humor break
I would have thought they would have taken the stolen merchandise away from her.
1 posted on
04/07/2003 12:33:27 PM PDT by
knak
To: knak
I would have thought they would have taken the stolen merchandise away from her. I was thinking the same thing.
2 posted on
04/07/2003 12:37:40 PM PDT by
PetroniDE
(Have Sign, Have Bullhorn, Will Freep -- WAR ON !!!)
To: knak
Her shyster lawyer Geragos must be on crack. She can't legally auction what isn't hers.
3 posted on
04/07/2003 12:37:52 PM PDT by
martin_fierro
(Mr. Avuncular)
To: knak
she could dispose of the merchandise by holding a charity auction
She would get all her court fees back in the form of a tax write-off.
4 posted on
04/07/2003 12:38:38 PM PDT by
Fraulein
To: knak
Ok...I'm dumbfounded!!!
6 posted on
04/07/2003 12:39:36 PM PDT by
Focault's Pendulum
(I just got a new job....I supervise putting the Braille on drive thru MAC machines)
To: knak
Didn't know you got to keep what you steal either. With lawyer/court costs what they are and the cost of the clothes (assume this is restitution), the fines were only $4500 over the amount of the clothes.
amazing, it must be good to be a Hollywood queen
7 posted on
04/07/2003 12:39:55 PM PDT by
rebel85
To: knak
knows no shame.
still if she's confused and hurt and needs a shoulder, I'll be there.
/something about whacko women
9 posted on
04/07/2003 12:41:57 PM PDT by
kinghorse
To: knak
If this is accurate
Ryder, sentenced on December 6, 2002 for shoplifting from Saks Fifth Avenue, had to pay $10,000 in fines and restitution and became owner of the property.
Then she owns the clothes. What's the judges problem ?
10 posted on
04/07/2003 12:42:14 PM PDT by
stylin19a
(oh to die peacefully in my sleep like my uncle-not screaming in terror like his taxi passengers)
To: knak
She won't have a wardrobe left if she autions off the clothes that she stole.......
11 posted on
04/07/2003 12:44:05 PM PDT by
b4its2late
(I know what's best for you.)
To: knak
"Ryder, sentenced on December 6, 2002 for shoplifting from Saks Fifth Avenue, had to pay $10,000 in fines and restitution and became owner of the property."
Looks like she had to pay for it (the "restitution" part of the 10 grand).
To: knak
What's her problem? She doesn't want to face the evidence of her guilt everyday? Or maybe her ill-gotten gains aren't considered today's style, hmn?
To: knak
Boy, their loss prevention department sure is crappy!!
17 posted on
04/07/2003 12:49:23 PM PDT by
BSunday
(Two words, Saddam - Buh-bye)
To: knak
Oh give me a break. Judge Fox praises her for completing her court ordered community service. Another pampered celebrity,I'm suprised they didn't give her a ticker tape parade. And the Clinton's lawyer of choice,Geragos, wants to hole an auction for the filched merchandise. Only in La,La land could this be happening.
18 posted on
04/07/2003 12:50:27 PM PDT by
MaggieMay
(A blank tag is a terrible thing to waste)
To: knak
Tomorrow's headline today:
Prima Donna Winona Gonna Wanna Getta Manna!
22 posted on
04/07/2003 12:57:47 PM PDT by
Revolting cat!
(Subvert the dominant cliche!)
To: knak
If she's really the owner of the syuff, I deny the judge's authority to decide on what she can do with it.
24 posted on
04/07/2003 1:03:32 PM PDT by
Sloth
("I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!" -- Jacobim Mugatu, Zoolander)
To: knak
...included Valium and Diazepam.One and the same, no?
FMCDH
To: knak
They aren't her's to auction off.
To: knak
Ryder, sentenced on December 6, 2002 for shoplifting from Saks Fifth Avenue, had to pay $10,000 in fines and restitution and became owner of the property.
33 posted on
04/07/2003 3:04:47 PM PDT by
Junior
(Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson