Paris Hilton on her way to the slammer.

[LouCipherr]

45 days is a bit harsh of a sentence, she should have to do at least 1 week. Most Drunk Drivers get off with 2 days jail on their first offense. It's not her first offense. It wasn't just drunk driving, but violation of parole - her license was suspended. Just FYI, my wife's brother was caught with a DUI, while his license was suspended, and he got six months in jail. If it was any of us, we'd have the book thrown at us - and they should do the EXACT same thing to this rat-faced bitch. She, regardless of her celeb status or money status, should be treated no different than the average citizen.

[DjfunkmasterG]

At the time she was caught for Drunk Driving her license was valid, it was then suspended by the court and she was caught, the scenario you are speaking about is being caught for DUI during a license suspension. This is not the case with Paris. Anyway, I still say she needs to go to jail, but any first offense is a minimum of at least 2-10 days in jail for a DUI and that is what she should serve. 45 days is excessive, and most likely the judge was doing it to be a headline maker. Now had she been like your brother in-law Lou, as you mentioned, I would say 45 days is not enough and she should do the same sentence as he did.

[AcesandEights]

This internet fan-based petition is an interesting idea, it makes me wonder if anyone has one going for state residents to turn into local legislature and the court demanding she be treated just as any other offender with regards to her sentence... Now that would be cool.

[DjfunkmasterG]

I wrote an email to the Governor's office this morning IN SUPPORT of her going to the Jail but I also stated California Law and Penalty for Drunk Driving, 1st offense. The 45 days was a bit excessive even per the law. I agree she needs to be treated like the average schmoe, and she needs to get locked up so she knows she isn't above the law. CA Law for sentencing of First Offense DUI - 1st Offense: Varies from court to court. Some courts do not require jail time on a first-offense, unless there are grounds for a sentence enhancement (such as a minor in the car, a BAC of .20 or higher, refusing the chemical test, or others). Other courts require some jail time (48 hours to 10 days), even on a first offense. The required alcohol education program will also vary. The standard program is once a week for 12 weeks; however, where the BAC is .20 or higher, a six-month program will be ordered.

[LouCipherr]

My bad, Dj - I thought it was the opposite. I thought she was caught for the DUI after the license suspension. (damn the short-term memory loss!) Either way, fu*k her - celebs get off WAY too easy in this world, and I'm glad to see the book thrown at her. It couldn't happen to a more deserving idiot. Call me an unfair prick all you want, but I still think if it was you or I, we would've rc'vd the exact same sentance, if not worse. I can't believe people are sticking up for this moron. You can cry "fairness" all you want, but there hasn't been "fairness" in a US courtroom in ages. This should not be a shock or surprise to anyone.

[DjfunkmasterG]

I agree 100% she should be treated no differently, but lets face facts her sentence was handed down because both the judge and the prosecutor are trying to make headlines. The Prosecutor announced his 90 day sentence request 2 months ago and it has been headlines ever since. If you are going to be that much of a prick, (the Prosecutor), then he needs to come down to reality and follow the law... the judge too.

[LouCipherr]

lets face facts her sentence was handed down because both the judge and the prosecutor are trying to make headlines. To what gain? To be forgotten about a week or month later after the media picks up another more interesting story for the glued-to-the-tv idiots in this country? I blame the public for this bullsh*t, not the people in the courtroom. It's the fu*king sharks in the media making a circus out of it - and why? because of the dumb asses that sit at home and eat this stuff up like Rush Limbaugh chowing down on an all-you-can-eat burrito buffet. If the general public wasn't stupid enough to follow this stuff on a daily basis, it would never make a single headline. Prime Example: Anna Nicole Smith. Does anyone REALLY give two fu*ks that she's dead? Seriously? Then again, maybe that's what they (judges & prosecutors) were counting on, I dunno. but what do these judges and prosecutors have to gain from this Dj? Their names are in the news, then forgotten about days later. The attention span of the average tv-watcher in this country wouldn't allow their (the judge and prosecutor) noterity to continue for very long at all. I see no 'up' side to this for them. If you don't beleive me, think about all the stupid decisions the courts have made and it was paraded around on the news for WEEKS. Now, name me 5, hell, even 3 judges or prosecutors names that were involved? Exactly. No one cares, their names are just a blip on the radar, so I don't know if I can agree with your statement. If you are going to be that much of a prick, (the Prosecutor), then he needs to come down to reality and follow the law... the judge too. C'mon Dj, realistically, when do courts here in the US "follow the law" anymore? That's a pretty comical statement if you base it in todays' reality. Hell, you probably know this from first-hand experience.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Well I am no innocent when it comes to being in front of a judge, every judge I ever went in front of gave me the punishment mandated by the law. I have only had two times when the punishment was reduced, meaning fines were lowered based on exceptions to the case (ie: fine reduced from $600 to $60 for a sound system violation as I was unaware there was even a law in PA at the time against your car stereo playing too loud, and also the fact the law stipulates after market systems only and mine was factory, so on appeal I got my money back. , the other was a speeding ticket in Virginia) Everything else was a punishment that fit the broken law, as mandated by law. Yeah I would agree that the stuff today is forgotten within a matter of minutes, but in order to make your mark in todays media it has to be something off the wall... a 45 day sentence for a first offense DUI is off the wall. Even by the California sentence mandates it is overly excessive. However, I do agree she needs to go to jail, maybe it will bring her into a reality check. I wold never jump on the wagon saying Free Paris... I mean that is setting the wrong example, and sets precendent that the state is going to condone her theatrics and drunk driving. I bet the people at MADD are going apesh!t over this debacle.

[LouCipherr]

Yeah I would agree that the stuff today is forgotten within a matter of minutes, but in order to make your mark in todays media it has to be something off the wall... a 45 day sentence for a first offense DUI is off the wall. In other words, you got lucky. :P Yeah I would agree that the stuff today is forgotten within a matter of minutes, but in order to make your mark in todays media it has to be something off the wall... a 45 day sentence for a first offense DUI is off the wall. I agree that's how you get your name out there - for the short-term - by doing something off the wall (which again, only gets you your 15 minutes of fame, then a lifetime of no one knowing who the hell you are), but at the same time, I think if you researched cases of people committing this same offense, I don't think you'll find that it's that excessive just for the sake of media attention. Drunk Driving, as the years go by, is being clamped down big-time. In my life, I've heard and seen first-hand some WAY excessive sentences given out to people who certainly did not earn it - but, again, that's why I'm saying that there is no "reality" in courtroom based judgements anymore. Had I been the judge, I would've have her 45 years if just for "The Simple Life" alone.