriff and not her (She didn't escape from jail but was let out by an officer). Is that how the law works? If anything, that part isn't fair.

Neither is jail time for an offense no one else goes to jail over. It's called being disliked, that is a criminal offense punishable by jail, especially if people in this thread had their way with the criminal justice system.

Getting jail time for breaking your probation isn't fair? I don't know about that.

 

[AAjax]

I truly have no affection for Paris, but joe citizen would not have gotten this stiff of sentence. The Judge is grandstanding.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: senseamp

Seems like he is letting his personal dislike for Paris influence his decision making. Not only did he give her a harsher sentence, but he is pursuing it to the point of telling the Sheriff how to do his job and to make sure that the Sheriff treats Paris differently from other inmates who are generally released on to home arrest under these circumstances. The judge is clearly biased and is trying to make a name for himself and needs to recuse himself or be removed from this case.

How is looking to see if someone shows remorse for what she did equates to personal bias? It's a big part of a judge's job to see if the person who violated the law shows any remorse and is likely to commit the crime again. Huge part of the sentencing is dependent on that judgment. By the way, it's funny you quote Mark Geragos who defended Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson. He is media whore and will say anything that will put him in the media.

He also practices law in L.A, so he knows what he's talking about.
It's OK for him to be a media whore, but when a judge is getting his 15 minutes of fame by his vendetta against Paris Hilton, that is a problem.

If you have read anything about this judge you would have learned a few things.

He's not one who cares one bit for your "fame"
He's not one to flip off, because if you do he'll call you on it.


He could have given her MORE than he did. You're just so infatuated by her that you can't see she asked for this with her behavior. For my part if she were flipping burgers, and showed such disregard for the safety of others and showed no remorse, then she should have gotten the same thing.

And would have been out of jail in no time. Let's say her behavior got her the 45 days sentence. Fine. But Geragos point was that people who get 60 days serve no time and are routinely released to home monitoring for much less than the 45 days that the Sheriff wanted her to be under house arrest. But in this case, the judge made an exception and dragged her back in jail. To me, the reason is clearly that he is influenced by the media and is on a power trip. The Sheriff on the other hand is clearly not influenced, because he was willing to take the heat from the media for releasing her early, just like would happen with most inmates who got her sentence. The point is if Paris wasn't a celebrity, she would not be in jail now, even if she got the 45 day sentence. The Sheriff should still go ahead and release her. He has authority under federal order to relieve overcrowding, and he should tell the judge to go pound sand.

Apparently you haven't read how non stars are treated by that department. You also want the sherrif to go and explain that Paris can't be kept in a vacant solitary cell because on person in a one person cell is too many? Heh, yeah let's see how that supposed authority works for that one.

Hell yeah he can go release her to relieve overcrowding. That is a federal order, overrules the state judge. The problem with the original release was that she was released for medical reasons, not to relieve overcrowding. The same sheriff is releasing people who have hurt others to make room for Paris. You aren't making any sense at all. She is taking up room in a jail while people who committed more serious crimes are released because there is no room to house them. The jail is under federal order to relieve overcrowding, and it is doing so by releasing inmates. From where I stand, they are better off releasing Paris than someone convicted of a more serious offense. You are so obsessed with her riches and fame that you want her to suffer, even if it means someone more dangerous will be set free.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: AAjax
I truly have no affection for Paris, but joe citizen would not have gotten this stiff of sentence. The Judge is grandstanding.

I really have no fucking sympathy for her. Jail isn't supposed to be nice and this is especially true when you've gotten more warnings then the average person. Try doing what she did and lets see how less stiff of a sentence you'd get without the million dollar team of lawyers. Basically this spoiled little rich brat thought she was above the law because she was wealthy. If she is going through drug withdrawals to bad for her because there are/were many of other drug users who went through the same thing when they got locked up and they just had to deal with it.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: senseamp

Seems like he is letting his personal dislike for Paris influence his decision making. Not only did he give her a harsher sentence, but he is pursuing it to the point of telling the Sheriff how to do his job and to make sure that the Sheriff treats Paris differently from other inmates who are generally released on to home arrest under these circumstances. The judge is clearly biased and is trying to make a name for himself and needs to recuse himself or be removed from this case.

How is looking to see if someone shows remorse for what she did equates to personal bias? It's a big part of a judge's job to see if the person who violated the law shows any remorse and is likely to commit the crime again. Huge part of the sentencing is dependent on that judgment. By the way, it's funny you quote Mark Geragos who defended Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson. He is media whore and will say anything that will put him in the media.

He also practices law in L.A, so he knows what he's talking about.
It's OK for him to be a media whore, but when a judge is getting his 15 minutes of fame by his vendetta against Paris Hilton, that is a problem.

If you have read anything about this judge you would have learned a few things.

He's not one who cares one bit for your "fame"
He's not one to flip off, because if you do he'll call you on it.


He could have given her MORE than he did. You're just so infatuated by her that you can't see she asked for this with her behavior. For my part if she were flipping burgers, and showed such disregard for the safety of others and showed no remorse, then she should have gotten the same thing.

And would have been out of jail in no time. Let's say her behavior got her the 45 days sentence. Fine. But Geragos point was that people who get 60 days serve no time and are routinely released to home monitoring for much less than the 45 days that the Sheriff wanted her to be under house arrest. But in this case, the judge made an exception and dragged her back in jail. To me, the reason is clearly that he is influenced by the media and is on a power trip. The Sheriff on the other hand is clearly not influenced, because he was willing to take the heat from the media for releasing her early, just like would happen with most inmates who got her sentence. The point is if Paris wasn't a celebrity, she would not be in jail now, even if she got the 45 day sentence. The Sheriff should still go ahead and release her. He has authority under federal order to relieve overcrowding, and he should tell the judge to go pound sand.

Apparently you haven't read how non stars are treated by that department. You also want the sherrif to go and explain that Paris can't be kept in a vacant solitary cell because on person in a one person cell is too many? Heh, yeah let's see how that supposed authority works for that one.

Hell yeah he can go release her to relieve overcrowding. That is a federal order, overrules the state judge. The problem with the original release was that she was released for medical reasons, not to relieve overcrowding. The same sheriff is releasing people who have hurt others to make room for Paris. You aren't making any sense at all. She is taking up room in a jail while people who committed more serious crimes are released because there is no room to house them. The jail is under federal order to relieve overcrowding, and it is doing so by releasing inmates. From where I stand, they are better off releasing Paris than someone convicted of a more serious offense. You are so obsessed with her riches and fame that you want her to suffer, even if it means someone more dangerous will be set free.

Riggghhttt..

Until about a year ago I thought Paris Hilton was a hotel. I think she's a spoiled brat with other spoiled brats coming to her defense. I think this is probably the best thing that ever happened to her, because before she gets behind the wheel drunk she's going to think twice about it. That will save someone else. As far as I am concerned, if you or I do the same thing, I believe the penalty a fair one, especially if you or I come in with a history of complete disregard for the law.

She and the other whiners can suck it up.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Lemon law
She managed to get the 45 days cut in half--and then tried to do much better than that by getting out in five---and her reward for all her continued hard work is back to 45 days
and the book thrown at her. The question is will she keep trying or just take her lumps? But one thing for sure---after she gets out she will relive all her trauma in tear jerking detail in every media outlet she can find-- and make a fortune doing it.-------some celibs have to die to get that much free publicity.

As she should. If she is being singled out for a harsher punishment because of her celebrity, she should also be able to profit from it. I bet the attention whore judge who sentenced her is shopping for a book deal right about now.

You don't know squat. Hilton got what every one else gets for what she did. The judge did to her what everyone else who did what she did gets. Geez, aren't you paying attention?
Or do you worship the rich and famous and want them to be treated differently?
Or was it /sarcasm?

Actually you don't know squat. Mark Gherigos was on Fox, and he said most people who are sentenced to 60 days serve no time in jail, and get much less than 60 days of electronic monitoring. Seeing how he's a lawyer in LA who does these cases all the time, he knows a lot more than you do. The judge is clearly grandstanding and singling her out by blocking the Sheriff from giving her the same treatment any other detainee gets. Clearly you are as blinded by your hatred of the rich and famous as the loser judge.

But do most people show up the judge by arriving late and have their mother come in and make comments and laugh during hearings? 2 people you never disrespect, police officers and judges.

Looks like the judge is on a powertrip. If he can't control his anger, he should recuse himself.

Why don't you answer my question?

Because it's irrelevant. If judge felt so strongly about her being late, he should have held her in contempt and held a separate hearing about it, not take out his fat aggression on her during the sentencing. Clearly he was prejudiced and should have recused himself.

No, its not irrelevant. It shows poor character in the defendent if they screw up probation two times and then show up late to court. If I'm a judge and the defendent is basically playing games and not taking this serious, I give them a max sentence so they can think about it.

Seems like he is letting his personal dislike for Paris influence his decision making. Not only did he give her a harsher sentence, but he is pursuing it to the point of telling the Sheriff how to do his job and to make sure that the Sheriff treats Paris differently from other inmates who are generally released on to home arrest under these circumstances. The judge is clearly biased and is trying to make a name for himself and needs to recuse himself or be removed from this case.

Why is the judge biased? Have you studied similiar cases? I've lost all respect for Geragos when that scum tried to defend Scott Peterson.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Didn't read through the whole thread, don't really care about this stuff. But I did see somewhere else, that the person in charge of letting her go had received campaign contributions from grandaddy Hilton...

Sheriff Lee Baca, the Los Angeles law-enforcement official who ordered Hilton released from jail after serving only three days in her 45-day sentence, accepted a $1,000 campaign donation last year from William Barron Hilton?Paris's grandfather. That contribution constituted the maximum amount allowable under California campaign rules.

While I don't care much for celeb news, I do care about what amounts to "pre-bribes".

 

[WHAMPOM]

Chain her, whip her, brand her, and ship her to GOR! GOR Wikie it. It is a nasty place for spoiled rich girls.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Didn't read through the whole thread, don't really care about this stuff. But I did see somewhere else, that the person in charge of letting her go had received campaign contributions from grandaddy Hilton...

Sheriff Lee Baca, the Los Angeles law-enforcement official who ordered Hilton released from jail after serving only three days in her 45-day sentence, accepted a $1,000 campaign donation last year from William Barron Hilton?Paris's grandfather. That contribution constituted the maximum amount allowable under California campaign rules.

While I don't care much for celeb news, I do care about what amounts to "pre-bribes".

Now that's a bit of a stretch, then again maybe my sarcasm meter needs a new solar cell. Although it does appear that the Hilton patriarch was a pretty good guy, he produced some terrible offspring.

For the record, the sheriff claimed he let Hilton out due to her medical condition NOT overcrowding. Repeat for those that missed that one . . . the sheriff has YET to claim Hilton was released for the sake of relieving overcrowding. In fact, she was originally placed in a cell . . . by herself!

Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, who was responsible for deciding to release her to home confinement, told reporters Friday night, "The purpose of the release was the fact that her medical condition was deteriorating."

He did not elaborate except to say, "she was not taking a particular medication when she was in our custody, and thus her inexplicable deterioration [became] a great concern."

And as Hayabusa Rider has highlighted, only two people involved have a record of being media whores . . . Hilton and Baca. But let's go all the way back to the root. Hilton could have avoided this by:

1) Not driving while impaired.
2) Fulfilling the requirements of her probation.
3) Not driving with a suspended license.
4) Fulfilling the requirements of her probation.
5) Not driving with a suspended license.
6) Do a few days in jail . . . don't make any waves . . . get early early release . . . probably a week.