Girl, 17, jailed for ringing phone

Newsday ^ | Rick Brand

[brianl703]

"My doctor told me to get rid of it - I crushed the metatarsal bones in my right foot when I dropped it there one day ;)"

I've always thought that the bag phone I have would also make a nice weapon, it's that heavy. I mostly keep it in the car and it's only costing me $8/month on a prepaid plan to keep it active (I might use it for 10-15 minutes a month, if that).

[Joe Hadenuf]

Joe, it's interesting to note that many of the posters defending this out of control judge are the same ones that support and defend our government's open borders agenda and all the lawlessness, crime, fraud, and mayhem associated with it.

It should be enought to make anyone gag.....

[beezdotcom]

Joe, it's interesting to note that many of the posters defending this out of control judge are the same ones that support and defend our government's open borders agenda and all the lawlessness, crime, fraud, and mayhem associated with it. Apparently Party affiliation trumps all common sense and sense of fairness.

Nice straw man. Too bad it won't stand up on its own.

To help it stand, you'll have to cite examples of the "many of the posters" that take these conflicting positions. If you're right, it should be easy to do.

You also shouldn't confuse "supporting an out-of-control judge" with "in the absence of more information, siding with a judge over a confirmed drug-abusing scofflaw".

Besides, as was mentioned previously in post 234 AND the article, she was serving the 21 days at the same time as the 45 days for the drug charge. So, in essence, he went easy on her, because if he REALLY wanted to be a jerk, he could have ordered her to serve it consecutively.

[Joe Hadenuf]

Joe, it's interesting to note that many of the posters defending this out of control judge are the same ones that support and defend our government's open borders agenda and all the lawlessness, crime, fraud, and mayhem associated with it.

Man, that's the turth.

[4.1O dana super trac pak]

She was sentenced to the 21 days for contempt before she was found guilty of the drug charge.

It is impossible to say whether the judge would have went 'easy on her' if she went to trial or was found innocent of the drug charges.

[Biblebelter]

This girl is and was too comfortable. She is a product of society where shame, fear, guilt, and corporal punishment are deemed too harsh for a civilized society. She is a probably public school student who is too uneducated to operate a voting machine or a cell phone. I personally cannot disagree with the generalization that the court system has a lot of lousy judges who go from one extreme to other. But people who are terminally stupid often find themselves at the mercy of people who may or may not be a jerk. The only fear this girl has is being unable to feed her momentary impulses to do what she wants to do exactly when she wants to do it. She has no fear that she is on track to lead a life of misery where she seems to be always butting heads over authority issues pertaining to things which have little signigicance in the larger scheme of things. She will be a drag on society and consume far more than she ever produces. But she will keep the liberal base viable and provide a host for the parasitic lawyers who feed on the underclasses.

[WRhine]

Nice straw man. Too bad it won't stand up on its own.

It's not a straw man. It's an Observation. An Observation based on the past histories of a number of posters here that defend and/or make excuses--at every turn--for the lawlessness that illegal immigration breeds in America but suddenly get righteous about "the law" when a hot-tempered judge hands down an extreme penalty for a frivolous infraction.

To help it stand, you'll have to cite examples of the "many of the posters" that take these conflicting positions. If you're right, it should be easy to do.

LOL. Oh, I see, I have to PROVE the validity of my observation to YOU. I have a better idea. Why don't YOU follow some of these characters around for awhile and watch them in action. Should be an eye-opening experience for you.

[beezdotcom]

LOL. Oh, I see, I have to PROVE the validity of my observation to YOU.

You don't have to do anything of the sort. I'm not your daddy.

But your Observation served to dismiss those (like myself) who might have valid reasons for leaning in favor of this judge, by lumping them in with those who are soft on illegal imiigration (unlike myself).

Sure, you can say that "you weren't talking about me", and that I'm jumping to conclusions. Perhaps. However, by being NON-specific in your Observation, it could easily lead people to think that you were making such a generalization - and you darn well know it.

[beezdotcom]

It is impossible to say whether the judge would have went 'easy on her' if she went to trial or was found innocent of the drug charges.

A refreshing viewpoint - yes, it is indeed "impossible to say".

That doesn't seem to stop people from instantly siding with the girl over the judge, despite the lack of information.

[Bullish]

This should read: Girl, 17, jailed for being an idiot.

[dalereed]

"If I was convicted for everytime I forgot to turn off the cell ringer I would have a lengthy criminal record by now."

Sounds to me like you need a couple of years in the slammer.

Maybe we could even fit you into the 3 strikes law and you could do 25 to live!

[mrfixit514]

the judge should be thrown in jail for being a jerk.

And you should go to DU. They probably think that the Right to A Cell Phone is mentioned in the Constitution. Or maybe they think it is a natural right (similar to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness).

Get lost you whiner.

[mrfixit514]

You know how many times I have shut off a cell phone and it either came right back on and I accidently failed to fully depress the button?

The judge gave them instructions that if they weren't sure how to turn if off to destroy it. You don't need a cell phone inside a court room. You don't need a cell phone at all. The only AH's around here are you and the other AH who don't want anyone telling you what to do. Grow up you AH.

[mrfixit514]

You're right the judge is a cantankerous old jerk, whose arrogance is only exceeded by the size of his head band. A misdemeanor offence gets the max of 45 days? Nice going, her next possession arrest will no doubt be a felony. Happy Holidays from the government. If they aren't taking it out of your pocket, their shoving it up your a$$, IMHO.

You need to learn what IMHO means.

[Once-Ler]

the judge should be thrown in jail for being a jerk.

She was warned to turn off the cell phone. It is a court room where she is not the center of attention. The punishment was correct.

[sweetliberty]

"If I was convicted for everytime I forgot to turn off the cell ringer I would have a lengthy criminal record by now."

Yes; being smacked about your head and ears by the people around you would likely be much more effective.

I have to spend a lot of time in court. That is one of many places where a ringing cell phone does not belong. Movie theaters are another. Rarely a day goes by that I don't run across some ill-mannered moron being rude with a cell phone. I have come very close to telling a couple of them just where I'd like to stuff it.

[Joe Hadenuf]

The only AH's around here are you and the other AH who don't want anyone telling you what to do

Hey mrfixit, guess who all of our cops and judges new boss may be in the very near future?

Bush's new candidate for the Attorney General of the United States belongs to a group named La Raza! Know what the slogan for this group is?

"For those within 'the race,' everything; for those outside 'the race,' nothing"

Boy, there's some real justice for you mrfixit! You'll be taking orders from a card carrying racist!

[WRhine]

"LOL. Oh, I see, I have to PROVE the validity of my observation to YOU."

You don't have to do anything of the sort. I'm not your daddy.

huh? Do you recognize the below statement in quotes?

"To help it stand, you'll have to cite examples of the "many of the posters" that take these conflicting positions. If you're right, it should be easy to do."

Sure, you can say that "you weren't talking about me", and that I'm jumping to conclusions. Perhaps. However, by being NON-specific in your Observation, it could easily lead people to think that you were making such a generalization -and you darn well know it.

I thought it in good taste not to name names and start a Flame War. OK, perhaps instead of saying "most" I should have said "some".

[beezdotcom]

huh? Do you recognize the below statement in quotes?

Perhaps you're right. I should have said "In order to convince me, you have to...."

Clearly, you have no obligation to convince me of anything. But yes, if you wanted me to consider your observation valid, I would expect to see examples of said observation. I hadn't made the same observation, therefore I felt no particular compulsion to try to validate YOUR observation - the burden would be on you, at that point. Since it was represented as a generalization, I already knew of at least one case where it wasn't valid - myself.

[luckystarmom]

I agree. Sometimes you think your cell phone is turned off (or at least on vibrate) and it isn't.

My brother died a few months ago. I thought I had turned my cell phone to vibrate, and it went off in the middle of the memorial service for my brother. At least, everyone there knew I had traveled to Texas from California and had three kids at home with dad. Everyone thought my husband had called, but it was a cousin who called instead to offer his sympathy.