Guest #1 December 7, 2002 Much more detail in this piece than I expected. The sentence was no surpise but the inflammatory remarks by the prosecution were. Winona Sentencing Hearing (Reuters) See also Winona Convicted Please keep in mind that it has been almost a year since she was busted. Justice delayed is justice denied..."The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #2 December 7, 2002 What a dumb bitch.... She could have bought the store then stole from it all she wanted.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RevJim 0 #3 December 7, 2002 QuoteRyder was convicted on Nov. 6 of grand theft and felony vandalism QuoteActress Winona Ryder was spared jail time on Friday for shoplifting thousands of dollars in designer goods OK, any one of us does the same thing at Saks, and where do you think we will end up? The verdit was right on, but the sentancing was pure and utter bullshit. She's now a convicted felon, that has not had to sit in jail and/or prison. Anyone else see a problem with that?It's your life, live it! Karma RB#684 "Corcho", ASK#60, Muff#3520, NCB#398, NHDZ#4, C-33989, DG#1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #4 December 7, 2002 QuoteMuch more detail in this piece than I expected. The sentence was no surpise but the inflammatory remarks by the prosecution were. Winona Sentencing Hearing (Reuters) See also Winona Convicted Please keep in mind that it has been almost a year since she was busted. Justice delayed is justice denied... That is funny. The dz.com link has a post in it from me where I say predict a sentence of "Small dollar fine with community service appearances. " Well, she paid restitution of the amount of the products that she damaged. Seems fair. She paid a little more in court costs. Yes, little. She has probably picked up the tab at dinner for more than that. She definitely stole over $5500 worth of stuff and damaged a $700 purse. The judge wants her to come to terms with her problem and accept responsibility for stealing. The "inflammatory remarks" were caused when the defense tried to say she was basically a good person because of her other good works. The prosecutor called them on their poor taste in mentioning the dead girl as an emotional playing chip. It is in bad taste. Of course, the defense attorney was "shocked". That is his job. Doing charity work does not mean that you can steal and expect everyone to say "Nice girl, just a little mistake." It was an emotional appeal in very poor taste. I am shocked that even the most jaded attorney would use something like that. The prosecutor just said what I would say. If I stole over $6000 worth of stuff, would I get $6000 restitution? No. No justice here. She was told to pay the store for the goods that she should have payed for to begin with. Most of us would get jail time, first offense or not. $6000 is grand theft. She is a thief. An attractive, famous thief, but most thieves will at least say "Yeah, I stole it." She is so f-ed up, that she doesn't understand that what she did is WRONG. Wrong. Recap. She definitely (no shadow of a doubt) stole the stuff. Her sentence - pay the store for the stuff and a miniscule fine. If anything is unfair here, it is that she didn't do jail time like the rest of us would. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #5 December 7, 2002 Hi, Jim... Actually, that was a typical sentence. According to what I understand of the laws, as it was not a violent felony, the sentencing structure allows for probation, fines, community service, and counselling. It follows what she'd been convicted of. The only reason it's a felony is because of the amount she stole. Had she stolen less than XX amount, it would've been a misdemeanor charge (IIRC...I could be wrong...legal eagles, please correct me...but I think the amount is less than $400, it's non-felonious). Furthermore, there generally would've been a plea offered and accepted had it NOT been Ryder, which may have garnered an easier sentence, such as a shorter probation, less fines, less community service time. It does create a record, and she will, if caught again, go to jail. This is not unheard of for a first time conviction. I think it's not even unusual. Ciels- Michele (edited to reflect a change in words from "fair" to "typical", because I don't know if I think it's fair...but it is typical). ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beeron 0 #6 December 7, 2002 Happythoughts.....I agree with you 100%. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #7 December 7, 2002 QuoteNo. No justice here. She was told to pay the store for the goods that she should have payed for to begin with. Most of us would get jail time, first offense or not. Actually, almost definitely not. Shoplifters rarely do jail time, especially if its a first offense. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #8 December 7, 2002 Of course, if she HAS to go to jail, I would like to do my part to relieve our over-burdened prisons by offering her space in my own home for her incarceration."Hey Winona, you dropped your soap! Aren't you gonna pick it up?" Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #9 December 7, 2002 QuoteQuoteNo. No justice here. She was told to pay the store for the goods that she should have payed for to begin with. Most of us would get jail time, first offense or not. Actually, almost definitely not. Shoplifters rarely do jail time, especially if its a first offense. I just think that $6000 of stuff is not like a pocket full of snacks or a steak. It is different than your general first offense. A lot of people have cars worth less than 6 grand. All the contents of my apartment add up to less than that. I was remarking on Mark's comment about "no justice". Mark can correct me, but I believe that he thinks that her sentence was too harsh or that justice was not served. I think that justice was served. Unfortunately, at the most minimal level. Restitution equal to the amount damaged is just paying for the stuff. How about all the other costs to the store? Guards interviewed, lawyers fees, investigations? Mark's original post in Nov questioned her guilt and characterized her as a "poor little starlet" type. She has been given justice. She is a thief. She was given the most lenient sentence available, even though the judge could not get her to admit that she did something wrong. The judge recommended counseling for her. Personally, I think 45 days in the pokey would have given her a reality wakeup call. Made her a better person. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #10 December 7, 2002 QuoteShe was given the most lenient sentence available, even though the judge could not get her to admit that she did something wrong. The judge recommended counseling for her. Personally, I think 45 days in the pokey would have given her a reality wakeup call. well you may be talking about justice as an absolute, in which case I'd agree. I'm simply pointing out that Winona's sentence was not more lenient than is typically given to other, non-famous shoplifters. Even if it is $6k. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #11 December 7, 2002 The beauty of being a kleptomaniac is that you can take something for it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #12 December 8, 2002 LOCK HER UP!!!!!!!!! The rest of us regular folk would be! "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rgoper 0 #13 December 8, 2002 QuotePlease keep in mind that it has been almost a year since she was busted. Justice delayed is justice denied... valid point, and legally correct. "grandstanding" and delaying court dates are a "standard" in the DA's offices everywhere in the country. i also think that if a crime is non-violent, why should it be a felony? this is b.s. now she has community service to deal with, and pay back the store (big deal) and a record that will haunt her the rest of her life. i guess she stole the stuff, haven't been following the story, but i do know the crime has long since passed the court date. the fact of the matter is she is basically a good person, she just made a misstake. who of us here has never made a misstake? Quote"let him who is without sin, cast the first stone." Jesus Christ--Richard-- "We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #14 December 8, 2002 Maybe she should be locked up, but i don't say that out of moral outrage...I just can't get these "Winona Ryder -prison shower" fantasies out of my head! Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtval 0 #15 December 8, 2002 thanks...now niether can I!My photos My Videos Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
