« Interesting grousings about former Justice Stevens' recent grousings | Main | How much sentencing unfairness is resulting from Fair Sentencing Act pipeline disputes? »

October 19, 2011

"Lindsay Lohan Slammed: Probation Revoked, Jail Could Be Next!"

I consider it is bit perverse and certainly worrisome that I should consider any aspects of sentencing law and policy to be a "guilty pleasure." Nevertheless, as revealed by the headline of this post, which is drawn from this "Breaking News" report from E! Online, the sorrid stories surrounding Lindsay Lohan is sentencing catnip I just cannot resist.  Here are the latest details:

Looks like Lindsay Lohan's luck just ran out.  A ticked-off Los Angeles judge has just revoked the trouble-magnet actress's probation after determining that she screwed up one time too many times by failing to perform her community service.

A shocked Lohan was immediately cuffed and is currently being held on $100,000 bail. Lohan's attorney, Shawn Holley, informed the court that a bail bondsman was already on hand and tried to argue that her client not be cuffed in open court, but the judge said that was the decision of he Sheriff's Department.

Lohan was ordered to return to court for a Nov. 2 grilling to determine whether she'll wind up with another trip to jail. "Lindsay is hoping this matter will be resolved on November 2 and the Court will reinstate probation and allow her to continue fulfilling her community service," said Lohan's rep Steve Honig in a statement to E! News.

The drama all began this morning at 10:00 a.m. when Judge Stephanie Sautner made it clear that Lohan getting booted from her community service at the Downtown Women's Center violated the terms of her probation. The judge added that Lohan's reassignment to the Red Cross and the time she has spent working there will not count toward completing her community service. "No one has the power to change my sentence," Sautner said. "Not the volunteer center and not probation. She is not getting credit for any time at the American Red Cross."

Holley then spoke about how well her client has been doing as a volunteer at the Red Cross and that she was completing her Shoplifters' Avoidance class. According to a probation report, Lohan was "very cooperative at all times during the 12 hour program. She exhibited a very positive attitude and was more than willing to complete each and every written assignment on a timely basis. We believe that she has acquired new skills to resist the impulse to take things that don't belong to her."...

Holley argued that Lohan has a year to complete her probation. She revealed that Lohan had already called the morgue (the other portion of her community service) and was told her she could start tomorrow. Holley asked the judge to let Lohan do her 120 hours at the morgue and then her 380 hours at the Downtown Women's Center.

Judge Sautner proceeded to read the probation report in disbelief. "It says she is in compliance, but she has not done her sentence," Sautner said.  The judge then proceeded to revoke Lohan's probation.

October 19, 2011 at 03:11 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e20162fbc47db7970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Lindsay Lohan Slammed: Probation Revoked, Jail Could Be Next!":

Comments

Ms. Lohan is of course in some ways a very atypical defendant, but in other ways she is right down the pike. Rules are for suckers, and there's always one more excuse. I'm glad the public is getting a glimpse of what the routine is actually all about.

Posted by: Bill Otis | Oct 19, 2011 3:47:04 PM

"...completing her Shoplifters' Avoidance class."

I would love to hear the rationale on even having this 12 hour program. It sounds ridiculous. The cynic in me sees it as simply an unnecessary corrections expense to satisfy probation conditions.

Posted by: Robert | Oct 19, 2011 4:01:17 PM

Robert --

The main thing wrong with "Shoplifters Avoidance Class" is not that it costs money but that it's absurd. Everyone from the age of about five on up knows you don't take stuff that doesn't belong to you. This is just another way to avoid doing the only thing that has even a chance of registering with this overgrown delinquent, to wit, a goodly stint in the slammer.

Posted by: Bill Otis | Oct 19, 2011 4:20:47 PM

"We believe that she has acquired new skills to resist the impulse to take things that don't belong to her."

Does anyone know what this means or how these classes at least purport to help impart these skills? I'm trying to assume that this is to be taken seriously, although I'm struggling.

Posted by: guest | Oct 19, 2011 5:53:29 PM

no offense but her luck ran out when she got caught up in the american INjustice system! 7 years now of so-called probation over 2 mistermeaner offenses! it's retarded! now this criminal stupidity over WHERE she's doing community service. YOU want to tell me ANY other defendatn the judge would be watching this damn close! as long as the hours were done by the time limith..where IS immaterial as long as it's an approved facility!

she needs to tell this nazi shit judge to kiss off. SEND ME TO DAMN JAIL! till i'm done.. no more joke probation.

i'm going to jail and refuse to come out till i have served my time and at that point you and your system can kiss my ass!

Posted by: rodsmith | Oct 20, 2011 1:55:47 AM

this little bit of CRIMINAL STUPIDITY is gonna hang this judge if her lawyers are good!

"The judge added that Lohan's reassignment to the Red Cross and the time she has spent working there will not count toward completing her community service. "No one has the power to change my sentence," Sautner said. "Not the volunteer center and not probation. She is not getting credit for any time at the American Red Cross."


sorry last time i looked probation deparments across the friggin PLANET change community service assignmetns DAILY!

kind of makes you wonder what kind of deal he's got with the one he is DEMANDING she work at!

Posted by: rodsmith | Oct 20, 2011 1:58:05 AM

The funny thing about "Shoplifting Avoidance Class" is that the name indicates that blame belongs on the nefarious concept of "shoplifting" rather than the perp. It is not something you "avoid" like a speeding car coming towards you. It is just something you do not do. We have become a country of irresponsible wimps.

@rodsmith (and some others): Here is an article from from the conservative National Review which seems down your alley. There is a taste below.

"The larger point is that the entire American justice system is crumbling. The country has nearly 48 million people with a criminal record; it has half the lawyers and a quarter of the incarcerated people in the world, and annual legal costs almost as large as the GDP of India. Congress is stuffed with second-rate lawyers who pass grandstanding laws that clutter the courts with what other serious jurisdictions would consider frivolous and vexatious litigation, and the benches are infested with unregenerate ex-prosecutors."

Posted by: TarlsQtr | Oct 20, 2011 10:23:21 AM

nice tars! of course all it shows is "it takes a crook to know one!"

sorry i still say this is a total an complete waste of time prosecution. how many 100's of thousands if not millions has been wasted in these multiple court herarsing over minor charges not to mention the 7 years of attention from probation/parole and the assorted sheriff's offices

plus this judge shows he's bias every time he opens his mouth!

Posted by: rodsmith | Oct 20, 2011 10:39:05 AM

as for the article itself. while it has some good points. not sure why anyone think's he's a good writer. that was the biggest mis/mash i've seen in a while.

Posted by: rodsmith | Oct 20, 2011 10:40:23 AM

Some of the details get confused, but the probation department says she's in compliance, and she has actually been performing community service? Why is the judge worried about it if the probation department thinks she's on track? Maybe she is screwing up and the judge needs to intervene. But I always worry in these cases that the judges can't resist the limelight and are just looking for ways to create drama and raise their Q ratings. Judge Ito in the Simpson trial was sort of the poster boy for the celebrity judge who seemed to have one eye on the cameras at all times... not saying that's what's happening here, and obviously Lohan is a mess and probably screwing up somewhere, but I still always wonder if the judges in these cases are acting entirely on good faith, or are trying to maximize drama and conflict (like reality show producers or something!)

Posted by: CelebWatcher | Oct 21, 2011 3:00:54 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB