Paris HIlton buys her way out of DUI jail sentence

LarsensAttack wrote:

> jcr wrote:
> > Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
> >
> >> First she was given 45 days for violating her probation for a DUI last
> >> year. Then it was cut to 23 days and it's just been announced she's
> >> released after 3!!! Drunk driving is a super-violent drug crime but
> >> criminal coddler america says we don't care.
> >
> > I can't believe anybody cares about this.
>
> The rich Neocons do, because they see themselves being dragged away
> screaming like Scooter Libby.

You mean they're worried that breaking the law might mean they have to go to
jail ?

Graham

"Scott en Aztlán" wrote:

> "Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' )" > said in
> rec.autos.driving:
>
> >> >> Actually, the sentence was raised from 26 days to 45. Paris only did
> >> >> what the Sheriff said.
> >> >>
> >> >Nope. The sentence was always 45 days.
> >>
> >> Nope. The sentence was REDUCED to 23 days.
> >>
> >If it was reduced to 23 days, then she'd get time off for good behaviour
> >on that and that's not true.
>
> I gave you a link to a news report that supports my statement.

A *news report*. Bwahahahahaha !

Leave it out will you ?

Are you some PH groupie or whatever ?

Graham

On Jun 10, 3:53 pm, (Matthew T. Russotto)
wrote:
> In article >,
>
>
>
>
>
> LarsensAttack <BayonetVariation.net> wrote:
>
> >Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> >> In article . com>,
> >> Harry K > wrote:
>
> >>>And the truth is that, had she been a normal type prisoner, she would
> >>>have been taken to the the prison infirmary or to the local hospital
> >>>with a jail affiliation, checked out, stabilized and RETURNED TO HER
> >>>CELL (see I can use caps also).
>
> >> If she'd been a normal type offender, she'd have been sentenced to a
> >> fine or house arrest, or maybe weekends in jail. 45 days for driving
> >> on a suspended license stinks of "making an example" of a celebrity.
> >> A royally DESERVING one, granted, but it's still wrong.
>
> >Well, have you got any statistics to prove your assertion that
> >her sentence was unusual?
>
> Sorry, only anecdote.
>
> >She had a suspended license for DUI
> >and drove repeatedly. So show everyone that what happened to her
> >is not the norm across the US.
>
> You don't know (at least indirectly, e.g. a not-too-close relative or
> a relative of a friend) a few drunks who pull the same **** fairly
> regularly, and never end up with more than weekends in jail?
> --
> There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
> result in a fully-depreciated one.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

That argument before the judge would carry the same weight as "but
your honor, I shouldn't have this speeding ticket because everyone
else was also speeding"...that is, absolutely no weight whatsoever.

Harry K

On Jun 10, 9:31 pm, Eeyore >
wrote:
> "Scott en Aztlán" wrote:
> > Eeyore said in rec.autos.driving:
> > >"Scott en Aztlán" wrote:
> > >> Eeyore said in rec.autos.driving:
>
> > >> >> I too wonder what she did to warrant having her time increased from 23
> > >> >> to 45 days.
>
> > >> >Failing to obey the orders of the court ?
>
> > >> Which orders were these? Be specific.
>
> > >Let's start with the one that removed her driving licence shall we ?
>
> > I don't know how it works over there in the UK, but here we have laws
> > against being tried more than once for the same crime.
>
> In the UK if you drive whilst banned it's a new offence every time you're
> caught.
>
> Are you trying to say that after losing her licence, PH can continue to drive
> but only the first stop will result in a penalty ?
>
> Graham- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

It is the same here but it gets even better. Each new offence will
also have a new "Probation Violation" added on. It is the PV that she
was given the 45 days on. The DUIs carry their own sentence/time
although it is common to run the sentences "concurrently".

Harry K

In article .com>,
Harry K > wrote:
>On Jun 10, 3:53 pm, (Matthew T. Russotto)
>wrote:
>> In article >,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> LarsensAttack <BayonetVariation.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
>> >> In article . com>,
>> >> Harry K > wrote:
>>
>> >> If she'd been a normal type offender, she'd have been sentenced to a
>> >> fine or house arrest, or maybe weekends in jail. 45 days for driving
>> >> on a suspended license stinks of "making an example" of a celebrity.
>> >> A royally DESERVING one, granted, but it's still wrong.
>>
>> >Well, have you got any statistics to prove your assertion that
>> >her sentence was unusual?
>>
>> Sorry, only anecdote.
>>
>> >She had a suspended license for DUI
>> >and drove repeatedly. So show everyone that what happened to her
>> >is not the norm across the US.
>>
>> You don't know (at least indirectly, e.g. a not-too-close relative or
>> a relative of a friend) a few drunks who pull the same **** fairly
>> regularly, and never end up with more than weekends in jail?

>That argument before the judge would carry the same weight as "but
>your honor, I shouldn't have this speeding ticket because everyone
>else was also speeding"...that is, absolutely no weight whatsoever.

So if everyone else who is caught speeding gets a $50 fine but I get a $500
fine in the exact same circumstances, I have no grounds for complaint?
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

"Scott en Aztlán" wrote:
>
> "Bill Bonde ( 'Hi ho' )" > said in
> rec.autos.driving:
>
> >> >> Actually, the sentence was raised from 26 days to 45. Paris only did
> >> >> what the Sheriff said.
> >> >>
> >> >Nope. The sentence was always 45 days.
> >>
> >> Nope. The sentence was REDUCED to 23 days.
> >>
> >If it was reduced to 23 days, then she'd get time off for good behaviour
> >on that and that's not true.
>
> I gave you a link to a news report that supports my statement. How
> about you provide a link to one that supports yours?
>
As I said, she's supposed to get the standard reduction for good
behaviour, the sentence still being 45 days.

On Jun 11, 7:03 pm, (Matthew T. Russotto)
wrote:
> In article .com>,
> Harry K > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jun 10, 3:53 pm, (Matthew T. Russotto)
> >wrote:
> >> In article >,
>
> >> LarsensAttack <BayonetVariation.net> wrote:
>
> >> >Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> >> >> In article . com>,
> >> >> Harry K > wrote:
>
> >> >> If she'd been a normal type offender, she'd have been sentenced to a
> >> >> fine or house arrest, or maybe weekends in jail. 45 days for driving
> >> >> on a suspended license stinks of "making an example" of a celebrity.
> >> >> A royally DESERVING one, granted, but it's still wrong.
>
> >> >Well, have you got any statistics to prove your assertion that
> >> >her sentence was unusual?
>
> >> Sorry, only anecdote.
>
> >> >She had a suspended license for DUI
> >> >and drove repeatedly. So show everyone that what happened to her
> >> >is not the norm across the US.
>
> >> You don't know (at least indirectly, e.g. a not-too-close relative or
> >> a relative of a friend) a few drunks who pull the same **** fairly
> >> regularly, and never end up with more than weekends in jail?
> >That argument before the judge would carry the same weight as "but
> >your honor, I shouldn't have this speeding ticket because everyone
> >else was also speeding"...that is, absolutely no weight whatsoever.
>
> So if everyone else who is caught speeding gets a $50 fine but I get a $500
> fine in the exact same circumstances, I have no grounds for complaint?
> --
> There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
> result in a fully-depreciated one.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You have grounds for complaint but don't try that argument while you
are talking to the judge. Save it for an appeal.

Harry K

In article . com>,
Harry K > wrote:
>
>You have grounds for complaint but don't try that argument while you
>are talking to the judge. Save it for an appeal.

Heh. On the street, they tell you "tell it to the judge". In court,
they tell you "save it for an appeal". On appeal, they say "You
should have brought that up earlier". Welcome to procedural
injustice.


--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

Let's get our facts straight, OK? Paris Hilton was not sent to jail
for DUI. She was sent to jail for driving after her license was
suspended for DUI.

Even so, all indications are that you or I would have gotten lighter
punishment. But PH needed it because she has the IQ of a stump.