Paris Hilton was released from jail Thursday — nearly three weeks ahead of schedule. The move sparked an outcry from some elected officials and the City Attorney’s Office, who questioned whether Hilton was receiving preferential treatment.

“This incident with Paris Hilton is just the most recent that highlights the problems our criminal justice system has with making sure sentences stick, whether it is in a county jail or under electronic monitoring,” county Supervisor Don Knabe said. “Length of punishment belongs in the hands of our judges and when a judge imposes a sentence, that sentence needs to stick.”

Sheriff’s Department spokesman Steve Whitmore said the decision to release Hilton after just more than 72 hours of incarceration was made after “extensive consultation” with medical personnel, but he refused to elaborate.

The judge has ordered Paris Hilton returned to jail, and she was taken from court screaming.



  1. stew says:

    Also this was not a first time. She obviously did not see the problem. I am not sure she sees the problem yet. A number of commentators, not just on this blog, but world wide do not seem to see the issues here beyond “Paris”.

  2. Quiznoz says:

    That’s hot.

    (I’m surprised no one’s said that yet.)

  3. bobbo says:

    28–By “everyone” I meant everyone I have heard on tv commenting on the situation. Note, I am not stating what “everyone” thinks the punishment “should” be but rather as a historical FACT, what is the punishment routinely handed down. Anybody have different facts?

    And as a fact that not everyone reports, Paris’s conviction was for a “wet reckless” which is a step below dui.

    #24 – – dui is not the same as attempted murder. Arguably, it might be closer to “wanton and reckless disregard” but remember that dui and such is a “presumption” under the law based on alcohol measurements. Murder and such has to prove specific intent. Very different animals regardless of your manufactured outrage.

    #35— you go to my request for facts. It looks to me that most poor people would have gotten extended probation instead of jail. Yes, once in jail, poor people would stay there and the rich can pay for excuses. But once again, if poor, I can see a jailer releasing to make room for violent offenders. Yes, the GOUSA already leading the world in percentage of jailed people, needs to build more jails to fulfill our rightious anger and judgment!!!!!

  4. matrixghost1286 says:

    The New American Justice system v1.2007.6.8.0.0.1a,
    still some bugs to workout.

    I hear the train a comin’
    It’s rollin’ ’round the bend,
    And I ain’t seen the sunshine,
    Since, I don’t know when,
    I’m stuck in LA County Prison,
    And time keeps draggin’ on,
    But that train keeps a-rollin’,
    On down to San Antone.

  5. Jeanne says:

    Did everyone here miss the connection between Scientology & the Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca? And the speculation that maybe his illegal release of Paris was an attempt to recruit her into Scientology. Digg has more about this.

  6. OhForTheLoveOf says:

    #32 – dui is not the same as attempted murder. Arguably, it might be closer to “wanton and reckless disregard”…. …Very different animals regardless of your manufactured outrage.

    Manufactured? You ever scrape a little girl’s brains off a shattered windshield? It isn’t a hell of a lot of fun.

    Your legal point is technically true… But if you get behind the wheel of a car drunk along a long enough timeless, you will kill someone. We aren’t talking about harmless non crimes… like having a bag of pot, eating too many Twinkies, and watch late night infomercials… We are talking about operating a deadly weapon under the influence of alcohol.

    What a fucked up nation we live in where we have a Drug Czar and we fight an absurd War On Drugs because we are righteous people and we would never allow our moral fiber to be corrupted by a mind altering substance…

    …unless it’s the powerful status quo’s drug of choice, alcohol, and then no matter how deadly it is we’ll look for every possible excuse to discount the impact of the most widely abused and deadliest drug there is.

    And frankly, as a marijuana legalization advocate, I know the only true practical reason for not legalizing it is the lack of a reliable roadside sobriety test for it… and I think we need one and I think driving under the influence of anything that affects your judgment and coordination should be a felony.

    My outrage isn’t manufactured, but your lack of it is staggering.

  7. Arrius says:

    Ahhahahahah screw her. I was in jail just one night but I didnt want to be there either and I had no one to cry to about it had it been longer than that. She needs this if shes an adult and still crys to her mom whenever she is in trouble.

  8. sdf says:

    Because when I want news – I go to Digg…pfft.

  9. bobbo says:

    36—-Lets see. We have a legislated system of laws that are litigated everytime someone is charged. The well settled law, if not the great majority of people, do see distinctions between driving under the enfluence and attempted murder. You agree you are outraged. I think it is fair, although not unavoidable, to make equating these dissimilar things as manufactured as you offer no analysis.

    “You ever scrape a little girl’s brains off a shattered windshield?” –if I have or haven’t, what would such an experience argue for or against? I am saddened by every sparrow that falls, and outraged by every injustice. That doesn’t mean any X choosen equals any other Y.

    “Your legal point is technically true…” then you go on to argue in complete disregard? Calling that “manufacturered” would be a compliment.

    The lack of accurate roadside sobriety test for marijuana is NO REASON not to legalize it. Bad driving should be punished regardless of cause.

    Sloppy, very sloppy.

  10. Thomas says:

    #36
    Ok, I have to disagree. Attempted murder? There is no intent to kill. At best we might be talking involuntary manslaughter which I believe is what the charge is raised to when injury involved. Have you ever scraped a girl’s brains off a shatter windshield due to a stupid mistake by a driver? What about a driver that was speeding? Is that now attempted murder? No question that drinking and driving is a serious offense, but it is simply not the same thing as premeditated murder.

    Furthermore, you keep harping on alcohol when simply driving with insufficient sleep is just dangerous, just as common and unpunishable. People drive stoned or tanked up on medications all the time and never get punished. Frankly, the most effective method for stopping people that drive under any influence is an effective public transit system that allows people to get where they want to go on foot.

  11. Gwendle says:

    Just as a side note, the judge held the sherriff in contempt for violating the court order.

  12. bobbo says:

    40—Right you are. I’ve traveled a bit and public transport has always been an interest of mine. Public transport flows very naturally from the city planning that has gone on before. Hard for PT to be cost effective on a system designed for private auto’s==we simply don’t have the density distribution to enable it –in most cities.

    Edit to Post 39 as it was not taken. The lack of accurate roadside sobriety test for marijuana is NO REASON not to legalize it. Marijuana should be legal or not on its own merits, not because of a tertiary law enforcement issue, which by the way, if you can drive skillfully under the enfluence, why shouldn’t you? Target the behavior–not the morality. Then, get a decent public transportation system!!!

  13. Jägermeister says:

    Soap Opera.

  14. Mark T. says:

    Expect a new South Park episode starring Paris in jail. Or, as they would put it, starring that “stupid spoiled whore”.

  15. Undissembled says:

    44… who coughs up a strange white substance.

  16. Billabong says:

    45 comments on this bimbo? What a cuntry!

  17. Mr. Fusion says:

    #33, bobbo

    Murder and such has to prove specific intent.

    If you willingly get behind the wheel of an automobile after drinking then you show intent. Maybe not the specific intent for 1st degree murder of plotting to kill your spouse, but criminal intent to do harm. The same if I shot a pistol randomly in a crowded area. I’m not aiming for anyone, but if someone gets hit, … .

    Legally most states will classify this as something less then 2nd degree murder. I do agree with OFTLO that is it attempted murder if you don’t kill anyone, and murder if you do.

    But more important, OFTLO (and I) was stating his opinion, not giving legal advice. Most of us would agree that there are many actions that should be illegal and some illegal actions that should be reduced or legalized.

    And BTW, please don’t include me when YOU say “everyone”. Your effeminate friends might be all atwitter about Miss Glamor Queen, but definitely, I am not.

  18. Mister Mustard says:

    >>It looks to me that most poor people would have gotten
    >>extended probation instead of jail.

    Maybe in LA (if you say so). In PA, driving with a suspended (b/c of DUI) license will get you 90 days, no exceptions. No early release for “crying”. And that’s the FIRST time you get caught (none of this “sign an affidavit saying you won’t do it again, then put it in your glove box” bullshit). I don’t even know what the penalty is for SUBSEQUENT violations….most people aren’t stupid enough to try that one out.

    Christ. Put her back in jail, let her serve her time, and move on. It’s not like we’re talking about Ol’ Sparky here, or even the needle. It’s three weeks in the Celebrity Cell. The maid can keep her house tidy, the butler can feed the pet, and 23 (or 45, or whatever) days from now, everybody will be happy.

  19. NappyHeadedHo says:

    Boo-fucking-hoo

  20. Thomas says:

    #47
    > If you willingly get behind the wheel of an automobile
    > after drinking then you show intent.

    Someone that is under the influence has their judgment impaired. How can you claim that someone whose judgment is impaired is sufficiently lucid to have premeditated intent to cause harm? Driving under the influence does not show intent to harm but rather negligence. Negligent behavior is not at all the same thing as premeditated murder even if someone is killed due to that negligence. Were it otherwise, anyone that drives to a bar would be conspiring to commit murder by drinking at the bar. Bartenders would be considered accomplices to murder and so on.

  21. OhForTheLoveOf says:

    #50 – Someone that is under the influence has their judgment impaired.

    That’s their problem.

    Seriously… Do you guys have such uncontrollable drinking problems that you can’t just call a goddamn cab?

    As for the little girl… Yes. I did. There were parts in the back seat, parts on the hood, parts in the tree… You want to belittle that? Fuck you.

  22. mcjj says:

    I am not sure if you people ever been to hollywood, but eveone drives like a drunk out here. This is just the ugly side of pop culture.

  23. John Paradox says:

    RUMOR: Paris Hilton’s mother baked her a cake with a file in it

    a NAIL file.

    J/P=?

  24. bobbo says:

    Ahem: Relevant: Having a bearing on or connection with the subject at issue.

    Not Relevant–your opinion of what the law “should be” masquerading as current relevant analysis of what the law “is!”

    Not Relevant–the law in Jurisdictions outside of the one at issue.

    Not Relevant–attacking the sobriety of a poster as if they were behind a car instead of a keyboard.

    Not Relevant–the sexual orientation of the friends of a poster.

    Not Relevant–the traumatic reaction of an individual to cleaning up guts and brains after a collision to negating proportionate sentencing guidelines and the distinctions they are based on.

    Other than that, good discussion!

  25. Interesting heartless bunch who reads this blog, eh? The fact is this girl, who might be a jerk, is in jail for what? Did she kill anyone? Did she steal? She is in for technical reasons and all you winners are gloating about it. Just peachy. She could have just as easily been confined to house arrest for 60 days and that would be that. But instead a bunch of A-holes (rooted on by the mob) throw her into the slammer with herion dealers. Yeah, that’s so cool!

    You should be ashamed of yourselves.

  26. Thomas says:

    Then why sentence her to jail time at all? If we do not think that 45 days in jail is a proper sentence then don’t sentence her to that. It is ridiculous to have a 45 day sentence if you can spend it at home. The core issue is whether she’s getting special treatment and most people believe that she is. It is preposterous to have a 45 day sentence whittled down to two days.

  27. BertDawg says:

    DUI is not anywhere near the same thing as attempted murder, and anybody who says it is is allowing his or her emotions to override intellect. Emotional response to bad things happening by generalizing is one of many things wrong with our society. We have way too much government intrusion into our lives as it is. This is the sort or knee-jerk BS that leads people to try to enact legislation banning iPods in crosswalks because a couple people got themselves killed doing it, and thinks absolutely nothing about penalizing all the folks who somehow manage to maintain enough situational awareness to accomplish the act day in and day out without incident.
    We need to return to more personal responsibility and less government.
    We should change the DUI laws to reflect the effect of the infraction. If you drive loaded and hurt or kill someone, death penalty first time – no second chances. Put some damn teeth in it. That would certainly make people think about designated drivers, etc., before they go out drinking. Trust me, by eliminating the problem drivers, the problem will go away. On the other hand, I’ve known people who regularly met or even exceeded the present legal criteria for DUI (.08%, or even .10% BAC) who routinely drove in that condition all their lives , and because they were aware of the dangers and were commensurately more careful when doing so, managed to do it without endangering anyone.
    It’s like speeding – when I was young, the laws in my home state still said reasonable and prudent for the conditions. None of this arbitrary shit that is easily measurable and therefore easily enforceable, and takes no account of the QUALITY of an individual’s driving. If an individual has his ass in the driver’s seat, he or she should be responsible for any bad things that happen as a result of bad driving. Conversely, if he or she is an excellent driver and has good situational awareness of all the factors that come into play, the present system of speed limits is just so damned arbitrary. Our interstates, for example, were supposed be our autobahns. There are so many bad drivers on the road these days – folks who hog the hammer lane and don’t even do the speed limit (which causes other people to lose their grip and take aggressive chances to get around them – people who make sudden lane changes without signalling – people who drive erratically (speeding up and slowing down – but we focus on speed because it’s easily quantifiable. It’s just another revenue-generating device. IMHO, it’s the subjective things that the police (notice I didn’t say law enforcement officers?) should be focusing on – you know – REAL impediments to the orderly flow of traffic.

    Bottom line – I’m for LESS government and MORE personal responsibility. And LESS knee-jerk emotional responses.

  28. BertDawg says:

    In in the spirit of more personal responsibility – Paris Hilton – NOT HER PARENTS – should do the time.

  29. J says:

    bobbo & Thomas & John C Dvorak

    Thank god someone has spoke out against this witch hunt. Bold move and you have earned my respect for standing up for what is right and just.

  30. J says:

    Ok Thomas after readign the rest of your posts I remove you from my last post


2

Bad Behavior has blocked 4221 access attempts in the last 7 days.