Author Topic: Paris Hilton  (Read 6865 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline zorm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 591
    • View Profile
    • Zorm's Page
Re: Paris Hilton
« Reply #15 on: June 09, 2007, 01:34:55 am »
Ok, first of all, it was reduced to a 23 day sentence.  That wasn't speculation.  Look up "paris hilton 23 day" on google, and a number of news sources will confirm that.  Second, I agree that having the sentence reduced for "good behavior" was inappropriate, but once it was done it should not be reversed
Third, I think it's obvious why the sheriff re-assigned her.

Actually, all the reliable news sources(CNN, Fox News, AP) I've seen indicate that her sentence was not reduced to 23 days.
Hilton, 26, was originally sentenced to 45 days in jail for violating probation in an alcohol-related reckless driving case, but had been expected to serve 23 days because of state rules allowing shorter sentences for good behavior.

I also found another site that indicated part of the good behavior 'rules' are actually California state law and that things like her showing up for court dates helps her. Another note of interest is that Sheriff Lee Baca supposedly received a $1,000 donation from a relative of Paris sometime last year, and hes that one that released her so everything isn't as "clean" as one might hope.

I still haven't seen anything that indicates that Paris will have to serve the full 45 days in jail now, and afterall if the good behavior rules are infact a law then the judge will not be able to override them and she'll get out after 23.
"Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora"
- William of Ockham

trust

  • Guest
Re: Paris Hilton
« Reply #16 on: June 09, 2007, 01:48:20 am »
I think it is completely fair to reinstate the 45 day term, if it cant be reduced for no reason it should be able to return to the original sentence for no reason (just so long as it isnt over the original).  She aggravated the situation throughout the entire case and even this morning when she didn't appear for court when she was supposed to and had to be escorted by sheriffs.

It's completely unfair for her sentence to be reinstated, if they let her go then that was the decision. It's not like she's some serial killer who is an increased danger to society (you could say she might kill someone by drunk driving, but she could kill someone just by driving sober..it's speculation). I think it's unprofessional for them to do this personally, and I think you're just for the reinstatement because of who she is. I bet if you or one of your friends was sentenced, then released, and then made to go back to prison you'd be singing a completely different tune.

Offline CrAz3D

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10184
    • View Profile
Re: Paris Hilton
« Reply #17 on: June 09, 2007, 01:49:28 am »
1) she wasnt released technically, the sheriff's office let her serve the time at home
2) read zorm's post re: the time she was suppose to serve

trust

  • Guest
Re: Paris Hilton
« Reply #18 on: June 09, 2007, 01:53:48 am »
1) she wasnt released technically, the sheriff's office let her serve the time at home

so...what you're saying is she was released from prison?House arrest is a completely different level.


People are saying the law is biased because she's a celebrity, but I say the people are biased because she's a celebrity. They want to see her suffer, they laugh at it because they have a negative opinion of her already and it makes them feel as if she's a regular person like them.

Offline CrAz3D

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10184
    • View Profile
Re: Paris Hilton
« Reply #19 on: June 09, 2007, 01:54:49 am »
technically released from prison, but not from her sentence...she was just transfered.  I suppose transfered is a more appropriate word