Maximum Term After Laughing About Murder

[Rhino]

Woman Gets Maximum Prison Term After Laughing About Murder Victim's Death
Thursday, January 24, 2008

TUCSON, Ariz. — A judge sentenced a woman to nearly the maximum prison term for negligent homicide after hearing a recorded jail conversation in which she made light of the bicyclist she killed.

Melissa Arrington... could have gotten as few as four years...but... Judge Michael Cruikshank sentenced her...to 10 1/2 years — one year shy of the maximum.

Cruikshank said he found a telephone conversation between Arrington and an unknown male friend...

During the conversation, the man told Arrington that an acquaintance believed she should get a medal and a parade because she had "taken out" a "tree hugger, a bicyclist, a Frenchman and a gay guy all in one shot."

Arrington laughed. When the man said he knew it was a terrible thing to say, she responded, "No, it's not."...http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,325146,00.html

[ThomasMore]

I read the short article. The woman told the court that she is remorseful.

But if I had gotten drunk and run over a cyclist, killing him, I would be distraught and devastated. I sure as heck wouldn't be wisecracking about "taking out" an innocent man. I don't care whether the guy was my worst enemy...much less, a total stranger.

The woman's off-the-record comments say a lot more than her self-serving statement in the courtroom.

I think the judge's response was appropriate and within the bounds of the law. The judge didn't have to have Political Correctness in his mind to go where he did -- her coldness showed that she obviously doesn't take getting drunk and running someone over very seriously.

[Air Force Guy]

For those that don't know...

Tucson has a never-ending problem with pedestrians and cyclists being struck by cars. Usually it's a hit-and-run deal, drivers aren't caught too often.

Fag, French AND a tree-hugger...I can see where that would generate a chuckle in many folks on this forum. Where's the ACLU on the phone-tapping involved here (unless Tucson jail phone booths clearly indicate that use of their phones grant a consent to monitoring)?

[ThomasMore]

For those that don't know...

Tucson has a never-ending problem with pedestrians and cyclists being struck by cars. Usually it's a hit-and-run deal, drivers aren't caught too often.

I hope that is not a justification.

Fag, French AND a tree-hugger...I can see where that would generate a chuckle in many folks on this forum.

Killing someone, then chuckling about it?

Where's the ACLU on the phone-tapping involved here (unless Tucson jail phone booths clearly indicate that use of their phones grant a consent to monitoring)?

I don't know whether they do, but any competent defense attorney should have considered whether the phone conversation could have been thrown out.

Sure, the ACLU could get involved, too. My point being only that that is what her lawyer is for.

[Air Force Guy]

1. It's not a justification for the defense, it's a justification for the prosecutor. I had no idea anyone would see it any other way.
2. Chuckling about the commentator's perspective on the issue, not about the death itself.
3. 'Competent defense attorney' is not a given in any legal situation...especially if the case goes pro bono/public defender.

[ThomasMore]

3. 'Competent defense attorney' is not a given in any legal situation...especially if the case goes pro bono/public defender.

True enough.

[Taylor1]

For those that don't know...

Tucson has a never-ending problem with pedestrians and cyclists being struck by cars. Usually it's a hit-and-run deal, drivers aren't caught too often.

Fag, French AND a tree-hugger...I can see where that would generate a chuckle in many folks on this forum. Where's the ACLU on the phone-tapping involved here (unless Tucson jail phone booths clearly indicate that use of their phones grant a consent to monitoring)?

Where's the liberal media with this?

[DeclinetoState]

If her victim had been a Christian conservative heterosexual Republican with a wife and children, and she had made a similar joke, the ACLU would be all over that judge like white on rice on a polar bear in a blizzard.

[Maggie_T]

Why not give her the death penalty since she finds death so amusing?

[DeclinetoState]

An appropriate punishment would be to make her listen Hillary's cackles 24 hours a day until she caps herself.

[Incident_command]

2nd DUI
Driving on a suspended DL
Vehicular homicide...
but it was the dumb comment that got her real time in prison. Our legal system is a joke.

[Uncle Ruckus]

An appropriate punishment would be to make her listen Hillary's cackles 24 hours a day until she caps herself.


........In a sealed room. Lights on constantly to further aid in the delirium. The subject must also be garbed in a straight jacket. For the sake of the prisoner I can only guess that death may be quick, but it will raise the ire of the ACLU, because this goes way beyond “water boarding’ IMHO.

[DoctorDoom]

........In a sealed room. Lights on constantly to further aid in the delirium.With the walls papered with posters of Michael "Shamu" Moore, Ted "Hold your breath, Mary Jo!" Kennedy, Nancy "Popeye" Pelosi and Helen "The Gargoyle" Thomas.

[DeclinetoState]

DoctorDoom has just insulted Shamu, Popeye and a gargoyle.

:evilgrin:

[ThomasMore]

DoctorDoom has just insulted Shamu, Popeye and a gargoyle.

:evilgrin:


ROTFLOL!

[ThomasMore]

2nd DUI
Driving on a suspended DL
Vehicular homicide...
but it was the dumb comment that got her real time in prison. Our legal system is a joke.

IC, I come down with the judge on this. Any one of the reasons you gave is plenty of reason to throw the book at her. The reason the judge gave is OK, too. To my mind, they are all of a piece -- she doesn't care how her actions affect others, even after she has already caused death.

It is not about being PC. If someone negligently kills another person, there is a penalty to be paid, but that is not as serious a crime as deliberately killing.

But if someone negligently or recklessly kills another, and treats it as a joke, that is (by law) a legitimate consideration how much the event was the kind of accident anyone could have, and how much a person's willful disregard for others' safety was in play. If you have accidentally killed someone and you can still joke about it, you obviously don't care very much about the damage you caused. For that reason, a lack of remorse is a legitimate consideration how hard a judge can punish.

In terms of public policy, (I am not talking to anyone here, but just making a policy statement) do you want someone walking the streets who doesn't give a rat's @$$ how they damage others? The law allows you to hit them harder, and if I was wearing the robe, I would do it -- for ALL of the reasons IC listed.

[Kathy30]

A woman hit a homeless man who went through her windshield. He was still alive. She drove home, parked in her garage and the next day when she was sure he was dead, called a friend to help dispose of the body. She too laughed about offing some white guy who was dying in her garage. She even joked later about having sex while he slowly bled to death.

http://www.wftv.com/sh/news/stories/nat-news-129327220020308-060355.html

We were to believe she was just a poor frightened woman.

[PrezLeefun]

Why not give her the death penalty since she finds death so amusing?

Yep.


Now sure plenty here will make fun of tree huggers, homosexuals etc.... but few would mock a death...especially if they caused it.

[ThomasMore]

A woman hit a homeless man who went through her windshield. He was still alive. She drove home, parked in her garage and the next day when she was sure he was dead, called a friend to help dispose of the body. She too laughed about offing some white guy who was dying in her garage. She even joked later about having sex while he slowly bled to death.

http://www.wftv.com/sh/news/stories/nat-news-129327220020308-060355.html

We were to believe she was just a poor frightened woman.

I remember that one. Put her away. Same reason.

[Air Force Guy]

An appropriate punishment would be to make her listen Hillary's cackles 24 hours a day until she caps herself.
She's protected against "cruel and unusual" punishment by law.

[ThomasMore]

An appropriate punishment would be to make her listen Hillary's cackles 24 hours a day until she caps herself.

She's protected against "cruel and unusual" punishment by law.

What about the rest of us?

[DeclinetoState]

"She's protected against 'cruel and unusual' punishment by law."

Yeah, but the Constitution is a "living, breathing document," don'tcha know, so I would think that a one-time exception could be made for Hillary's laugh.<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[ThomasMore]

But who will rule that? Chief Justice Ginsburg?

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/LAW/03/15/scotus.threat/story.vert.ginsburg.gi.jpg

BTW, here is a SHOCKINGLY good picture of Ginsburg, taken when she was an attorney for the ACLU.

http://www.aclu.org/images/ginsburg_intro.jpg

[DesertFox]

Broad juss needed a good horse f---, uh, never mind.

[Riverboat]

I can't make a dispassionate statement on the sentence until I find out if the victime was wearing bicycle pants.

Just kidding. Here's a personal anecdote. Exactly one year ago today I was hit from behind by a car on my way to school a few blocks away from my house. I landed on my ass, bounced around on the pavement a coupla times until I came to rest flat on my back. By the grace of God, I suffered not a single fracture, although I was plenty banged up. I couldn't walk without severe pain or support for at least three days. This occurred on a Thursday. I reported back to work the following Monday.

To her credit, the person who hit me was MIGHTY upset and rendered whatever aid and assistance she could after she called 911. I'm mighty thankful for people who are willing to take responsibility for their actions. To this day, my left elbow and my tailbone hassle me over changes in the weather and hard surfaces. But when I think how much worse I could have wound up, the pain sort of subsides.