That's all the lunatic who drove her car on the Interstate in Ohio while breast-feeding got. 90 days house arrest, and a $300 (or possibly $500, the newspaper accounts differ) fine. And a prohibition against driving without a license (aren't there laws for that? Oh, right: that's one of the things she was convicted of), two years probation, and a mental health evaluation. Well, she certainly needs that last one.
The prosecutor wanted the penalty to include jail time, but said he's glad it's over: "I hope the circus is done ... I think the judge was very tolerant of her, more than I would've been. Obviously a three-day trial and a half-day sentence [hearing] is more than enough for a misdemeanor."
Naturally, she's going to appeal, so the judge has stayed the sentence until the appeals are completed. Difficult to see any reasonable grounds for appeal, but then, there weren't any reasonable defenses offered at trial, so I suppose it evens out. And she's already filed some sort of appeal back in September, on the grounds that she had ineffective assistance of counsel. While I'd certainly agree that her trial representation was suspect at best, that's because she refused the counsel that had been appointed by the court and freely chose to represent herself. Perhaps she's trying to break new ground by applying the concept of res ipsa loquitur to ineffective assistance claims.
It's fun to see how different reports pick up different tidbits. While the wire reports got just the facts, this local reporter noted that she is a Michigan graduate who also attended the Naval Academy (not the stability I'd like to see in our military officers), and that she's at least two other confrontations with state police before, once when she and her "partner" were pulled over for not having valid license plates. (Given the strictures of their "religion," I can only wonder who was driving.) And another local reporter noted that in one of those incidents, on Sept. 12, 2001, in Maryland, police found two loaded handguns in the locked console compartment of their vehicle, and that charges are pending for transporting and handling of firearms in a motor vehicle. Given what happened the day before and not that far away, I imagine those police officers were not happy wth their discovery.
At one point during the sentencing hearing, the judge asked, "If you want to be left alone, why would you do things to bring attention to the police officers involved to pull you over? It's almost like ... you are playing a little game, like a constitutional chess game, with officers who might pull you over on the side of the road - and that you get some sense of adventure out of it all." Well, sure: the adventure, and the repeated fifteen minutes of fame they get.
And it's also been interesting to see how quite a few of the articles are now referring to the baby's father as the defendant's "partner" or "companion," where they had referred to him as her "husband" in the news accounts over the summer. Well, sure: the couple refer to themselves as married, although they had done so without the formality of a wedding license. Perhaps the reporters are also wondering whether the dissolution of the husband's previous marriage was also done without the formality of a divorce through the courts, if it was done at all.
You know, you couldn't write something this strange in a novel and expect to get it past your publisher. But it will be fun to see where this goes next - because you know this can't be the end of the tale.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment