Jail PH for life

[Letum]

A good deed for the day:
http://www.petitiononline.com/Hilton/petition.html

[Polak]

If this petition goes through, it would be a giant leap for mankind.

[HunterICX]

Originally Posted by Polak

If this petition goes through, it would be a giant leap for mankind.

Jailed for life, that would get her media antention for a couple of years


I would say a petition to ''put her down'' would be more in order

[baggygreen]

as well as being more in order, isnt it kinder, to both her and all of us???

[Skybird]

That boring blonde's 45 days in prison is okay and no concern. But remembering to have heard of a sentence in California just some days ago: 25 years for shoplifting, I found this article which tells a story of a law they have in California that on the third time you get caught for something, no matter how minor it is, you end up what in Germany would equal lifelong prison. Note that all three offences are minor, and are separated by many years. Also note that it seems to be a systematical method, and no exception from the rule.

http://www.justicepolicy.org/article.php?id=424

Sometimes you can just shake your head. I have no doubts that there are enough upright ultra-tough law-and-order-types who even defend such crimes commited by a judical system. I shake my head about them, too. This is medieval punishement.

Schwarzenegger was on German TV maybe two weeks ago, on the matter of overcrowded prisons in California. He saw no need to rethink the laws, he also saw no reason to think about differing between high and low grade crimes, and what causes crime, and the enormous impact on california'S finances the immense prison costs are causing. His simple solution was: build more prisons.

Hopeless.

Originally Posted by Skybird

That boring blonde's 45 days in prison is okay and no concern. But remembering to have heard of a sentence in California just some days ago: 25 years for shoplifting, I found this article which tells a story of a law they have in California that on the third time you get caught for something, no matter how minor it is, you end up what in Germany would equal lifelong prison. Note that all three offences are minor, and are separated by many years. Also note that it seems to be a systematical method, and no exception from the rule.

http://www.justicepolicy.org/article.php?id=424

Sometimes you can just shake your head. I have no doubts that there are enough upright ultra-tough law-and-order-types who even defend such crimes commited by a judical system. I shake my head about them, too. This is medieval punishement.

I'd agree if the woman wasn't on probation and not have violated it on two occasions. She was on probation, which is the slap on the wrist and keeps one out of jail. PH thinks that the Hilton money is more important than the law. People with less means are given probation every day and are able to comply with the court order. The fact that she was not able to comply with the order is enough to give her 45 days in jail. W/O probation the sentence was a year. She is getting out easy.

[Heibges]

Prisons=Jobs=Votes

[robbo180265]

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Have any of you lot read the comments on the petition?

Here's a few samles:

Make this happen you steroid-fuelled-feely-feely-nazi. Ta.

THROW HER TO THE LESBIANS!

Nobody is above the law, especially talentless celebrities that are famous for .........er....what is she famous for again...?

This better outnumber the "keep her out" petition

Makes very funny reading

You can go back to the serious stuff again now

Edit: I lied about the serious stuff, I've just found this

http://www.urban75.com/Punch/paris-hilton.html

[Subnuts]

Paris Hilton shouldn't just be thrown in jail.

She should be vaporized and rendered an unperson.

[bookworm_020]

Originally Posted by Subnuts

Paris Hilton shouldn't just be thrown in jail.

She should be vaporized and rendered an unperson.

Well she is already unbrained! Could we create a list of wastes of space like her and see that they are redended life unviable in some way???

[Ishmael]

Here's my take on Paris Hilton:

"How Can I Miss You When You Won't Go Away?"

By Dan Hicks

Oh I talked to your momma & I talked to your dad,
They say they tried but it's all in vain.
I've begged and I've pleaded, I even got mad.
Now we must face it. You give me a pain.

How can I miss you when you won't go away?
I keep telling you day after day.
But you don't listen, you only stay & stay.
How can I miss you when you won't go away?

Your never-ending presence really cramps my style.
I dream that it won't always be the same.
At first I was attracted, but after a while,
Have you ever heard of the hard-to-get game?

How can I miss you when you won't go away?
I keep telling you day after day.
But you don't listen, you only stay & stay.
How can I miss you when you won't go away?

Out of six billion people, why must it be me?
Oh why, oh why won't you cut me loose?
Do me a favor and listen to my plea.
I'm not the only fish in the sea.

How can I miss you when you won't go away?
I keep telling you day after day.
But you don't listen, you only stay & stay.
How can I miss you when you won't go away?

I talked to your mother and I talked to your dad.
They say they tried but it's all in vain.
I begged and I pleaded, I've even got mad.
Now we must face it. You give me a pain.

How can I miss you when you won't go away?
I keep telling you day after day.
But you don't listen. You only stay & stay.
How can I miss you when you won't go away?

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Skybird

But remembering to have heard of a sentence in California just some days ago: 25 years for shoplifting, I found this article which tells a story of a law they have in California that on the third time you get caught for something, no matter how minor it is, you end up what in Germany would equal lifelong prison. Note that all three offences are minor, and are separated by many years.

Well the law covers if a person commits three felonies they are put away for "life" as a hibitual criminal.

The crimes this person commited were burglery (a felony) and Purse snatching which can be, but not always a felony depending on the criminal circumstances. The last conviction was for shoplifting which, in California is considered Felony Petty Theft which is covered in Section 666 of the California Penal Code.

An argument can be made that applying section 666 as a justification for sentencing under Prop 36 and 66 and 184 is not valid.

However the argument can also be made that this individual repeatedly commited crimes and showed no sign of stopping. While this case may seem harsh, I feel that the intent behind habitual offender laws is valid.

When arguing whether these laws are a good or bad idea, we need to remember that in these cases, the offender was in control whether they commited additional crimes. At any time after the first conviction, these people can make the decision not to commit any more felonies and have nothing to fear by the habitual offender laws.

If you don't want to receive a life sentence, then don't commit three felonies. How is society supposed to trust that a person who has commited three felonies will of a sudden stop and become a viable citizen?

How do you explain to the family of the forth victim that "well we really did not expect this three time criminal to commit another crime. So sorry, our bad"

Three "mistakes" is a lot of leeway to give a citizen before taking serious action.

So, it may seem like this person got 25 years for shoplifting sheets, but in actuallity, they got 25 years for being a hibitual criminal. As in the fable about the straw that broke the camel's back, one can't just look at that last straw.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Well the law covers if a person commits three felonies they are put away for "life" as a hibitual criminal.

The crimes this person commited ...

(...)

...for being a hibitual criminal. As in the fable about the straw that broke the camel's back, one can't just look at that last straw.

It'S simply beyond any reasonable scale. Hacking a thief's hand seems to be the more harmless penalty, than this, imo. Third time minor offence can get you more than high-violation crimes (sorry, i do not know all the exact English terms). If a three-time-shoplifter, juvenile age, causing a damage of let's say 50 dollars gets half his life being taken away, while a bank robber who wounded several people, or sexual offender may get away with less because it was his first or second only, then this is simply accepting too much injustice in the legal system, and shows the same acceptance of serious flaws in the legal system as is illustrated by the error statistics concerning procedure mistakes in cases that ended with death penalties. While I welcome increasing intensity of legal penalties in case of repeated crimes, "crime" is not the same like "crime", shoplifting of a perfum does not compare to a shooting incident, and fetching a trouser does not deserve 25 years - chances are that a drug baron will get far shorter penalties.

Richard Morgan, 25 years for shoplifting a baseball glove; Herman Clifford Smith, 25 years for trying to cash a forged cheque for $193; Gilbert Musgrave, 25 years for possession of a stolen video recorder; George Anderson, 25 years for filing a false driving licence application; Johnny Quirino, 25 years for stealing razor blades; Eric Simmons, 25 years for possessing three stolen ceiling fans. (...)

But unlike the three strikes laws operating in some other states, California's version does not restrict the initiative to violent crimes. Sixty-five per cent of those imprisoned under three strikes in California were convicted of non-violent crimes; 354 of them received 25-years-to-life sentences for petty theft of less than $250.

Absurd, and more criminal, in my subjective feeling, than the crimes themselves. Sorry, but this is a legal system that is running amok. Justice has nothing to do with it.

[bradclark1]

You can be a criminal here in Connecticut and if you have a lot of medical problems they will release you because they don't want to absorb the cost. I kid you not.

Originally Posted by Skybird
[FONT=Arial

Sorry, but this is a legal system that is running amok. Justice has nothing to do with it.
[/font]

Exactly. That is why you called it a legal system. Justice has nothing to do with it.
Dostoevsky called it 'Crime and Punishment'. I don't like it any more than you but that is what we have. At least we have the right to council and due process and the right to a jury.
For the most part the legal system, including law enforcement officers, are nothing more than tax through other means.