Not the LA Hilton
From the "Thirty-Days-in-the-Hole" Department
So Paris Hilton spectacle took a new tabloid turn.
Sentenced to 45 Days for violating parole and driving intoxicated with a suspended license has never been such a media event.
Lets recap.
- Paris is arrested when caught driving under the influence (second offense) with a suspended Operators License.
While this is a serious offense, most people who are convicted of said crimes are given a fine and an extension on their parole. It was rather odd for a 45-day jail sentence to be handed down. Some say that it was due to the original parole agreement, with the same judge, which she violated. But still. All the charges are considered misdemeanors under the California Penal Code. (Look it up). The jail sentence, seems steep, even if it was a celebrity (as such starlets as Lindsey Lohan, in fact, the usual celebrity level sentence is Three-Years-Probation. All the experts suggest she will only serve 26 days of her sentence. Well versed celebrity ex-cons (Like Bonaduce) suggest she’ll barely serve two weeks before let out on Parole. - Paris reports to Jail, a day early on Sunday night. And by Wednesday night, somehow convinces the Sheriff to release her to Community Confinement (ie. House Arrest) for medical reasons.
- Thursday, Paris is released with a fashionable ankle bracelet Lo-Jack.
Even though she only served three full days, she is given credit for Sunday and Thursday as well, she will remain under house arrest for 40 more days. - Officiating Judge is outraged that his sentence was subverted, and demands Hilton and company return to the court, and he forces her back to jail, to serve the full 45 days.
I’m wondering if Paris was right when she said, “It’s not Right.”
First Wolf Blitzer, now Jeremy Gilby. A sad day.
But ok, I’ll play along even though I’m happy to say I haven’t followed this at all.
Is the 45 day sentence outside the sentencing guidelines for the offense? Is it outside the norm for this judge for this offense? Those seem like better measuring sticks, don’t they?
Comment by Cisco — June 8, 2007 @ 7:57:28 PM
To be honest, I’m not sure what I think about all this, hence the post.
When I first was made aware of this, I thought, “Good riddance.”
Then, as I looked into the statues of your state, I saw that indeed, 45 days is the maximum sentence for such a misdemeanor.
Then, I heard the advocates wanting a Governator Pardon, saying it would be an expensive task to jail Hilton for 45 days. And I was against a pardon.
It is hard to deny there is a special treatment going on here, from both directions. The usual sentence for this case is not usually the maximum. I’m not sure as to the legal tendency of this particular judge.
At the same time, there is preferential treatment from the LA County Sheriff. He shouldn’t have released her, at least based on the data made public.
So, hence my question,
Comment by Jeremy — June 8, 2007 @ 8:08:54 PM
People forget that she violated parole which carries a stiffer penalty than driving w/ a suspended license.
I compare her original statement when she said she was ready to do the time and her latest crying and calling for mommy. I believe her early release was prearranged but this time she knows she’s going behind bars for some time. I thought it strange that her first processing did not include removing the makeup and hair extensions. That told be something was up day-one.
Comment by Dad — June 9, 2007 @ 1:47:09 PM
Also while on a suspended license, she did get caught multiple times driving drunk without a license, and it was overlooked. Now this last time she just happened to not be drunk when she got pulled over. The way I see it she is a multiple time offender and deserves it.
Seems a little silly when she could have afforded to have a driver cart her around.
Comment by G.B. — June 12, 2007 @ 4:40:39 AM