home

Lindsay Lohan Bail Denial Reversed, Release Imminent

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 08:11:02 PM EST
Tags: Lindsay Lohan (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Lindsay Lohan returned to jail today after a judge ordered her held pending an October 22 probation violation hearing for failing two drug tests since her release in June.

Lindsay's attorney, Shawn Chapman Holley, filed an appeal asserting the Judge exceeded his authority.

The reviewing judge has reversed no bail order. Lindsay will be released within hours.

Judge Patricia Schnegg, Assistant Supervising Judge for the L.A. County Criminal Courts, just threw Judge Fox's bail decision out the window. Judge Schnegg has set bail at $300,000. Lindsay, who is in Lynwood Jail right now, should get out soon ... probably in a few hours.

< Friday Morning Open Thread | Judge Authorizes CA Execution, Inmate Can Choose Drug Cocktail >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Lindsay Lohan Bail Denial Reversed, Release Imminent | 46 comments (46 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Just how many get out of jail free cards are (2.00 / 1) (#1)
    by BTAL on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 09:10:23 PM EST
    there in LL's deck of cards?

    Seriously, why can't she follow the rules and be responsible/accountable for her actions.  Everyone here would be.

    Not sure what kind of... (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 09:54:43 PM EST
    responsibility you want her to take, all she did was pee in a cup...no driving, no murder, no pillaging of any sort...just frowned upon pee.  Think about it BTAL, you seem like a reasonable sort.

    How many go to jail cards does the State of California have?  And who is taking responsibility for that mess?  These are the questions a tyrannized state/nation should be asking.

    Parent

    She broke the rules (none / 0) (#10)
    by BTAL on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 09:59:53 PM EST
    If you or I had broken the rules, then we (am assuming) that we would abide by the conditions at least until we were out from under the hammer.  By chosing to ignore the hammer (whether it is justified or not) shows her complete lack of understanding and/or maturity.

    As to whether she is an addict and needs medical treatment, IIRC she already had a bite at that apple.  

    Parent

    I'm guessing you don't have any (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by nycstray on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 10:17:23 PM EST
    close relationships with anyone who has an addiction problem . . .

    Parent
    "I'm guessing you don't have any" (none / 0) (#16)
    by BTAL on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 10:19:46 PM EST
    and you would be guessing wrong.

    Parent
    then you should be fully aware (none / 0) (#17)
    by nycstray on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 10:33:38 PM EST
    that a "bite of that apple" isn't always successful. and addicts cannot always control their behavior.

    Parent
    Fully aware. And you have to acknowledge (none / 0) (#18)
    by BTAL on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 10:36:56 PM EST
    that there are not unlimited bites of the apple.

    Correct?

    Parent

    Nope (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by nycstray on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 10:40:56 PM EST
    we cannot know how many "bites" it will take.

    Parent
    So, IOW there is an indefinate number of (none / 0) (#20)
    by BTAL on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 10:46:32 PM EST
    get out of jail free cards.  

    If you and/or a family member were on the receiving end of LL's DUI via an car accident - how many GOJF cards are you willing to offer up?

    Parent

    she needs treatment (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by nycstray on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 11:07:05 PM EST
    not jail and there should not be a limit on treatment. i thought it was pretty clear that was "the bite of the apple" i was talking about.

    Parent
    I think it's pretty much settled (none / 0) (#29)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Sep 25, 2010 at 12:05:36 PM EST
    that treatment only works when the person wants it to work enough, and I'm not sure there is any way to measure beforehand whether or not someone wants it to work enough.

    We only know if that person wanted the treatment to work enough when we observe that the treatment did or did not work, ie., after the treatment.

    One of the things that helps people to want treatment to work enough is when enough bad stuff happens to them from the drug abuse.

    My personal opinion is that the more bad stuff that happens to you from your drug abuse, the faster you'll reach your required level of wanting the treatment to work, such that it does in fact work.

    Parent

    Abuse? (none / 0) (#30)
    by squeaky on Sat Sep 25, 2010 at 12:19:41 PM EST
    Or use?

    Seems to me that is the question. At this point any use is considered criminal. That is a crime, imo.

    Parent

    I do (none / 0) (#41)
    by Socraticsilence on Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 09:17:03 PM EST
    and frankly I'd be okay with the way the system is handling this- with one exception why does she have a driver's license- she's a city with good public transit and supposedly has the money to afford a cab- why considering the biggest problem she's faced in the past was auto related is she allowed to drive while sorting out her addiction issues?

    Parent
    "You had your chance" is about as cold (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Anne on Sat Sep 25, 2010 at 05:14:49 PM EST
    as it gets, at least from where I'm sitting.

    You say you have experienced the addiction of someone close to you, but it doesn't sound to me as if you actually learned anything about the physiology and psychology of addiction, and are still under the impression that it's all a matter of will.

    An addict's brain does not work like everyone else's - how else to explain that many people are able to use and/or experiment with drugs of all kinds without ever developing an addiction.  Same with alcohol...millions of people can have a drink when and where they want, can decide whether or if the time and/or occasion is right to drink, have no problem not drinking, don't have to drink before events where there won't be alcohol served in order to "get through" it.  But some don't have the same experience.

    Going by the tone and tenor of your comments, I'm guessing you think it's just a matter of exercising control - except that control is the one thing the addict doesn't have.

    We can all sit back and look down our noses at Lohan for failing the drug test - for not being grateful enough for the breaks she's gotten to toe the one line the court set for her - but we do so as those who aren't addicted, who don't know what it's like to feel compelled do the very things we know we shouldn't.

    If there is a failing here, it was in releasing her from treatment after such a short period of time - it simply wasn't enough time for her to understand herself and develop ways of coping with the things that trigger her to use.

    Everyone hits bottom in their own way, but that doesn't mean the people who care about her, and the judicial system in which she is currently caught, can't influence when that happens.  It is impossible for someone using on a regular basis to think rationally until all the drugs and alcohol have cleared the body, and even then, it can be weeks before things start to click.

    I think the system failed Lohan, and what they ought to do is order her back to treatment; she's someone of intelligence and talent, and it would be a shame to see that go to waste.

    Parent

    I don't know man... (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 10:10:26 PM EST
    luckily I've never been in a "your urine please" probabation situation, just regular probation...I might put my faith in the GNC stuff like I've used to get work...you gotta live your life.

    "Breaking the rules" don't carry no water when the rules are broken...need a better reason to lock people up or take mad cash from 'em, to not be the arsehole in such a situation anyway.

    Parent

    She was released early from rehab (none / 0) (#24)
    by MO Blue on Sat Sep 25, 2010 at 07:49:12 AM EST
    The positive result came after the judge released Lohan early from inpatient rehab at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center.

    Even if Lohan requested it, the judge who authorized the early release IMO make a mistake. Also

    The actress is not entirely free. She will be required to wear an ankle alcohol monitor and stay away from establishments that primarily sell alcohol.

    Source: AP

    Parent

    BTW, thank you for the kind words. n/t (none / 0) (#13)
    by BTAL on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 10:06:35 PM EST


    Parent
    I'm guessing, based on her conduct, (none / 0) (#3)
    by Peter G on Fri Sep 24, 2010 at 09:27:02 PM EST