Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Hilton out of jail after 3 daysFollow

#52 Jun 08 2007 at 3:10 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
xtremereign wrote:
Seriously, everyone knows about this crap. No one is afraid to explain anything.


If everyone knows this crap, then why are 99.99999% of all discussions on this topic revolving around the assumption that she got released after 3 days because of her wealth and fame? So everyone knows about this crap but chooses to bash her for getting what they know is "normal" treatment anyway? Is that what you're arguing? Cause that's the only way for your statement to be true.


Quote:
If Paris had been cooperative, even attempted to fake understanding the seriousness of her situation, this probably would never have blown up the way it did. Basically, she spit in the eye of the D.A. and the judge, and expected nothing to come of it.


What are you talking about? The three days she was released? She didn't do that. The jail system did (the undersherrif specifically). How is that "spitting in the eyes of the DA and judge?

Or are you talking about the original charge? Um. Not to be obvious, but that's the same reason anyone who's been sentenced to 45 days in the country jail for that charge is there. She didn't do anything different then thousands of other people each year who choose to drive on a suspended license and get arrested for it.

Or are you saying that because she's rich and famous that she should be treated more harshly then any other random anonymous joe that does the exact same thing she did? Cause that's what I was saying...


For the record, my observation about being punished "more" because she is famous was in reference to the apparent increase of her sentence to the full 45 days. Essentially, she's being denied the "time off for good behavior" for actions that she didn't take and that only had repercussions because she is famous. I can assure you that this process occurs all the time. The judge would *never* have ordered her back to jail (or likely known about it) if it wasn't for the fact that the media made such a big deal out of her super early release that he had to do something to correct the issue. And the media wouldn't have cared if she wasn't famous.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#53 Jun 08 2007 at 3:31 PM Rating: Good
***
3,339 posts
gbaji wrote:
The three days she was released? She didn't do that. The jail system did (the undersherrif specifically). How is that "spitting in the eyes of the DA and judge?


Fine, she swallowed for the undersheriff.

#54 Jun 08 2007 at 3:58 PM Rating: Good
gbaji wrote:
The judge would *never* have ordered her back to jail (or likely known about it) if it wasn't for the fact that the media made such a big deal out of her super early release that he had to do something to correct the issue


Actually...

Fox News wrote:

...the judge interrupted several times to say that he had received a call last Wednesday from an undersheriff informing him that Hilton had a medical condition and that he would submit papers to the judge to consider. He said the papers never arrived.

Every few minutes, the judge would interrupt proceedings, state the time on the clock, and note that the papers still had not arrived.

He also noted that he had heard that a private psychiatrist visited Hilton in jail, and he wondered if that person played a role in deciding her medical needs.

The Judge still awaiting the papers to consider.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#55 Jun 08 2007 at 4:20 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
If she hadn't been famous, the judge would not have asked for nor needed any papers explaining why she was being released after serving 3 days of a 23 day sentence.

Get it? This exact thing happens all the time in LA county. No one cares. Not the sherrif. Not the judges. No one. But because the media is paying attention, they care in this case, so they're being forced to actually apply a full sentence to her, not because the specifics of her case warrant it anymore then anyone else's, but because the media attention given to the case will force them to answer questions they don't want to answer if they don't.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#56 Jun 08 2007 at 4:52 PM Rating: Good
The judge certainly seems to care. Otherwise she would been sentanced to house arrest in the first place.

Unfortunatly, I doubt even 45 days in jail will make her "learn her lesson". I'm thinkin' she'll still be on probation when she gets out. Care to wager how long it takes for her to violate it again?
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#57 Jun 08 2007 at 5:07 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
The judge certainly seems to care. Otherwise she would been sentanced to house arrest in the first place.


Doesn't matter. Everyone else sentenced to jail (and not house arrest) is typically released after serving about 10% of their total jail time if they are a non-violent offender. How she got to be sentenced is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that she is being treated differently (and not in a positive way) because she's famous.

The reason the judge cares about it *now* is because of the media. With any other person, they'd have been let out after a few days and no one would have cared. The judge cares because he's got a dozen different news agencies all cramming cameras in his face asking him how he feels about Hilton being released so early when he sentenced her to 45 days. If the media wasn't there, he wouldn't care. It really is that simple.

Quote:
Unfortunatly, I doubt even 45 days in jail will make her "learn her lesson". I'm thinkin' she'll still be on probation when she gets out. Care to wager how long it takes for her to violate it again?


Not your call to make though. And also completely irrelevant to this discussion. I'd wager that she does not violate it though. She certainly can find lots of people to drive her around if she wants to.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#58 Jun 08 2007 at 5:53 PM Rating: Good
I disagrea completely. As a manager, if one of my staff members decided to do anything I told them delibrately not to do, I'd be pissed.

And that's essentially what the Sherriff did. The Sherriff had his orders and for whatever reason, decided to go against said orders and do what the Judge had dilebrately told him not to do.

I'd wager that's what really irks him. And despite your penchant for blaming the media whenever possible, there's no way for you to "pin" this on the media unless you find a quote by the Judge supporting your cause.

But feel free to continue blaming the media if you like. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, as am I.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#59 Jun 08 2007 at 6:04 PM Rating: Excellent
Mistress of Gardening
Avatar
*****
14,661 posts
I read that she was ordered back to jail after she told the judge she would attend her hearing via phone instead of in person. I would think that would **** off a judge so much they'd nail her with a full sentence.
____________________________
Yum-Yum Bento Box | Pikko Pots | Adventures in Bentomaking

Twitter


[ffxivsig]277809[/ffxivsig]
#60 Jun 08 2007 at 6:16 PM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
She obviously has no capacity to cope with real-world consequences, and for that, I blame Kathy Hilton. What a ****-poor mother she is, constantly bailing out a child that she should have raised to self-sufficiency years ago. Same for Dina Lohan. WTF?
#61 Jun 08 2007 at 7:58 PM Rating: Decent
*****
19,369 posts
gbaji wrote:
Everyone else sentenced to jail (and not house arrest) is typically released after serving about 10% of their total jail time if they are a non-violent offender. How she got to be sentenced is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that she is being treated differently (and not in a positive way) because she's famous.

The reason the judge cares about it *now* is because of the media. With any other person, they'd have been let out after a few days and no one would have cared. The judge cares because he's got a dozen different news agencies all cramming cameras in his face asking him how he feels about Hilton being released so early when he sentenced her to 45 days. If the media wasn't there, he wouldn't care. It really is that simple.


*********

Anyone who doesn't show respect towards a judge gets the book thrown at them. It's not because she's famous but because of her attitude toward the judge and the legal process. I've seen perfectly non-famous normal people get treated in a similar matter because of their lack of care and respect to justice.

And typical doesn't mean all does it? You can claim it's because she's famous all you want but this isn't the only case where something like this has happened. It's not discrimination, but people like you think it is. Why? Because it's the focus of the media. What about John Smith and his case? Who? Exactly.
#62 Jun 08 2007 at 8:47 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
She obviously has no capacity to cope with real-world consequences, and for that, I blame Kathy Hilton. What a ****-poor mother she is, constantly bailing out a child that she should have raised to self-sufficiency years ago. Same for Dina Lohan. WTF?


You're thinking in terms of self-sufficiency for a woman that has all the money she needs for the rest of her life. I know it's very easy to judge when a person one is watching is so self-sufficient that they don't have to 'follow societal rules' in a 'social sense', none-the-less, she is a product of being in a bubble of 'self-sufficiency' that most of us dream about. It's not like she's relying on employers for her popularity to get the next meal, or pay for that home, or pay for the heating bill. She truly is 'self-sufficient' in the truest form of the concept.

I'm not biblical, but I truly think that "don't judge, unless ye be judged" is very applicable in this case.

In other words, if I was going to jail, and I had the power to try and prevent it, I would do everything within my power to try and prevent it. That's means money, connections, and anything else I could think of. Nobody likes punishment. Even a 4 year old getting spanked puts his/her hand over their backside. If that doesn't say something about the natural human trait to avoid punishment, I don't know what does.

Punishment doesn't feel good, and people don't like not feeling good, thus they avoid punishment. It's a syllogism that has roots in the human psyche. It's very easy to judge people on the basis of this human trait due to their circumstance. That's life.
#63 Jun 08 2007 at 8:56 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
You're thinking in terms of self-sufficiency for a woman that has all the money she needs for the rest of her life. I know it's very easy to judge when a person one is watching is so self-sufficient that they don't have to 'follow societal rules' in a 'social sense', none-the-less, she is a product of being in a bubble of 'self-sufficiency' that most of us dream about. It's not like she's relying on employers for her popularity to get the next meal, or pay for that home, or pay for the heating bill. She truly is 'self-sufficient' in the truest form of the concept.

I'm not biblical, but I truly think that "don't judge, unless ye be judged" is very applicable in this case.

In other words, if I was going to jail, and I had the power to try and prevent it, I would do everything within my power to try and prevent it. That's means money, connections, and anything else I could think of. Nobody likes punishment. Even a 4 year old getting spanked puts his/her hand over their backside. If that doesn't say something about the natural human trait to avoid punishment, I don't know what does.

Punishment doesn't feel good, and people don't like not feeling good, thus they avoid punishment. It's a syllogism that has roots in the human psyche. It's very easy to judge people on the basis of this human trait due to their circumstance. That's life.


And, replying to myself, as I often do, I must say I'm only stating this viewpoint because I think Paris will someday show up at my front door, offer me a million dollars, a blow-job, and invite me to live in her mansion. I would never state truths based on observational facts. It really is all about attention. Please love me. /smirk
#64 Jun 08 2007 at 10:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Mistress of Gardening
Avatar
*****
14,661 posts
kanidana wrote:
In other words, if I was going to jail, and I had the power to try and prevent it, I would do everything within my power to try and prevent it. That's means money, connections, and anything else I could think of. Nobody likes punishment. Even a 4 year old getting spanked puts his/her hand over their backside. If that doesn't say something about the natural human trait to avoid punishment, I don't know what does.


Funny, she was at the MTV Awards a few days ago saying how she was the one insisting she go to County and that she was going to learn from it and serve her time to set a good example for young kids.
____________________________
Yum-Yum Bento Box | Pikko Pots | Adventures in Bentomaking

Twitter


[ffxivsig]277809[/ffxivsig]
#65 Jun 08 2007 at 11:02 PM Rating: Decent
Wow, Paris Hilton showed weakness. She IS human after all. I'm very sorry for this fact. I always thought that being born into wealth and red carpet walks meant strength. Sadly, this didn't prove to be the case. Woe is me!!!

Jail sucks, it's only celebrities that bring awareness to the fact that our society loves to OVER PUNISH for simple offenses. I'm not saying that somebody that drank 2 beers isn't deserving of 5 days in hell for driving sober on a suspended license for said offense, I'm simply saying that who sets the standards and why?

I'm darn sure that sober f---nuts who couldn't drive to save their own lives, let alone somebody else's life, cause more deaths on the world stage of reality than drunk drivers. Does that excuse drunk driving? Of course not. Any time a death happens and one has a conclusive source to blame, it really tidies up said death. Nobody likes their loved ones to die without a blatant source.

Sorry, it really does go back to the old subconscious archaic brain impulse to find causes for every single death on the surface of the earth, and lay blame for said deaths. People do tend to hate this chaotic universe that punishes and rewards without cause.
#66 Jun 09 2007 at 12:27 AM Rating: Excellent
Mistress of Gardening
Avatar
*****
14,661 posts
Yes, she's human, I get it. She's also a celebrity. She knows perfectly well how things work when people watch your every move. She should have known her celebrity status would put her under the microscope and leave her open to something like this. Or at the very least, her lawyers or parents should have told her that with the world watching she has that much less room for error.

That whole "I'll attend my hearing via phone" thing is insulting. I can only imagine how pissed that judge must have been about that.
____________________________
Yum-Yum Bento Box | Pikko Pots | Adventures in Bentomaking

Twitter


[ffxivsig]277809[/ffxivsig]
#67 Jun 09 2007 at 12:34 AM Rating: Decent
*****
19,369 posts
kanidana wrote:
I'm simply saying that who sets the standards and why?

I'm darn sure that sober f---nuts who couldn't drive to save their own lives, let alone somebody else's life, cause more deaths on the world stage of reality than drunk drivers. Does that excuse drunk driving? Of course not. Any time a death happens and one has a conclusive source to blame, it really tidies up said death. Nobody likes their loved ones to die without a blatant source.

Sorry, it really does go back to the old subconscious archaic brain impulse to find causes for every single death on the surface of the earth, and lay blame for said deaths. People do tend to hate this chaotic universe that punishes and rewards without cause.


You do know that if you drive and kill somebody you're held responsible right? It doesn't matter if you're sober or not.

And the only reason they're laying blame to deaths is if someone caused them, fUcknuts. I wouldn't call some nutjob running over nuns and gets jail time a chaotic universe that punishes and rewards without cause.

There is cause and effect. Try drinking drano cocktail and see if you live. You'll die like the scum sucking terd that you are because it's an effect that was caused by your actions. You probably got a dui and are pissed about it. Suck it up, bucko and take responsibility.
#68 Jun 09 2007 at 1:30 AM Rating: Decent
Quote:
You do know that if you drive and kill somebody you're held responsible right? It doesn't matter if you're sober or not.

And the only reason they're laying blame to deaths is if someone caused them, ********* I wouldn't call some nutjob running over nuns and gets jail time a chaotic universe that punishes and rewards without cause.

There is cause and effect. Try drinking drano cocktail and see if you live. You'll die like the scum sucking terd that you are because it's an effect that was caused by your actions. You probably got a dui and are pissed about it. Suck it up, bucko and take responsibility.

You are quite right. You have certainly pegged me. I'm judged. I like the taste of **** because it's like a drug....obviously. What else would make me respond to such claptrap.

Anyways, you are actually wrong. If you drive and the blame isn't clearly placed in your lap by concrete evidence, you are not convicted. On the other hand, no MATTER WHAT THE circumstances, if you are under the influence of a substance, you are convicted as harshly as those that wish to blame arbitrary mechanical deaths wish you to be.

"That big car monster got my daughter, and it was driven by a homicidal maniac under the influence of a drug 'we tried to outlaw 80 years ago'. I'm MADD, and I'm not gonna take it anymore."





#69 Jun 09 2007 at 1:42 AM Rating: Decent
Quote:
Yes, she's human, I get it. She's also a celebrity. She knows perfectly well how things work when people watch your every move. She should have known her celebrity status would put her under the microscope and leave her open to something like this. Or at the very least, her lawyers or parents should have told her that with the world watching she has that much less room for error.

That whole "I'll attend my hearing via phone" thing is insulting. I can only imagine how pissed that judge must have been about that.


Oh give me a ******* break. All of the sudden judges are infallible? There is no political ******** going on? Give me a ******* break. Judges aren't perfect. I'd argue that judges and sheriffs are so far from perfect they barely qualify to do their job (duhhhhh, judge).

By the way, I'm so jealous of Paris Hilton I taste gourmet cuisine. Still, I don't think the woman I've *********** to twice deserved to be incarcerated for driving without a license.

Let's think about the very concept of a license. It's a picture document that we pay for and take a very simple test to attain. This isn't a document of competence, it's a document of I can say "HUHHH????" In this society, driver's license suspension, is like a Burger King suspension. You're barred from Whoppers for thirty days.

She got an extraordinary sentence and everybody knows it. Do I care? Not really. But on the same day a killer who killed her husband got a sentence that an average marijuana dealer drools over. Look it up. OH THE HORROR!!!!
#70 Jun 09 2007 at 1:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Mistress of Gardening
Avatar
*****
14,661 posts
kanidana wrote:
Quote:
Yes, she's human, I get it. She's also a celebrity. She knows perfectly well how things work when people watch your every move. She should have known her celebrity status would put her under the microscope and leave her open to something like this. Or at the very least, her lawyers or parents should have told her that with the world watching she has that much less room for error.

That whole "I'll attend my hearing via phone" thing is insulting. I can only imagine how pissed that judge must have been about that.


Oh give me a @#%^ing break. All of the sudden judges are infallible? There is no political bullsh*t going on? Give me a @#%^ing break. Judges aren't perfect. I'd argue that judges and sheriffs are so far from perfect they barely qualify to do their job (duhhhhh, judge).

By the way, I'm so jealous of Paris Hilton I taste gourmet cuisine. Still, I don't think the woman I've *********** to twice deserved to be incarcerated for driving without a license.

Let's think about the very concept of a license. It's a picture document that we pay for and take a very simple test to attain. This isn't a document of competence, it's a document of I can say "HUHHH????" In this society, driver's license suspension, is like a Burger King suspension. You're barred from Whoppers for thirty days.

She got an extraordinary sentence and everybody knows it. Do I care? Not really. But on the same day a killer who killed her husband got a sentence that an average marijuana dealer drools over. Look it up. OH THE HORROR!!!!


Oh come on now, only twice? ;)

I don't see how me implying that the judge let his irritation lead him to a smackdown sentencing is me calling him perfect. All I'm saying is she's an even bigger idiot for pissing off the judge.

Yeah ok, compared to the average Joe, she got owned. But the world doesn't send helicoptors to Mr. Joe's house or broadcast spoof Law and Order clips about them reporting to jail. As ridiculous as it is, the world is watching. The pressure is on to send the message that you can't do the things she did and suffer little to no consequences. This is why she is back in jail.
____________________________
Yum-Yum Bento Box | Pikko Pots | Adventures in Bentomaking

Twitter


[ffxivsig]277809[/ffxivsig]
#71 Jun 09 2007 at 1:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Mistress of Gardening
Avatar
*****
14,661 posts
Btw if you're referring to the preacher's wife, iirc she made a case of mental, physical, and sexual abuse and wasn't convicted of murder. It's an entirely different kind of case.
____________________________
Yum-Yum Bento Box | Pikko Pots | Adventures in Bentomaking

Twitter


[ffxivsig]277809[/ffxivsig]
#72 Jun 09 2007 at 3:30 AM Rating: Good
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Quote:
still, I don't think the woman I've *********** to twice


You have very low standards.
#73 Jun 09 2007 at 4:37 AM Rating: Decent
*
50 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Hello and welcome to "Overcoming your third grade grasp of the English Language". Let's begin.

So really, I guess the overall point you're arching for is that, occasionally, wealthy people don't go to jail when they're not found guilty and this one particular time a wealthy person was released from being jail because of a preposterous probation violation which never would have been imposed had it not been something that would make headlines.



For the record, does "being jail" mean Jail=Person, or Person=Jail. Please enlighten us.

Grats on progressing to Fourth Grade English.
#74 Jun 09 2007 at 9:08 PM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
Why the mother of Jophiel do you a$$holes continue to post threads about this *****? You know, OOT is only a click away. This type of material surely would send you straight to a sticky over there. When channel surfing the tube, I do my best to avoid this annoying little **** inhaler at all costs. The fact I come here to get away from this kind of bullsh1t and STILL have to see it is like a well focused kick to the nut sack. It's sort of like going to bed on a Saturday night and dreaming about working at the office. It's just not right. So knock this **** off immediately. Capice?

Totem
#75 Jun 10 2007 at 1:12 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

If they are highly intelligent, you could assume they pay attention to things and read forums like the Asylum, or WOW General


Tried to continue reading from there a few times, but the convulsive vomiting kept obscuring the screen.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#76 Jun 10 2007 at 1:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
You think thats bad you should try the alliance or horde forums.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 231 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (231)