General
Hilton’s Lenient Treatment
So far I don’t see anyone making the obvious point about Paris Hilton’s special treatment:
Hilton was released from the county jail Thursday by Sheriff Lee Baca because of an undisclosed medical condition, and the sheriff said she would serve the duration of her term confined to her home in the hills above Sunset Strip, wearing an electronic ankle bracelet to monitor her movements. Late in the day, however, she was ordered back to court Friday so Superior Court Judge Michael T. Sauer could review the situation.
Anyone think the Sheriff is giving her lenient treatment because he feels sorry for her? Heck no! He’s getting paid! A high-profile, well-heeled celebrity in his jail is just what his retirement account needed. Of course he’ll keep it on the down-low until the storm passes, but I’d bet anything his net worth goes up in a few months.
I’m sure the Hiltons tried to “work with” the judge too but he’s apparently an honest man. CQ misses that point but does lay out what it was, exactly, that Paris did and why she’s in prison:
Let’s not forget why Paris Hilton went to jail. Last January, Hilton got convicted of driving drunk. That killed 18,000 people last year; it’s no joke. Hilton didn’t have to serve a day in jail for it, either. She got 36 months probation and had her license suspended (in November 2006). She was also ordered into an alcohol education program.
Within a month, she had been arrested twice for driving without a license, and still had not entered the program as ordered. The city prosecuted her for violating her probation and the court order, and convicted her last month. Her defense? She blamed everyone but herself, and even at this last court proceeding, wanted to appear only by telephone. The judge had to order her brought to court.
Discussion
Comments are disallowed for this post.
I think for driving with a suspended license and reckless driving, its a harsh sentence. But I don’t care.
Interesting Note about Judge Sauer- He was the LA Deputy City Attorney who unsuccessfully argued the Cohen v. California case, even though I personally think his position in the matter was the Constitutional one.