sixds said:how can she be known as a celebrity anyways. like, she released and album or two, thats it.
More like she's a rich heiress who did an amateur porn tape, which made her "famous."
whenfoxforks-ruled said:she was suffering from something the jail was incapable of dealing with
She could sell a toe-nail clipping for $350.
Problem here is he specifically noted that she NOT get to serve it at home , then the sheriff did it anyway... but yes, I'm sure he's fine with the attention.rickyd said:The judge probably did it do to get media attention. If it were somebody else and they were released he probably wouldn't of even thought about it. Read somewhere that they predict that her popularity would increase if she served her time behind bars, pretty sad IMHO.
Jeff Gilbert said:I feel sorry for her, she can't relate to reality.
robwbright said:However, I question any law which pre-emptively takes away a person's freedom when that person has not caused any injury to another person.
QUOTE]
Rob.
She has been caught driving drunk and on a suspended license. It was not the first time. She failed to show up for court. When she did, she blamed it all on her manager for not telling her that she couldn't drive on a suspended license.. Any nitwit knows that. When interviewed, she talked about it like it was a big joke.
She failed again to show up in court on friday. Thought she could just call in. :coocoo: The judge sent a police car to pick her arrogant little butt up and bring her to court. Now, she knows that she is not above the law. :cool: I would think as an attorney, you would know this stuff.
It was only a matter of time until she killed someone, now she has 45 days to think about it. :nod:
I applaud this judge. To bad we don't have more like him.
robwbright said:However, arresting people and forcing them to do jail time - for whatever reason - when they have not injured another person is stupid and tyrranical.
robwbright said:"What precisely is being criminalized? Not bad driving. Not destruction of property. Not the taking of human life or reckless endangerment.
What have we done by permitting government to criminalize the content of our blood instead of actions themselves?
The law should deal in actions and actions alone,
and only insofar as they damage person or property.
Despite the propaganda, what's being criminalized in the case of drunk driving is not the probability that a person driving will get into an accident but the fact of the blood-alcohol content itself.
A drunk driver is humiliated and destroyed even when he hasn't done any harm.
Drunk driving should be legalized.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?