PDA

View Full Version : Paris Hilton: Political Pawn



joshdahl
06-09-2007, 05:26 PM
My buddy The Drifter just posted this in his livejournal. (http://thedrifter88.livejournal.com/)


"Damnit. The truth sucks.
Everyone who hates Paris Hilton, please continue to do so.

But here's how I see it....

The LA sheriff's department is in a 12 year battle with the LA district courts over reduced sentences due to the overpopulation issue. The courts want their mandates enforced, the jails simply cannot keep up with the traffic. Sentences under 90 days are dealt with by early releases, work release, house arrest, etc.

Every conservative am radio talk show host is in an 'outrage' over this. They make statements like, 'with reduced jail time, there's no reason NOT to pursue a life of crime in LA!!!'

Personally, I've dealt with LA jails on 4 occasions. Due to overpopulation, I was only processed into county once (the towers). One night of being transferred around the holding cells will expose you to enough staph and violence to 'scare you straight' if that is at all possible.

Fuck Paris Hilton. She got caught violating court orders and deserves whatever book they throw at her. But...

She recieved a harsher sentence than I would have for the same violations.

She did everything the most recent court ordered her to. Right now she is a pawn trapped between 2 political agendas and will become the mascot of whatever local legal upheaval takes place. I hate to say it, but they're making this issue bigger than she is. Or using her to inflate public awareness on the matter. And probably making her a pariah in the process.


The legal system should be above and beyond biases... even that which we all have for Paris Hilton.

Go ahead, disagree with me."

Ray G.
06-09-2007, 05:29 PM
Ex-fucking-actly.

I dare anyone to justify why Sauer increased her sentence back to the original 45 days, when she did absolutely nothing to deserve it. And please, if you could do it without referring to her with any derogatory terms or bringing in your opinion of her from outside the case.

c. page
06-09-2007, 05:32 PM
Ex-fucking-actly.

I dare anyone to justify why Sauer increased her sentence back to the original 45 days, when she did absolutely nothing to deserve it. And please, if you could do it without referring to her with any derogatory terms or bringing in your opinion of her from outside the case.

showing up two hours late for court when ordered to show at a particular time, leaving the jail under an unspecified "illness" and then throwing a party (or planning to the next night) with no proof of illness given. her sentence was reduced with the contingent being good behavior, if i remember right. this would violate (to my mind) the terms of "good behavior".

Ray G.
06-09-2007, 05:35 PM
showing up two hours late for court when ordered to show at a particular time, leaving the jail under an unspecified "illness" and then throwing a party (or planning to the next night) with no proof of illness given. her sentence was reduced with the contingent being good behavior, if i remember right. this would violate (to my mind) the terms of "good behavior".

I don't know about the showing up late thing, I've heard different stories about that. Either way, that seems like a rather petty thing. It's fucking LA. You arrive when the traffic lets you arrive.

And she didn't "leave the jail", she was released by the LA Sheriff's department. They're the ones at fault here. Sauer might be legally allowed to do what he's doing, but it really looks like he's picked Hilton to make an example out of in his little war with the Sheriff's office.

kari
06-09-2007, 05:38 PM
all what Chris said..plus I think her disruptive behavior in jail and in the court room also had alot to do with her getting the full sentence back.

CNN had reported that the judge told her if she continued with her disruptive behavior he would also consider sending her to a state facility where her behavior could be dealt with better and could probably have more time added to her sentence.

kari
06-09-2007, 05:41 PM
I don't know about the showing up late thing, I've heard different stories about that. Either way, that seems like a rather petty thing. It's fucking LA. You arrive when the traffic lets you arrive.

And she didn't "leave the jail", she was released by the LA Sheriff's department. They're the ones at fault here. Sauer might be legally allowed to do what he's doing, but it really looks like he's picked Hilton to make an example out of in his little war with the Sheriff's office.

She has had several instances of showing up late to court. Traffic is no excuse, leave home earlier.

Amos Moses
06-09-2007, 05:42 PM
I don't know about the showing up late thing, I've heard different stories about that. Either way, that seems like a rather petty thing. It's fucking LA. You arrive when the traffic lets you arrive.

Doesn't matter. If you have to leave at 10am to arrive on time to a 1pm hearing, you get your innocent-until-guilty ass over there. Paris is out of excuses. No wait, the only one she has left is "My dad didn't pull out soon enough". And she doesn't have the ovaries to use it.


And she didn't "leave the jail", she was released by the LA Sheriff's department. They're the ones at fault here. Sauer might be legally allowed to do what he's doing, but it really looks like he's picked Hilton to make an example out of in his little war with the Sheriff's office.

She shouldn't be punished for taking advantage of an opportunity (at least not in a court of law), but it's pretty obvious she was given special treatment by being let out early. And there's nothing wrong with courts making examples out of people to make a point to other would be law breakers. Jesus Christ Ray, she's spending a few more days in jail. Stop trying to make her into Eddie Slovik

c. page
06-09-2007, 05:44 PM
I don't know about the showing up late thing, I've heard different stories about that. Either way, that seems like a rather petty thing. It's fucking LA. You arrive when the traffic lets you arrive.

And she didn't "leave the jail", she was released by the LA Sheriff's department. They're the ones at fault here. Sauer might be legally allowed to do what he's doing, but it really looks like he's picked Hilton to make an example out of in his little war with the Sheriff's office.

i would love to see you try to pull that one with a judge, ray. if the court orders you to be there at 9am, it's generally a good idea to do that. i've heard the excuse that she thought she could phone the trial in from home, but again, that doesn't hold water to me. like i said, when a judge tells you to do something, it's a good idea to do it.

i will agree that the sheriff's department is at fault, but at the same time, they wouldn't have released her if she hadn't suddenly "come down" with something. i will agree that he's using her to set an example, but i think it has less to do with the state of the sheriff's office and more to do with the state of paris hilton and the ones like her that think they can just ignore the law.

Ray G.
06-09-2007, 05:46 PM
She shouldn't be punished for taking advantage of an opportunity (at least not in a court of law), but it's pretty obvious she was given special treatment by being let out early. And there's nothing wrong with courts making examples out of people to make a point to other would be law breakers. Jesus Christ Ray, she's spending a few more days in jail. Stop trying to make her into Eddie Slovik

As I've said, I don't care about Paris Hilton. She's not my focus here. I just don't like people being used as pawns in power games and publicity stunts by the judicial system. If he had sentenced her to the term she was previously set to serve, fine. He let himself get greedy.

A lot of people want to see spoiled celebrities have examples made out of them. I kind of want to see judges who use their seats as a political soapbox have the same happen.

Ray G.
06-09-2007, 05:49 PM
i would love to see you try to pull that one with a judge, ray. if the court orders you to be there at 9am, it's generally a good idea to do that. i've heard the excuse that she thought she could phone the trial in from home, but again, that doesn't hold water to me. like i said, when a judge tells you to do something, it's a good idea to do it.

Fortunately, I'm not going to do anything stupid that would land me in that position. :razz:


i will agree that the sheriff's department is at fault, but at the same time, they wouldn't have released her if she hadn't suddenly "come down" with something. i will agree that he's using her to set an example, but i think it has less to do with the state of the sheriff's office and more to do with the state of paris hilton and the ones like her that think they can just ignore the law.

It seems like this conflict with Sheriff Baca has actually been building for some time. It's a case of judges wanting their absolute mandates to be followed, and the corrections department having to deal with the actual nitty-gritty of the situation. Hilton makes for the perfect public face for Sauer to make a stand and force Baca into submission. I certainly don't think she's being "persecuted for being pretty" as some of her airhead supporters have asserted, but I do think her fame is making her into an easy scapegoat for this preexisting issue. That rubs me the wrong way.

c. page
06-09-2007, 05:54 PM
As I've said, I don't care about Paris Hilton. She's not my focus here. I just don't like people being used as pawns in power games and publicity stunts by the judicial system. If he had sentenced her to the term she was previously set to serve, fine. He let himself get greedy.

A lot of people want to see spoiled celebrities have examples made out of them. I kind of want to see judges who use their seats as a political soapbox have the same happen.

again though, this was her original sentence. and even then, if she keeps out of trouble (which shouldn't be that hard for her in solitary) she gets one day knocked off her sentence for every four served, so she's still not serving the full sentence.

her sentence only got bumped back to its original state (in my mind) because she was showing contempt for the legal process, thus violating the terms of why it was bumped down in the first place.

lonesomefool
06-09-2007, 05:54 PM
As I've said, I don't care about Paris Hilton. She's not my focus here. I just don't like people being used as pawns in power games and publicity stunts by the judicial system. If he had sentenced her to the term she was previously set to serve, fine. He let himself get greedy.

A lot of people want to see spoiled celebrities have examples made out of them. I kind of want to see judges who use their seats as a political soapbox have the same happen.

I agree that judges shouldnt use their seat's as a political soapbox....but it's Paris Hilton, so in this case I agree 100% with her being used as an example :)

And I too have to disagree about the traffic, if you have to drive 50 minutes to get to work, you leave early if you know it might take longer than 50 minutes to get to work, that cannot be used as an excuse, it's not like she had to get off of work or something and was late. She's Paris Hilton, there is no excuse she couldnt leave plenty early, unless her Valtrax ran out.

Foolish Mortal
06-09-2007, 06:00 PM
She has had several instances of showing up late to court. Traffic is no excuse, leave home earlier.


Doesn't matter. If you have to leave at 10am to arrive on time to a 1pm hearing, you get your innocent-until-guilty ass over there. Paris is out of excuses. No wait, the only one she has left is "My dad didn't pull out soon enough". And she doesn't have the ovaries to use it.
http://www.imagefilez.com/out.php/i111966_ExactimundoFonz.jpg (http://www.imagefilez.com)

I'm really sick and tired of people making excuses for Hilton. If she had obeyed the terms of her probation, she wouldn't be in this mess now.

Bill!
06-09-2007, 06:03 PM
She's not being used as a pawn or treated bad at all. She acted like a spoiled brat in the courtroom, as did her mother, and she abused the system at her own whim. The judge had enough and threw the book at her. Judges don't take kindly to people misbehaving against their orders and in the courtroom itself.

And by the way, being late for court and saying, oh well, its LA traffic, is beyond ridiculous.

Amos Moses
06-09-2007, 06:04 PM
http://www.imagefilez.com/out.php/i111966_ExactimundoFonz.jpg (http://www.imagefilez.com)

I'm really sick and tired of people making excuses for Hilton. If she had obeyed the terms of her probation, she wouldn't be in this mess now.

I've never seen an episode of Happy Days, and yet I am able to see the coolness of that man.

JoeE
06-09-2007, 06:08 PM
Hey, it looks the the sheriff who let her go took campaign contributions from the Hilton family!

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2007/06/paris-sheriff-took-hilton-family-cash.php


Did family money buy Paris Hilton a temporary get-out-of-jail card?

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.

Baca has come under heavy fire for deciding to let Hilton serve out the remainder of her sentence at home, in apparent defiance of the orders given by the judge who sentenced her last month. Baca has said that Hilton was suffering from a "medical condition," an explanation that has not fared well under scrutiny. This afternoon, Judge Michael T. Sauer ordered Hilton back to jail. She reportedly left the courtroom screaming "It's not right! Mom!"

In office since 1998, Baca has cultivated close ties to the Hollywood community. Others who donated money to his campaign last year included Rupert Murdoch, Les Moonves, Ron Meyer, Brad Grey, Steven Segal, and Burt Bacharach. He was assailed last year over a claim by the Sheriff's Department that Mel Gibson had been arrested without incident, when the star had actually spewed anti-Semitic statements after getting pulled over for drunk driving. It soon emerged that Gibson had taped a public service announcement for Baca's relief committee.

Baca has not yet responded to a request for comment.

So it looks like she wasn't sent back to jail for political reasons; she was let out of jail in the first place for political reasons. You Hilton apologists who pitched such a fit over her alleged "unfair treatment" should clearly be equally infuriated by this outrageous breach of justice!

Ray G.
06-09-2007, 06:14 PM
Hey, it looks the the sheriff who let her go took campaign contributions from the Hilton family!

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2007/06/paris-sheriff-took-hilton-family-cash.php



So it looks like she wasn't sent back to jail for political reasons; she was let out of jail in the first place for political reasons. You Hilton apologists who pitched such a fit over her alleged "unfair treatment" should clearly be equally infuriated by this outrageous breach of justice!

That's proof of absolutely nothing. It's the kind of circumstantial connections that the political brigades bring up in their faux Bush scandals all the time.

Baca is clearly a celeb-humper, who likely tried to curry favor with the community in this case, but the campaign contribution shows nothing.

Foolish Mortal
06-09-2007, 06:20 PM
That's proof of absolutely nothing. It's the kind of circumstantial connections that the political brigades bring up in their faux Bush scandals all the time.

Baca is clearly a celeb-humper, who likely tried to curry favor with the community in this case, but the campaign contribution shows nothing.
Yep, and there is no proof that Hilton is being used as a political pawn either.

Lyfeforce
06-09-2007, 07:07 PM
I've tried (and failed) to keep quiet on this issue, so please excuse me adding my two cents:

Putting aside my personal slant, There's truth on both sides of this one. It does look like there's a political stand-off between the Sheriff and the Judge and it does have a influence on the case. However, that doesn't absolve Hilton from her infractions and it's not a "dealbreaker", if you'll excuse the term, that would constitute a new hearing or something of the like. Certainly showing up to court late and not paying attention to the judge or the proceedings does not help things either.

Putting myself in her shoes. If I had committed the same infractions and received the 45 day sentence AND had a "medical condition" (which I'm still unclear whether or not it's a rash or an eating issue, I've heard both being reported), would I be released on house arrest or would I be taking a trip to the infirmary? I'm sure that infirmary isn't Cedars-Sinai, but surely they can treat a rash. If it's an eating issue, then it depends on if she's got food poisoning like Salmonella or if she's flat-out not eating.

Concerning the re-appearance in court, I understand that the Judge refused to be briefed on the medical condition by Hilton's lawyers. That certainly lends credibility to the idea that the Judge was pissed that the Sheriff's department would release her. I'm not sure, but is it within a Judges rights to do what he did, both ordering Hilton to appear again and refusing to be briefed by the Lawyer?

The appearance in court itself: Concerning Hilton's behaivior, if I were in the place of Hilton, would showing up hours late to court and not paying attention to the proceedings look negatively on me (if it were traffic, couldn't my attorney call the courthouse and say as such, keeping them informed?) Would it show that I didn't take what was going on seriously? If those last two questions were true, wouldn't that influence the judge's decision to re-sentence me? When I was an attendant in court to do research for a school paper, I've seen things like that happen before.

like I said, I think there's truth on either side of this issue. I don't presume to think either side is 100% right, even if I do tend to side with the camp that is happy that she is serving her "full" sentence (with days taken off for good behavior, etc.)

Foolish Mortal
06-09-2007, 07:59 PM
I've never seen an episode of Happy Days, and yet I am able to see the coolness of that man.
The two first seasons are good. But then Fonzie starts losing his edginess and becomes too homogenized in the later seasons, the show is not as good anymore.

Magnum V.I.
06-09-2007, 08:03 PM
The two first seasons are good. But then Fonzie starts losing his edginess and becomes too homogenized in the later seasons, the show is not as good anymore.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/06/HenrythefonzZuckerkorn.JPG

Heeeyyyy.

Pia Guerra
06-09-2007, 08:59 PM
I can understand the traffic issue IF SHE HAD EVEN LEFT THE HOUSE. She didn't. Two hours after she was set to appear she was still at home. Her publicist gave her the impression she could just call it in (not sure if it was the same publicist who told her she could drive on a suspended licence but since she claimed that guy was fired, probably not). The judge then got pissed and demanded the sherrif go and pick her up. That's right, the court had to go and get her ass into court. Many are held in contempt for far less.

She was given the original reduced sentence based on good behavior, but for the three days she was behind bars she was freaking out and pressing her emergency call button non stop for no real medical reason except that her one blanket wasn't warm enough and that the lights in her cell were too bright. Not exactly good behaviour.

The so called hunger strike was her eating the veggies and jello but leaving a hot dog on her plate because she was too disgusted to eat it.

Was her sentence harsher than it should have been? Maybe, but consider her behaviour: she got a drunk driving charge reduced to reckless driving involving alcohol thanks to her lawyers. The first time she was busted for probation violation was after she was stopped for driving erratically. Instead of getting slammed there she was given a pass (no doubt also thanks to her legal team) and had to a sign a form saying she wouldn't drive again while her licence was suspended. And then she turns around and gets in a car, is stopped again driving recklessly and claims she didn't know because she didn't read the form.

How bloody stupid do you have to be?

She was given plenty of chances and she blew every one of them. And she risked other people's lives in the process. Here's a woman who (for some insane reason) young girls look up to, they buy her clothes and emulate her behaviour, she has influence and I for one have no problem seeing her be made an example of.

alexia
06-09-2007, 09:31 PM
I can understand the traffic issue IF SHE HAD EVEN LEFT THE HOUSE. She didn't. Two hours after she was set to appear she was still at home. Her publicist gave her the impression she could just call it in (not sure if it was the same publicist who told her she could drive on a suspended licence but since she claimed that guy was fired, probably not). The judge then got pissed and demanded the sherrif go and pick her up. That's right, the court had to go and get her ass into court. Many are held in contempt for far less.

She was given the original reduced sentence based on good behavior, but for the three days she was behind bars she was freaking out and pressing her emergency call button non stop for no real medical reason except that her one blanket wasn't warm enough and that the lights in her cell were too bright. Not exactly good behaviour.

The so called hunger strike was her eating the veggies and jello but leaving a hot dog on her plate because she was too disgusted to eat it.

Was her sentence harsher than it should have been? Maybe, but consider her behaviour: she got a drunk driving charge reduced to reckless driving involving alcohol thanks to her lawyers. The first time she was busted for probation violation was after she was stopped for driving erratically. Instead of getting slammed there she was given a pass (no doubt also thanks to her legal team) and had to a sign a form saying she wouldn't drive again while her licence was suspended. And then she turns around and gets in a car, is stopped again driving recklessly and claims she didn't know because she didn't read the form.

How bloody stupid do you have to be?

She was given plenty of chances and she blew every one of them. And she risked other people's lives in the process. Here's a woman who (for some insane reason) young girls look up to, they buy her clothes and emulate her behaviour, she has influence and I for one have no problem seeing her be made an example of.

:rock: :rock: :rock: :rock:

Granted, there does appear to be conflict between Sheriff & Judge, but I do not thing the Judge is being harsher on Paris than anyone else. Paris was given ample opportunity prior to the initial sentencing. She simply disregard the law as if it did not apply to her.

In addition, given that this has been such a high profile case, I would not be surpised if Sheriff Baca loses his job over this. The fact that Sheriff office failed to provide the appropriate medical documentation to the Judge demonstrates that Sheriff's office was showing favoritism to Paris and there wasn't any significant medical condition (unless it included whining). The Sheriff's office blantantly disregarded the Judge's order that indicated that only the Judge could release Paris early for good behavior.

Pia Guerra
06-09-2007, 10:41 PM
Let's also not forget that in Hollywood not showing up fifteen minutes before set call is considered a cardinal sin. If every actor in that city can show up on time for their shows then it shouldn't be that hard to make a court date.

Ryan Elliott
06-09-2007, 11:45 PM
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/cryingparis.jpg

XXXenophile
06-09-2007, 11:48 PM
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/cryingparis.jpg

Oh that's good!

Also, I love how Baca did the bit in his press confrence with the "here's the form that talks about Miss Hilton's medical condition. No one's going to read it to verify anything but its all truthful and legal right here."

Talk about just baiting the media.

Fusion
06-10-2007, 01:28 AM
There is a point being missed. Its well with in the Sheriff's rights to let her out with in a quarter of her sentence. The only reason she IS back in jail is because the Judge made sure that he said "No House Arrest". The sheriff could have let her go but he didn't. The fact is I still don't see her serving her entire sentence, meaning that the Sheriff can let her go at anytime and there is nothing the Judge can do about it.

Hate_Prime
06-10-2007, 01:59 AM
Tommy Chong was a political pawn. Paris Hilton is just a dumb twat who still got off easy. I would hold her in contempt on top of the everything else if I were the judge. Then again, if I were a judge, I'd be the type who charges you with contempt for, I dunno, slouching in my courtroom. I will not tolerate any sass!

Foolish Mortal
06-10-2007, 06:57 AM
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/cryingparis.jpg
:rofl:

Thudpucker
06-10-2007, 07:27 AM
Ex-fucking-actly.

I dare anyone to justify why Sauer increased her sentence back to the original 45 days, when she did absolutely nothing to deserve it. And please, if you could do it without referring to her with any derogatory terms or bringing in your opinion of her from outside the case.

The justification is that sentencing is up to the descretion of the judge. If the judge senses that a person has no true remorse they should feel more than justified to make the sentence harsh instead of lenient.

The average person who gets a leinient sentence? That is someone who has remorse and who the judge feels will not be likely to repeat the offense, someone who does not need the harsest punishment to learn a lesson.

The judge obviously feels Hilton has no remorse for what she did.

Foolish Mortal
06-10-2007, 07:30 AM
The justification is that sentencing is up to the descretion of the judge. If the judge senses that a person has no true remorse they should feel more than justified to make the sentence harsh instead of lenient.

The average person who gets a leinient sentence? That is someone who has remorse and who the judge feels will not be likely to repeat the offense, someone who does not need the harsest punishment to learn a lesson.

The judge obviously feels Hilton has no remorse for what she did.
Yep. It's not just the rule of law that decides sentencing, your behavior plays a huge role in it too.

If you're not respectful to the court, it'll cost you.

alexia
06-11-2007, 07:05 AM
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/cryingparis.jpg


:rock: :rock: :rock: :rock:

PatrickA
06-11-2007, 07:20 AM
It is common practice in misdemenor cases, for lawyers to appear in court in lieu of their clients. In this case, Hilton's lawyers, the day before, altered the court that their client would be appearing by phone. The court (but not the judge) apparently approved it because the court made the announcement that she would be appearing by phone.

It was only when the judge got into the courtroom that he ordered her there.

So she wasn't really late for court. Her lawyers arranged her testimony to be via phone with the courts, the court system apparently approved it, since they made the announcement and then the judge over ruled it and demanded she appear.

Which strikes me as grandstanding by the judge- although I understand him being sort of backed into a corner. if it were me who was having my lawyer appear for me, the judge would just deal with the lawyer or issue a bench warrent for my arrest (which gets taken care of in the next few days) and gone on with whatever was on the docket.

Ray G.
06-11-2007, 07:21 AM
It is common practice in misdemenor cases, for lawyers to appear in court in lieu of their clients. In this case, Hilton's lawyers, the day before, altered the court that their client would be appearing by phone. The court (but not the judge) apparently approved it because the court made the announcement that she would be appearing by phone.

It was only when the judge got into the courtroom that he ordered her there.

So she wasn't really late for court. Her lawyers arranged her testimony to be via phone with the courts, the court system apparently approved it, since they made the announcement and then the judge over ruled it and demanded she appear.

Which strikes me as grandstanding by the judge- although I understand him being sort of backed into a corner. if it were me who was having my lawyer appear for me, the judge would just deal with the lawyer or issue a bench warrent for my arrest (which gets taken care of in the next few days) and gone on with whatever was on the docket.

Sauer needs a buddy comedy movie with Mike Nifong. :)

Matt Jay
06-11-2007, 07:30 AM
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/cryingparis.jpg
:)

I must say, the more facts that come to light concerning this whole ordeal, the funnier that picture gets.

LenNWallace
06-11-2007, 07:34 AM
showing up two hours late for court when ordered to show at a particular time, leaving the jail under an unspecified "illness" and then throwing a party (or planning to the next night) with no proof of illness given. her sentence was reduced with the contingent being good behavior, if i remember right. this would violate (to my mind) the terms of "good behavior".

Fuckin' A. She's a skank, and she hopefully 45 days in the clink will help bring her down to earth a little.

But not fucking likely.

Cth
06-11-2007, 07:36 AM
New avatar for the thread title

<--------

alexia
06-12-2007, 08:33 AM
It is common practice in misdemenor cases, for lawyers to appear in court in lieu of their clients. In this case, Hilton's lawyers, the day before, altered the court that their client would be appearing by phone. The court (but not the judge) apparently approved it because the court made the announcement that she would be appearing by phone.

It was only when the judge got into the courtroom that he ordered her there.

So she wasn't really late for court. Her lawyers arranged her testimony to be via phone with the courts, the court system apparently approved it, since they made the announcement and then the judge over ruled it and demanded she appear.

Which strikes me as grandstanding by the judge- although I understand him being sort of backed into a corner. if it were me who was having my lawyer appear for me, the judge would just deal with the lawyer or issue a bench warrent for my arrest (which gets taken care of in the next few days) and gone on with whatever was on the docket.


Gee whiz, the fact that she did not seem sincere or contrite for breaking the law repeatedly is what landed her in jail in the 1st place. I cannot imagine that her lawyers advised her not to make a court appearance given the circumstances. I am assuming that the she was just having a jolly good time and did not want to be bothered which is probably why the Judge demanded that she be there in person.

In addition, it is interesting that she and her lawyers dropped the issue of appeal when they repeatedly failed to provide appropriate documentation to support that she suffered any alleged "medical condition".

PatrickA
06-12-2007, 09:31 AM
I cannot imagine that her lawyers advised her not to make a court appearance given the circumstances. I am assuming that the she was just having a jolly good time and did not want to be bothered which is probably why the Judge demanded that she be there in person.

With all respect, I think you are completely wrong.

I can't imagine that her lawyers advised her to show up for court, especially considering they apparently thought they had already arranged for her not to be there. Opinions on what happened are one thing, but in this case people seem to want to disregard what actually, factually happened in lieu of their opinions.

her lawyers arranged for her not to appear in court. it is a common practice in these cases. The court offices said it was okay, but the actual judge decided he wanted her there (as is her right). he sent for her (which is a bit extreme, but certainly within his powers).

ClintP
06-12-2007, 09:36 AM
I don't know about the showing up late thing, I've heard different stories about that. Either way, that seems like a rather petty thing. It's fucking LA. You arrive when the traffic lets you arrive.

And she didn't "leave the jail", she was released by the LA Sheriff's department. They're the ones at fault here. Sauer might be legally allowed to do what he's doing, but it really looks like he's picked Hilton to make an example out of in his little war with the Sheriff's office.

so joe nobody would get a break for being late? Does the judge have to just come in when he does?

Gavin
06-12-2007, 09:43 AM
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/cryingparis.jpg

Wow. Am I evil for finding this amusing?

Foolish Mortal
06-12-2007, 10:12 AM
Wow. Am I evil for finding this amusing?
No you're not. :twisted:

Ray G.
06-12-2007, 10:41 AM
so joe nobody would get a break for being late? Does the judge have to just come in when he does?

As it turns out, the showing up late thing is bullshit as well. She didn't "show up late". She was told by the court officials that she would be allowed to attend the hearing from home, like is commonplace for misdemeanor cases. When Sauer heard this, he demanded that she be summoned at the last minute, and she showed up late. Which he then took as a personal insult.

Matt Jay
06-12-2007, 10:44 AM
As it turns out, the showing up late thing is bullshit as well. She didn't "show up late". She was told by the court officials that she would be allowed to attend the hearing from home, like is commonplace for misdemeanor cases. When Sauer heard this, he demanded that she be summoned at the last minute, and she showed up late. Which he then took as a personal insult.
Can you blame him? First the Sheriff jerks him around, then he gets jerked around by (supposedly) his court officials. I'd be pissed too.

Ray G.
06-12-2007, 10:49 AM
Can you blame him? First the Sheriff jerks him around, then he gets jerked around by (supposedly) his court officials. I'd be pissed too.

And of course, the person to take this out on is the celebrity defendant, who's been equally jerked around.

Matt Jay
06-12-2007, 10:51 AM
And of course, the person to take this out on is the celebrity defendant, who's been equally jerked around.
Jerked around by her own lies. What was her medical condition that they couldn't be bothered to inform the judge about? ADD? Poutiness?

Ray G.
06-12-2007, 10:54 AM
Jerked around by her own lies. What was her medical condition that they couldn't be bothered to inform the judge about? ADD? Poutiness?

It's come out that it was a mental condition relating to extreme paranoia that was causing her to endanger herself. Flimsy, yes, but still potentially valid. HE says he never recieved the documents. Given his sketchy conduct during this entire case, I'm not sure I believe that 100%. But if he didn't, wouldn't a normal judge want to be briefed on the condition before making his decision?

Matt Jay
06-12-2007, 11:01 AM
It's come out that it was a mental condition relating to extreme paranoia that was causing her to endanger herself. Flimsy, yes, but still potentially valid. HE says he never recieved the documents. Given his sketchy conduct during this entire case, I'm not sure I believe that 100%. But if he didn't, wouldn't a normal judge want to be briefed on the condition before making his decision?
"A mental condition relating to extremem paranoia"? That's not a problem, that's a vague hint to a problem. Where did you read that? I read it was ADD/she didn't want to get caught shitting on camera.

It's the duty of Paris and her counsel to make the documents relevant to her "condition" available to the judge at, but preferably before, the hearing. You don't make a judge wait for your ass to act responsibly no matter how pampered or entitled you think you are. The hearing is when she should share this information if the Sheriff is too lazy/full of it to do so.

I'd ask you to support your allegation of his "sketchy conduct" during this case, but I won't hold my breath. The only people acting sketchy are the Sheriff, Paris, and her counsel in not being forthcoming about the reasons for her change in sentence which directly contradicted the judge's orders.

Ray G.
06-12-2007, 11:11 AM
"A mental condition relating to extremem paranoia"? That's not a problem, that's a vague hint to a problem. Where did you read that? I read it was ADD/she didn't want to get caught shitting on camera.

It's the duty of Paris and her counsel to make the documents relevant to her "condition" available to the judge at, but preferably before, the hearing. You don't make a judge wait for your ass to act responsibly no matter how pampered or entitled you think you are. The hearing is when she should share this information if the Sheriff is too lazy/full of it to do so.

I'd ask you to support your allegation of his "sketchy conduct" during this case, but I won't hold my breath. The only people acting sketchy are the Sheriff, Paris, and her counsel in not being forthcoming about the reasons for her change in sentence which directly contradicted the judge's orders.

Have fun.

http://www.postchronicle.com/news/original/article_21285707.shtml

Matt Jay
06-12-2007, 11:16 AM
Have fun.

http://www.postchronicle.com/news/original/article_21285707.shtml

Don't puss out now. You almost learned something.

Here's the take home message: when you tell the judge you have a case, present your case at the hearing. It's not his job to play detective and figure out what your case is without any input from you.

Amos Moses
06-12-2007, 11:23 AM
"Extreme Paranoia"? What is she, Richard Nixon?

Ray G.
06-12-2007, 11:32 AM
Don't puss out now. You almost learned something.

Here's the take home message: when you tell the judge you have a case, present your case at the hearing. It's not his job to play detective and figure out what your case is without any input from you.

No one's saying that Paris handled things well. This judge made it clear he wanted to make an example out of her, and she pretty much played right into his hands.

GelfXIII
06-12-2007, 11:33 AM
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/cryingparis.jpg

That's fucking BRIL! Did you make thhat? Kudos to who ever did. :lol:

badpoet
06-12-2007, 11:35 AM
I think the Judge simply isn't equipped to fairly handle the case and is seeking to take out his frustrations with a defendant and the Sheriff in spite of the law. Sure, she's a shallow, stupid person that adds very little redeeming value to society, but she's still a citizen that should be treated equally under the law. With the overcrowding in the jails, the space is best used for people that are much more dangerous to society as a whole than she is (regardless of the possibility of her acting in a movie that would scar all of us for life were we to see it).

Matt Jay
06-12-2007, 11:36 AM
No one's saying that Paris handled things well. This judge made it clear he wanted to make an example out of her, and she pretty much played right into his hands.

For the exact same offense, my friend got seven days more than she did. He spent Christmas in his cell. She had a lucky break and she fucked it up by using her privilege to try and serve even less time. No sympathy over here.

Ray G.
06-12-2007, 11:41 AM
For the exact same offense, my friend got seven days more than she did. He spent Christmas in his cell. She had a lucky break and she fucked it up by using her privilege to try and serve even less time. No sympathy over here.

You live in Nebraska. Does your friend live in California?

Every state is different, and it's fruitless to compare what happened here to what happened in your state. California has a notoriously lenient criminal justice system due to the sheer numbers they deal with, and 90% of cases like this are dealt with without jail time. I'm not asking for sympathy. I don't have much sympathy for her myself. I'm just looking at the case itself, and it smacks of special treatment alright.

ClintP
06-12-2007, 11:47 AM
I got a conspiracy for everyone:

Ray and a select few bendis boarders are part of some global conspiracy brainwashing plot to gather up Paris Hilton supporters. All of this is stemmed from her being a moron with too much time and money on her hands. Had she gotten a decent hobby like reading comics or knitting, all of these futile X-File like P.R. stunts could have easily been avoided.

:twisted:

ClintP
06-12-2007, 11:48 AM
No one's saying that Paris handled things well. This judge made it clear he wanted to make an example out of her, and she pretty much played right into his hands.

When a cop or judge starts coming down on me and it is obvious I am going to get shit on, I get an umbrella and do as I am told. :)

Matt Jay
06-12-2007, 11:50 AM
You live in Nebraska. Does your friend live in California?

Every state is different, and it's fruitless to compare what happened here to what happened in your state. California has a notoriously lenient criminal justice system due to the sheer numbers they deal with, and 90% of cases like this are dealt with without jail time. I'm not asking for sympathy. I don't have much sympathy for her myself. I'm just looking at the case itself, and it smacks of special treatment alright.

Overcrowding was not cited for her sentencing change. This (still) mysterious medical condition was. A month in jail for this crime is not disproportionate in the slightest, regardless of whatever boundaries you're using to define justice.

Hate_Prime
06-12-2007, 12:36 PM
This reminds me when classmates suddenly reveal they have some sort of medical condition that excuses them from of PE and shit. Notes from a doctor an everything. For some reason they got better afterwards. It's a modern day medical miracle.

Extreme Paranoia, huh. Afraid of being photographed with her pants down. It's a shame. It seemed like she was overcoming her condition. Facing her fears head on. I mean, she goes out in public bra-less in skimpy tops or panty-less in very short skirts around all the paparazzi. All these pictures of her nipples popping out and her meat curtains flapping in the wind must be the steps to her recovery from her terrible condition. She even allowed herself to be videotaped naked while sucking a dick and getting crammed in her cramhole. Multiple times. All this stress must be getting to her and worsened her condition back down to square one.

But... hold on a minute! I suffer form the same "condition" too! I don't want photos of me naked! I don't even like wearing tight and/or revealing clothing! But I call it "modesty." Modesty is something Paris doesn't have (fortunately for me); figures she thinks suddenly minding a camera zoomed up to her ass hole is a sign of poor health. Bullshit excuses from a dumb twat.

Amos Moses
06-12-2007, 12:42 PM
Ray, I wouldn't call California's "3 Stike Rule" leniant.

And Jay, you should have said your friend was from Endor.

Ray G.
06-12-2007, 12:56 PM
Ray, I wouldn't call California's "3 Stike Rule" leniant.

And Jay, you should have said your friend was from Endor.

The three strikes law only applies to felonies, correct? Paris wasn't charged with any felonies.

PatrickA
06-12-2007, 01:21 PM
People who do what paris did normally serve ten percent of their sentenced time.

The oddest thing about this case is people don't seem to care what actually happened all that much. You can say "She didn't show up at court late. Here is why." You can say "It's not at all unusual for lawyers to appear for their clients and in this case it was actually approved by the office of the court." Nobody cares. It's like any information that does paint this woman in a bad light is ignored by the populance at large.

They don't care about the case at all really. There are just a lot of people who simply hate Paris Hilton out of all proportion to her actual importance. It is sort of weird.

Magnum V.I.
06-12-2007, 01:27 PM
The three strikes law only applies to felonies, correct? Paris wasn't charged with any felonies.

Well it depends. I think it depends on circumstances but some minor crimes are felonies(Like taking 150 bucks or something) And they put you away for life. If I can find my notes on this stuff I'll send you the cases.

Ray G.
06-12-2007, 01:29 PM
Well it depends. I think it depends on circumstances but some minor crimes are felonies(Like taking 150 bucks or something) And they put you away for life. If I can find my notes on this stuff I'll send you the cases.

I believe that's the case when the first two crimes are felonies. Three Strikes laws are fucked up beyond belief, no question. I just don't see what that have to do with Paris Hilton, but thanks for the information. :)

alexia
06-12-2007, 07:32 PM
With all respect, I think you are completely wrong.

I can't imagine that her lawyers advised her to show up for court, especially considering they apparently thought they had already arranged for her not to be there. Opinions on what happened are one thing, but in this case people seem to want to disregard what actually, factually happened in lieu of their opinions.

her lawyers arranged for her not to appear in court. it is a common practice in these cases. The court offices said it was okay, but the actual judge decided he wanted her there (as is her right). he sent for her (which is a bit extreme, but certainly within his powers).


I strongly beg to differ. Any decent lawyer, would have taken the impact of presentation. At that point of time, a sense of remorse from Paris (not her lawyers) would have been her best chance. Please note that lawyers often do what their clients tell them to do, albeit against legal advise. It is entirely feasible that Paris told her lawyers that she was not going to show for court and they would have attempted to arrange for her not to be present.

In other words, it a matter of what came 1st, the egg or the chicken. In this case, did Paris refuse to show or did her lawyers think she would do more damage to her own case?

alexia
06-12-2007, 07:51 PM
Jerked around by her own lies. What was her medical condition that they couldn't be bothered to inform the judge about? ADD? Poutiness?
:) :) :)


I got a conspiracy for everyone:

Ray and a select few bendis boarders are part of some global conspiracy brainwashing plot to gather up Paris Hilton supporters. All of this is stemmed from her being a moron with too much time and money on her hands. Had she gotten a decent hobby like reading comics or knitting, all of these futile X-File like P.R. stunts could have easily been avoided.

:twisted:
:twisted: :) :twisted: :)


When a cop or judge starts coming down on me and it is obvious I am going to get shit on, I get an umbrella and do as I am told. :)

:) :twisted: :) :twisted:


This reminds me when classmates suddenly reveal they have some sort of medical condition that excuses them from of PE and shit. Notes from a doctor an everything. For some reason they got better afterwards. It's a modern day medical miracle.

Extreme Paranoia, huh. Afraid of being photographed with her pants down. It's a shame. It seemed like she was overcoming her condition. Facing her fears head on. I mean, she goes out in public bra-less in skimpy tops or panty-less in very short skirts around all the paparazzi. All these pictures of her nipples popping out and her meat curtains flapping in the wind must be the steps to her recovery from her terrible condition. She even allowed herself to be videotaped naked while sucking a dick and getting crammed in her cramhole. Multiple times. All this stress must be getting to her and worsened her condition back down to square one.

But... hold on a minute! I suffer form the same "condition" too! I don't want photos of me naked! I don't even like wearing tight and/or revealing clothing! But I call it "modesty." Modesty is something Paris doesn't have (fortunately for me); figures she thinks suddenly minding a camera zoomed up to her ass hole is a sign of poor health. Bullshit excuses from a dumb twat.

:) :twisted: :) :twisted:


People who do what paris did normally serve ten percent of their sentenced time.

The oddest thing about this case is people don't seem to care what actually happened all that much. You can say "She didn't show up at court late. Here is why." You can say "It's not at all unusual for lawyers to appear for their clients and in this case it was actually approved by the office of the court." Nobody cares. It's like any information that does paint this woman in a bad light is ignored by the populance at large.

They don't care about the case at all really. There are just a lot of people who simply hate Paris Hilton out of all proportion to her actual importance. It is sort of weird.

I do not hate Paris, but as a memember of society it sickens me that she cares so little about endangering others lives when she has so many other options. She is in the position where she can afford to have some one drive her from point A to B when ever and where ever. If she wants to throw away her life, it is her business, but it pisses me off when someone, regardless of his/her status, acts if others lives are of no consequence to him/her. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

I personally consider it a shame that some of the boarders ignore that fact that she endangered others lives.

Magnum V.I.
06-12-2007, 07:51 PM
I believe that's the case when the first two crimes are felonies. Three Strikes laws are fucked up beyond belief, no question. I just don't see what that have to do with Paris Hilton, but thanks for the information. :)

Oh yeah. Well you asked I think :lol:

Has nothing to do with Paris In prison.

Ray G.
06-12-2007, 07:53 PM
Oh yeah. Well you asked I think :lol:

Has nothing to do with Paris In prison.

No, you've been very helpful. Thanks.

It just seems like some people on the "we hate Paris" bandwagon bring up a lot of completely unrelated things to make their case.

Magnum V.I.
06-12-2007, 07:54 PM
No, you've been very helpful. Thanks.

It just seems like some people on the "we hate Paris" bandwagon bring up a lot of completely unrelated things to make their case.

Well I need to put my Criminal Justice Degree to SOME use, even if it is on a Message Board for Comics :lol:

Yeah, it's just misdirection to argue some other point. Digressing if I say so myself.

alexia
06-12-2007, 08:04 PM
No, you've been very helpful. Thanks.

It just seems like some people on the "we hate Paris" bandwagon bring up a lot of completely unrelated things to make their case.

It appears that some Pro-paris individuals are wearing blinders.

DC Camel
06-12-2007, 08:29 PM
Guys, she was late for the original case when she was first sentenced not the one where she thought she could phone in. If she wasn't late that first time and showed respect for the court not treating everything like it was a game the judge would probably not have been so harsh on her. Considering that case concerned her violating her PROBATION multiple times I don't blame the judge at all. Probation means you have a suspended jail sentence hanging over your head and if you fuck up you go to jail! She wasn't allowed to drive due to drunk driving and she got caught driving multiple times with no license! This isn't some blue collar guy with 4 kids trying to drive to work to take care of his family this is the heiress of the Hilton empire! She can't afford a fucking driver? Not even after the first time she was caught? Give me a break.

alexia
06-12-2007, 08:46 PM
Welcome to the Board, DC Camel.

olesiateigra
06-12-2007, 08:50 PM
I'm tired of those who suggest that Paris is some sort of victim in this situation. She rolled the dice. She got caught. She needs to live w/ the consequences of her actions. :twisted:

mike black
06-12-2007, 10:10 PM
I forgot how much I fucking love this board.

PatrickA
06-13-2007, 06:44 AM
I strongly beg to differ. Any decent lawyer, would have taken the impact of presentation. At that point of time, a sense of remorse from Paris (not her lawyers) would have been her best chance. Please note that lawyers often do what their clients tell them to do, albeit against legal advise. It is entirely feasible that Paris told her lawyers that she was not going to show for court and they would have attempted to arrange for her not to be present.

In other words, it a matter of what came 1st, the egg or the chicken. In this case, did Paris refuse to show or did her lawyers think she would do more damage to her own case?

We are both guessing here, to a degree.

I'm going by what is a relatively standard procedure in these cases and based on the fact that the day before her lawyers took steps to assure that she wouldn't have to show up. She had already been sentenced, had been sent to home incarceration, if I were her lawyers I'd be hoping the judge wouldn't be so pissed off at the sheriff that he immediatly sent her back to jail and the chances of that happening were lessened by Paris's absence.

If suddenly that morning her lawyers had been scrambling to assure she didn't have to show I'd be more inclined to think maybe she just decided she didn't feel like going to court that day, but that isn't what happened.

However, I keep reading post after post about how "that skank just didn't want to drag her bitch ass to court" or whatever, and that doesn't seem to be the case at all.

I kinda feel for the judge in this case, actually. If he treats her like any other person who did the same thing he gets blistered by the media for being to leinent because the media (like a lot of posters) don't care about the reality of the situation as much as they do their emotional reaction to it. it got to the point (and the sheriff didn't help and I'm not suggesting that Paris didn't get herself there) where the judge had to do what he did because MSNBC, FOX and every other news outlet was prepared to crucify him.

The Drifter
06-13-2007, 09:09 AM
I originally wrote my thoughts in response to allegations made by ignorant media extremist douchebags that she recieved preferential treatment on her original sentencing for being rich, white and famous. She HAS recieved preferential treatment in all OTHER areas of her life.

I do not feel sorry for her and sincerely doubt anyone does. Personally, I hope her stay in jail turns into Chained Heat 5.

Here are a few things that I can't verify, I'm just repeating what I heard on various talk radio shows from seemingly credible sources.

'Paris has a prescription to adderall', (an amphetamine which causes loss of appetite and sleep deprivation). I imagine she didn't have access to this in the towers, possibly the 'unknown medical condition' was a withdrawal from this. Either way, this could explain how she found the will to refuse the burnt greasy cornbread with a thumbprint and a pubic hair in it that they probably offered her for lunch.

The cash prize for the 1st clear paparazzi pics of Paris in county jail clothes was $500,000. Paris taking a dump has to be worth something too. I can understand not making it easy for them.

A.Huerta
06-13-2007, 09:11 AM
SHe's a whore who ignores the law and drinks while driving. End of story.

Whip
06-13-2007, 09:13 AM
I originally wrote my thoughts in response to allegations made by ignorant media extremist douchebags that she recieved preferential treatment on her original sentencing for being rich, white and famous. She HAS recieved preferential treatment in all OTHER areas of her life.

I do not feel sorry for her and sincerely doubt anyone does. Personally, I hope her stay in jail turns into Chained Heat 5.

Here are a few things that I can't verify, I'm just repeating what I heard on various talk radio shows from seemingly credible sources.

'Paris has a prescription to adderall', (an amphetamine which causes loss of appetite and sleep deprivation). I imagine she didn't have access to this in the towers, possibly the 'unknown medical condition' was a withdrawal from this. Either way, this could explain how she found the will to refuse the burnt greasy cornbread with a thumbprint and a pubic hair in it that they probably offered her for lunch.

The cash prize for the 1st clear paparazzi pics of Paris in county jail clothes was $500,000. Paris taking a dump has to be worth something too. I can understand not making it easy for them.


Wow, a lot of very-new people joining lately. Welcome to the board. :)

PatrickA
06-13-2007, 09:38 AM
SHe's a whore who ignores the law and drinks while driving. End of story.


If that were really the end of the story we wouldn't know about it.

Ray G.
06-17-2007, 11:41 AM
Got anything, Hilton-bashers?

All of you who called and wrote the LA corrections department over this supposed horrid miscarriage of justice, going to start a new petition or chain mail?

Paris got special treatment all right. This is sickening.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06172007/news/nationalnews/extra__extra__nationalnews_cathy_burke.htm

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06172007/photos/news023.jpg


EXTRA, EXTRA!
PARIS JAIL TIME LONGER THAN MOST
By CATHY BURKE

CLICK TO ENLARGE

June 17, 2007 -- Looks like Paris Hilton did get special treatment for her sentencing - just not the kind she was hoping for.
Hilton will spend more time in the clink than the majority of bad boys and girls dispatched to L.A. County Jail for similar offenses, according to a recent newspaper analysis.
In fact, the study, which examined 2 million jail releases, found 1,500 cases from July 2002 that involved defendants with comparable case histories to the blond bubblehead.
In 60 percent of those cases, the offenders - who, like Hilton, were busted for drunken driving, then violated probation or were caught driving without a license - got out of jail after a mere four days, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Contrast that with poor little rich girl Hilton, who's scheduled to do 23 days.
And if Hilton, who got a visit from sister Nicky last night, does wind up doing the full 23 days as expected, she'll have done about the same amount of time as 4,000 inmates since 2002 who've been charged with assaults.
She'll also serve the same as more than 1,800 convicts charged with burglary, more than 2,600 charged with domestic violence and nearly 11,000 charged with drug violations, the newspaper found.
"The only special treatment she got - she got more time in jail," Sheriff Lee Baca said in an interview last week.
The analysis of jail releases also found that more than 60 percent of those with cases similar to Hilton's walked free after serving less than half their time.
Under the department's current guidelines, Hilton probably would have served even less time. Most nonviolent female offenders sentenced to less than 90 days are released immediately.
Civil-rights activist Najee Ali was one of several critics who pounced all over Baca's decision to spring Hilton, but concedes that only dangerous offenders should serve their full terms given the jail overcrowding issue.
"Clearly, her violation is not as serious, so she should be released," said Ali, director of Project Islamic Hope. "The rules of fairness should be applied equally."
Hilton was sentenced to 45 days for violating probation on alcohol-related, reckless-driving charges from an incident in September. Police stopped her while she was driving during the period that her license was suspended.
Meanwhile, talk-show host Ellen DeGeneres took issue with Hilton's recent promise to Barbara Walters to quit acting dumb because "that act is no longer cute."
"She's not getting anywhere doing that," said DeGeneres backstage at the "Daytime Emmy Awards" on Friday.
"If that really is an act, if she really was playing dumb, then what does that say about our society that we're celebrating someone who was successful because they're not smart?"
DeGeneres said that she'd be happy to have the jailed heiress on her show and express her opinions in person.

JimboX
06-17-2007, 12:00 PM
I still say they went easy on her. She should have gotten the death penalty.

Ray G.
06-17-2007, 12:02 PM
I still say they went easy on her. She should have gotten the death penalty.

LOL! Kill the reality TV stars!!!! :crazy:

I like you, dude, but why the hell do you hate her so much? What did she ever do to you?

JamesV
06-17-2007, 12:02 PM
So wait...

60% of people got less Jail time then her.

So she's in the 40% bracket? How do they stack up?

Ray G.
06-17-2007, 12:03 PM
So wait...

60% of people got less Jail time then her.

So she's in the 40% bracket? How do they stack up?

As they said, the overall average is 14 days.

JamesV
06-17-2007, 12:05 PM
As they said, the overall average is 14 days.

Yeah, I caught that.

So if she serves 14 days lets say, wouldn't that make her average?

Ray G.
06-17-2007, 12:16 PM
Yeah, I caught that.

So if she serves 14 days lets say, wouldn't that make her average?

Yep.

But she's serving 23, or 45, if Sauer has another snit fit.

JamesV
06-17-2007, 12:23 PM
Yep.

But she's serving 23, or 45, if Sauer has another snit fit.

To be fair, I wonder, if everything had been played by the book, how many days she would have gotten. I mean, if we hadn't been treated to the catch-and-release version and she instead had gone straight in and not had any of the theatrics (from all parties involved).

WinstonWolf
06-17-2007, 12:59 PM
This judge must be a total scumbag. Paris landed in jail on a violation that she didn't even KNOW about. Now granted, I'm not a Paris Hilton fan really, and am kind of tired of the public making her into a celebrity, but she should be treated just like everyone else. She should have hired Mark Gerigos (or however you spell his name.).

xyzzy
06-17-2007, 01:17 PM
Got anything, Hilton-bashers?

All of you who called and wrote the LA corrections department over this supposed horrid miscarriage of justice, going to start a new petition or chain mail?

Paris got special treatment all right. This is sickening.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06172007/news/nationalnews/extra__extra__nationalnews_cathy_burke.htm



Those stats are useless unless they're for this judge. You can't say that she's been treated more or less harshly because of who she is unless you can show that this judge's history matches that.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that those statistics are meaningless.

Foolish Mortal
06-17-2007, 01:22 PM
This judge must be a total scumbag. Paris landed in jail on a violation that she didn't even KNOW about.
Bullshit.

At her initial court hearing for her DUI charge, Hilton pleaded no contest to that, and she was given sentence of 36 months probation, alcohol education, $1,500 in fines and a suspended licence for the term of probation.

A few months after that, she was pulled over by police, and according to officers, she was informed that she was driving on a suspended license. The officer told her at that time that she need to acknowledge, in signing the citation, that she was not allowed to drive.

Now, a month after that, she's pulled over by officers again, and this time, it's for driving without her headlights and speeding. And they tell her again this is on a suspended license, and again she acknowledges on the signed citation that she knows she was driving with a suspended license!

Ray G.
06-17-2007, 01:33 PM
Those stats are useless unless they're for this judge. You can't say that she's been treated more or less harshly because of who she is unless you can show that this judge's history matches that.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that those statistics are meaningless.

The stats aren't about the sentence given, they're about the sentence served, though. So the judge doesn't factor into this so much as the sherrif's department does. It hasn't been mentioned anywhere that Judge Sauer has a history of overturning sherrif's department decisions about release, so all indications are that this is an unusual case. And given these statistics, Sauer should have had no problem with the sentence, unless he wanted to make an example of Hilton, Baca, or both.

I'm less interested in proving that Hilton was actually mistreated than I am in debunking the ridiculous outrage that erupted when she was released to house arrest.

Colby
06-17-2007, 01:45 PM
This judge must be a total scumbag. Paris landed in jail on a violation that she didn't even KNOW about. Now granted, I'm not a Paris Hilton fan really, and am kind of tired of the public making her into a celebrity, but she should be treated just like everyone else. She should have hired Mark Gerigos (or however you spell his name.).

Ignorance of the law is no excuse, though.

BTW, it's pretty hilarious to hear people say, "The judge is just trying to make an example out of Paris!", as if making an example out of criminals ISN'T one of the fundamental goals of our legal system in the first place.

Ray G.
06-17-2007, 01:47 PM
Ignorance of the law is no excuse, though.

BTW, it's pretty hilarious to hear people say, "The judge is just trying to make an example out of Paris!", as if making an example out of criminals ISN'T one of the fundamental goals of our legal system in the first place.

When you make an example of one person while letting others who committed the same crime slide because they didn't make as good public faces of your crackdown, that's not justice.

Matt O'Keefe
06-17-2007, 01:56 PM
When you make an example of one person while letting others who committed the same crime slide because they didn't make as good public faces of your crackdown, that's not justice.

No, it's America.


The higher-ups just want to prove to us that they're not as useless as we know they are.

Hate_Prime
06-17-2007, 02:03 PM
Got anything, Hilton-bashers?

All of you who called and wrote the LA corrections department over this supposed horrid miscarriage of justice, going to start a new petition or chain mail?

Paris got special treatment all right. This is sickening.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06172007/news/nationalnews/extra__extra__nationalnews_cathy_burke.htm

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06172007/photos/news023.jpg

What's the percentage of those who acted accordingly in court and those who acted like a privileged, full of shit, heiress?

Colby
06-17-2007, 02:06 PM
When you make an example of one person while letting others who committed the same crime slide because they didn't make as good public faces of your crackdown, that's not justice.

Perhaps, but the answer isn't to let ALL offenders slide. The justice system isn't an all-or-nothing proposition, and thank god for that.

xyzzy
06-17-2007, 02:16 PM
When you make an example of one person while letting others who committed the same crime slide because they didn't make as good public faces of your crackdown, that's not justice.

This could easily be read as cracking down on a scofflaw as a celebrity.

As injustices go, I'm failing to give a shit about this one.

RebootedCorpse
06-17-2007, 02:26 PM
This is becoming one of my favorite threads of the year.

WinstonWolf
06-17-2007, 06:16 PM
Ignorance of the law is no excuse, though.

BTW, it's pretty hilarious to hear people say, "The judge is just trying to make an example out of Paris!", as if making an example out of criminals ISN'T one of the fundamental goals of our legal system in the first place.

Ignorance of the law might not be an excuse, but it does factor into the sentencing. As for making an example out of criminals, well that depends on WHY there in there in the first place. Paris just got a DUI, hardly that uncommon. Mel Gibson, Nick Nolte, Ty Pennington, Wynonna Judd, and many other celebrities got a DUI (or DWI) and have not gone to jail, etc.

WinstonWolf
06-17-2007, 06:17 PM
Bullshit.

At her initial court hearing for her DUI charge, Hilton pleaded no contest to that, and she was given sentence of 36 months probation, alcohol education, $1,500 in fines and a suspended licence for the term of probation.

A few months after that, she was pulled over by police, and according to officers, she was informed that she was driving on a suspended license. The officer told her at that time that she need to acknowledge, in signing the citation, that she was not allowed to drive.

Now, a month after that, she's pulled over by officers again, and this time, it's for driving without her headlights and speeding. And they tell her again this is on a suspended license, and again she acknowledges on the signed citation that she knows she was driving with a suspended license!

Didn't she plead no contest AFTER entering a not guilty plea? I'm sure other people would have just gotten there license taken away, and not gone to prison.

Foolish Mortal
06-17-2007, 06:47 PM
Didn't she plead no contest AFTER entering a not guilty plea? I'm sure other people would have just gotten there license taken away, and not gone to prison.
She knew that driving with a suspended license violated the terms of her probation, and violating the terms of your probation could get you thrown in jail. That's why it's called probation.

If she didn't know that, then she's dumber than a nine-year old.

HoldFastNow
06-17-2007, 07:22 PM
i think what should have happened is when she got her FIRST dui she should have been sentenced to coach a peewee hockey team like gordon bombay in the mighty ducks. he didn't spend ONE DAY in jail and still learned the value of team work and even went on to be on a minor league hockey team himself.

Ray G.
06-17-2007, 07:30 PM
i think what should have happened is when she got her FIRST dui she should have been sentenced to coach a peewee hockey team like gordon bombay in the mighty ducks. he didn't spend ONE DAY in jail and still learned the value of team work and even went on to be on a minor league hockey team himself.

W00t!

JimboX
06-17-2007, 08:18 PM
LOL! Kill the reality TV stars!!!! :crazy:

I like you, dude, but why the hell do you hate her so much? What did she ever do to you?

Have you ever heard that G-d damned "Stars Are Blind" song?!?! She deserves the chair for that song alone!!!

Seriously though, I hate what she symbolizes: A snobby, spoiled dim-witted whore. She's trash! She does drugs, she's racist, she's a slut. And yet she gets all this undeserved adoration despite all of that. Or because of all of that. She hasn't contributed anything positive to society. In fact, I think her influence on young girls is hurting society. We'd be better off without her.

Do I think she got a harsh sentence? Yeah, probably.
Do I feel bad for her? Not at all!!!

Besides, she's getting preferential treatment anyways. And when she's out in a couple weeks (at the most) she'll go on the talk shows. Write a book. Maybe make another "reality" tv show. This is the best thing that could have ever happened to her career.

Colby
06-17-2007, 08:20 PM
Ignorance of the law might not be an excuse, but it does factor into the sentencing.

Maybe, MAYBE, but it's very rare, and it would be at the judge's discretion.


As for making an example out of criminals, well that depends on WHY there in there in the first place. Paris just got a DUI, hardly that uncommon. Mel Gibson, Nick Nolte, Ty Pennington, Wynonna Judd, and many other celebrities got a DUI (or DWI) and have not gone to jail, etc.

Noooooooo, Paris did not "just get a DUI". She got a DUI AND reckless driving, which got her a suspended liscense and 36 months probation. Then she was caught driving on her suspended lisence (where she had to sign a statement saying she KNEW she couldn't drive). Then she was caught driving AGAIN (and going double the speed limit. At night. With her headlights off.). These actions constituted a violation of her probation, which is what got her put in jail.

JimboX
06-21-2007, 03:34 PM
Poor, poor Paris Hilton. She's being treated so unfairly!!! My heart bleeds for her.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06212007/news/nationalnews/nbcs_1m_deal_for_paris_chat_nationalnews_marianne_ garvey.htm

June 21, 2007 -- LOS ANGELES - NBC has agreed to pay as much as $1 million for Paris Hilton's first after-jail interview, which will appear on the "Today" show, The Post has learned.

Sources told The Post the sit-down will be conducted by Meredith Vieira the day after the heir-head is sprung some time next week.

The deal has infuriated ABC executives, the sources said, because they were banking on Hilton's first remarks as a free woman going to Barbara Walters, who has become close with Hilton's mom, Kathy.

ABC was the front-runner until NBC Universal boss Jeff Zucker personally called Hilton's father Rick and made the pitch, the sources said.

Hilton agreed to the interview, but said she'd only speak with Vieira because of "disparaging" remarks her co-host Matt Lauer made about her.

A spokeswoman for NBC did not return a call for comment.

Hilton's spokesman Eliot Mintz said he "can't confirm or deny" the report.

If Hilton's jailhouse fan mail is any indication, the interview will fetch great ratings. She has received almost 5,000 pieces during her three weeks behind bars and she's writing back to her admirers, authorities said yesterday.

Thudpucker
06-21-2007, 04:06 PM
Got anything, Hilton-bashers?

All of you who called and wrote the LA corrections department over this supposed horrid miscarriage of justice, going to start a new petition or chain mail?

Paris got special treatment all right. This is sickening.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06172007/news/nationalnews/extra__extra__nationalnews_cathy_burke.htm

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06172007/photos/news023.jpg

Don't need anything else, I made my point earlier. What the average defendant gets is irrelevant. The degree of lieniency should be on a case to case basis, depending on factors like remorse, likelyhood to repeat an offense, contept a defendant shows to the court, ect.

Paris got a fitting sentence I think.

Ray G.
06-21-2007, 04:19 PM
Don't need anything else, I made my point earlier. What the average defendant gets is irrelevant. The degree of lieniency should be on a case to case basis, depending on factors like remorse, likelyhood to repeat an offense, contept a defendant shows to the court, ect.

Paris got a fitting sentence I think.

So, you and I both agree that the sentence was based on the judge's personal opinion of her, then. I just don't think the factors he cited were there.

My comments are more directed at those who seemed to be outraged when she was released to home confinement. Yeah, real blow to justice there.

And Jimbo, what the hell does the media's treatment of her have to do with the justice system's treatment of her?

Thudpucker
06-21-2007, 05:35 PM
So, you and I both agree that the sentence was based on the judge's personal opinion of her, then.

That is what judges do, Ray. They use thier own judgement to determine guilt and hand out sentences. That is why they are called 'judges'. :-?

Ray G.
06-22-2007, 05:54 PM
Heh. :D

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070622/people_nm/hilton_prosecutor_dc_1

Matt Jay
06-23-2007, 06:46 AM
This poor, innocent victim will be going free on Tuesday.

Ray G.
06-23-2007, 07:52 AM
This poor, innocent victim will be going free on Tuesday.

Good. Still served about 20 days more than the average. I guess the haters will have to find someone else to take their own issues out on.

JimboX
06-23-2007, 08:48 AM
Is this you, Ray? :)



A Paris Hilton devotee, dressed in full pirate garb, is demanding the heiress' release from prison in the next three days, or else he will "raid, plunder and pillage the entire village of Lynwood." Sounds like someone is suffering from scurvy.
The pirate, replete with hook hand, conducted a 30-second "press conference" early Friday afternoon in front of the jail that houses the convicted celebutante. He then danced to the hit song "Crazy."

Sums it up perfectly.

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tmz.com/media/2007/06/0622_pirate_paris.jpg

Ray G.
06-23-2007, 08:53 AM
Is this you, Ray? :)



A Paris Hilton devotee, dressed in full pirate garb, is demanding the heiress' release from prison in the next three days, or else he will "raid, plunder and pillage the entire village of Lynwood." Sounds like someone is suffering from scurvy.
The pirate, replete with hook hand, conducted a 30-second "press conference" early Friday afternoon in front of the jail that houses the convicted celebutante. He then danced to the hit song "Crazy."

Sums it up perfectly.

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tmz.com/media/2007/06/0622_pirate_paris.jpg

:lol:

Don't worry, guys. Nicole Richie is up for sentencing in her own drunk driving case soon. You'll have a new petty criminal to hope for horrible things to happen to. :)

JimboX
06-23-2007, 08:57 AM
You know if Nicole Richie goes to jail, this whole thing will have been one big advertisement for The Simple Life 5.

JimboX
06-23-2007, 08:58 AM
This poor, innocent victim will be going free on Tuesday.

There's still 3 days for her to get shanked.

Ray G.
06-23-2007, 09:01 AM
There's still 3 days for her to get shanked.

Wow...fucking sick.

JimboX
06-23-2007, 11:51 AM
Wow...fucking sick.

Oh, come on. Obviously I'm kidding about that. Don't be a prude.

Ray G.
06-23-2007, 12:08 PM
Oh, come on. Obviously I'm kidding about that. Don't be a prude.

You, sir, need a lesson in emoticon use. :no:

JimboX
06-23-2007, 12:11 PM
You, sir, need a lesson in emoticon use. :no:

:jackoff:

How's that? :)

Matt Jay
06-25-2007, 07:38 AM
Good. Still served about 20 days more than the average.

For violating parole twice and faking an illness to get out of her sentence? I doubt there is an average for such facts.

Ray G.
06-25-2007, 07:40 AM
For violating parole twice and faking an illness to get out of her sentence? I doubt there is an average for such facts.

Link to her "faking" her illness? Obviously it was serious enough for the duly elected Sherrif of the area to release her.

And I'd prefer a link without the words "whore" or "skank" in the article.

Matt Jay
06-25-2007, 07:45 AM
Link to her "faking" her illness? Obviously it was serious enough for the duly elected Sherrif of the area to release her.

And I'd prefer a link without the words "whore" or "skank" in the article.

The onus of proof is on those making the claim. She and the sheriff made the claim, then failed to provide documentation to substantiate it when they were required to (the hearing). We've been through this.

Ray G.
06-25-2007, 08:10 AM
The onus of proof is on those making the claim. She and the sheriff made the claim, then failed to provide documentation to substantiate it when they were required to (the hearing). We've been through this.

No it's not. It's clearly not. You're saying that she violated some kind of law or protocol by being released that would warrant a longer sentence. The onus of proof is ALWAYS on the accuser. Your case would have been much stronger if you stuck to the twice violating probation.

Matt Jay
06-25-2007, 08:58 AM
No it's not. It's clearly not. You're saying that she violated some kind of law or protocol by being released that would warrant a longer sentence. The onus of proof is ALWAYS on the accuser. Your case would have been much stronger if you stuck to the twice violating probation.
No, I'm not. I'm saying she wasn't forthcoming with the tribunal on the subject matter of the hearing and YES, the tribunal CAN take that attitude into consideration when delivering a sentence (hai imattorneybtw). This case was unique in both her attitude in this hearing and her REPEATED parole violations, so any "average" you find to support your irrational, apologist attitude is highly suspect.

EDIT: Almost forgot this to address this gem:

The onus of proof is ALWAYS on the accuser.

You misunderstand, and we've been through this. This hearing was not about proving a crime, the hearing in question was to address the legitimacy of her shortened sentence. In this matter, the onus is on her and the sheriff to explain why the judge's orders were not followed. They did not.

Again, in a situation such as this the Judge's job is not to play detective and try to figure out what you are trying to say: you are supposed to tell him. The justice system is burdened enough without having to follow your inspired belief that the judges' job includes making cases for the parties involved.

GelfXIII
06-25-2007, 09:00 AM
I cant believe you guys are still arguing about this as if it's in any way important.



...



Sorry. My bad. Go about your fun.

Matt Jay
06-25-2007, 09:07 AM
I cant believe you guys are still arguing about this as if it's in any way important.



...



Sorry. My bad. Go about your fun.
I can't believe the enlightened still drop in to remind us of their enlightenedness.

GelfXIII
06-25-2007, 09:09 AM
I can't believe the enlightened still drop in to remind us of their enlightenedness.

I know. I apologized for the snarky comment (but still felt it had to be made ;))

Matt Jay
06-25-2007, 09:13 AM
I know. I apologized for the snarky comment (but still felt it had to be made ;))

No, no. You're right. How dare we interrupt something as important as skrull speculation with something as unimportant as the real world criminal justice system. Your wisdom is beyond reproach.

GelfXIII
06-25-2007, 09:16 AM
No, no. You're right. How dare we interrupt something as important as skrull speculation with something as unimportant as the real world criminal justice system. Your wisdom is beyond reproach.

You couldn't find a less shallow subject matter for such a weighty debate though? There aren't a thousand more tragic and important cases winding their way through the travesty that is our criminal justice system that the one that draws your passion is this one? Really?


Anyway. I realize that I'm the one who is intruding an unasked for and largely irrelevant POV. Again, I apologize and withdraw.

Matt Jay
06-25-2007, 09:18 AM
You couldn't find a less shallow subject matter for such a weighty debate though? There aren't a thousand more tragic and important cases winding their way through the travesty that is our criminal justice system that the one that draws your passion is this one? Really?


Anyway. I realize that I'm the one who is intruding an unasked for and largely irrelevant POV. Again, I apologize and withdraw.
Good. Back to the skrulls with ye.

Hate_Prime
06-25-2007, 09:21 AM
What's the over/under on the number of days until she drops the good ol' born again christian thing?

Also the number of days until she finds the dumb "act" cute again?

stevapalooza
06-25-2007, 10:53 AM
I can't wait to read her jailhouse manifesto.

Ray G.
06-26-2007, 05:45 AM
She was released this morning.

Let's hope she came out of this a better person. Now, onto Nicole Richie.

ClintP
06-26-2007, 05:47 AM
She was released this morning.

Let's hope she came out of this a better person. Now, onto Nicole Richie.

Will Clint care either way? Hell no! :)