Guilty...Winona...Guilty

[Godiva]

Poor Winona was just found guilty...I never believed she was doing this for a movie role..But just make sure...can we pole the members here individually for your verdicts:)

 

 

Godiva...Guilty

[duke37]

Hey don't blame a girl for stealing something nice for herself!

 

Seriously though as a retailer I hope they throw the book at her. I can't begin to descibe the losses store owners suffer because in some circles it has become trendy by girls to shoplift. Apparently some of them don't outgrow the nasty little habit and get hooked on the "thrill". At least thats my guess on why she did it.

 

Oh yeah she was guilty all right. That store video should have been enough to convict all by itself.

 

Jeff

[+ glutes]

Now now, she was studying for a movie role!

I used that once when I was caught in a gay bar...

[Rick Munroe]

>Seriously though as a retailer I hope they throw the book at her.

 

OUCH! I hope it's paperback, Jeff. She has such delicate skin.

 

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2002/images/11/06/top.ryder.lawyer.jpg

[ad rian]

>Poor Winona was just found guilty...I never believed she was

>doing this for a movie role..But just make sure...can we

>pole the members here individually for your verdicts:)

 

Yes, but why not guilty of "burglary"? I see the larceny and the vandalism, but this looks like jury nullification to me! Does anyone believe that she did not illegaly enter the store with intent to commit a theft? Whhat was lacking - the illegal entry or the intent? I don't get it.

[Guest 7Zach]

worth a grain of salt, at most...

but she bought some merchandise in the store, so it's a stretch to me to say beyond a reasonable doubt that she had a bad intent when entered; plus, i have never heard of burglary being a charge cuz you enter to shoplift - the door's not locked, no breaking, but i guess that's a cal. quirk.

sorry she's guilty, but i thought so too. think she's talented, and as said, really pretty skin. a little more translucent skin, perhaps, than a twink butt, albeit close.

[+ Lucky]

In California, burglary is the entering with intent, there is no breaking required. Rarely is this charge included in shoplifting cases.

[ad rian]

>plus, i have never heard of

>burglary being a charge cuz you enter to shoplift - the

>door's not locked, no breaking, but i guess that's a cal.

>quirk.

 

The door does not have to be locked for there to be a trespass, if the entry was done with the intent to commit a theft. I agree though that the jury had some room to manoevre here. I just wonder if a single monm on welfare would have been given the benefit of that doubt in light of the videotape evidence.

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

She is guilty .. of VERY bad acting. I feel I am seeing the same character in every movie she is in. A bag of hair would do better in her next movie role.

 

----------

"Beware of the the devil my child in the dark rocky places he'll keep. Beware of the devil my child. Beware of his charming ways. You'll fall under a spell just looking at his beautiful face. You gotta build yourself a levee deep inside."

~ Natalie Merchant ~

----------

[MiamiLooker]

>...can we pole the members here individually...

 

And her punishment is that she has to watch?

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

Miami Looker,

 

>>...can we pole the members here individually...

>

>And her punishment is that she has to watch?

 

HOW CRUEL YOU ARE!!!!

http://www.besottedwithjeffrey.com/bj/images/caps/oc/lydia_14_small.jpg

http://images.goantiques.com/thumbnails2/YVE97661756AN.jpg

[Guest Bitchboy]

Sorry, but I vote guilty. I also think this will be good for her career. I sure will be going to see her next film. Let's face it, she'll be talked about much more for this than for Autumn in New York.:o

[+ Axiom2001]

There are SERIOUS issues facing us Americans. It's really too bad that so much publicity and news coverage was devoted to this young lady's situation and those facets that are IMPORTANT went by the wayside.

 

Bill Mayer stated that he really yearned to be back on tv to discuss this issue as well as those which really should be of concern to the people of these United States of America. There is so much irony and contradictions which lurk in our land. When will things change-- really change for the benefit of all?

 

If she committed the crime, she should do the time (in some form or another!

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

It's The End Of The World ....

 

Found guilty and not freed and the Republicans control the levers of power.

[Justice]

Guilty. I just wished the media hadn't covered it so extensively.

[Flower]

>Yes, but why not guilty of "burglary"? I see the larceny

>and the vandalism, but this looks like jury nullification to

>me! Does anyone believe that she did not illegaly enter the

>store with intent to commit a theft? Whhat was lacking -

>the illegal entry or the intent? I don't get it.

 

Obviously only the jury knows why they did what they did, but my guess is this:

 

1. The SPECIFIC INTENT to steal before she entered the store was required for burglary--that Intent is hard to prove (beyond a reasonable doubt)--arguably she could have walked through the doors without the intent but then decided to try it after seeing something she liked--who knows--but it was the prosecutor's job to prove the intent BEFORE entry and that is hard--so the jury may have felt the prosecutor didn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. I didn't see the evidence, but only saw the very damning videos on CNN or excerps thereof.

 

2. Even if the Jury believes she had the intent on entry, they could have had some other reason for a compromise verdict--maybe they all didn't agree and there was a trade off--all sorts of compromises take place in the jury room--They could have liked her (I do) and although felt duty bound for the theft charges since they were so obvious, but let her off on the burgalry since it required a SPECIFIC intent to steal BEFORE she entered and that was easier to say the prosecutor didn't prove..

 

Anyway, just my thoughts.

 

I am Flower :*

[Guest Love Bubble Butt]

What about punishment?

 

Guilty or not is only half the equation. What about her punishment? It's being reported that she most likely will not receive ANY jail time. I think that is wrong.

 

If convicted shop lifters started serving some type of jail sentences, maybe (hopefully) it would deter others from taking up the habit. It seems they always just get a slap on the wrist, especially if it is their first offense. Shoplifters cause all of us to pay more for merchandise because retailers have to cover/allow for certain percentage of theft.

 

She knew what she was doing. She's well off financially; she wasn't stealing because she was hungry. I say throw the bitch in jail for at least six months! }>

[ad rian]

>1. The SPECIFIC INTENT to steal before she entered the

>store was required for burglary--that Intent is hard to

>prove (beyond a reasonable doubt)--arguably she could have

>walked through the doors without the intent but then decided

>to try it after seeing something she liked--who knows--but

>it was the prosecutor's job to prove the intent BEFORE entry

>and that is hard--so the jury may have felt the prosecutor

>didn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. I didn't see the

>evidence, but only saw the very damning videos on CNN or

>excerps thereof.

 

She went with a kit that included a pair of scissors apparently. With the video, that is enough to prove intent for me.

 

>2. Even if the Jury believes she had the intent on entry,

>they could have had some other reason for a compromise

>verdict--maybe they all didn't agree and there was a trade

>off--all sorts of compromises take place in the jury

>room--They could have liked her (I do) and although felt

>duty bound for the theft charges since they were so obvious,

>but let her off on the burgalry since it required a

>SPECIFIC intent to steal BEFORE she entered and that was

>easier to say the prosecutor didn't prove..

 

I guess that jury compromise is polite for jury nulification, eh?

[Godiva]

RE: What about punishment?

 

Hey......I see a movie deal in the works...Well what do ya know..since she was training for a nonexsistent movie role that now exsist..she can play her self..Now lets see..I need someone to play the snoopy store security who peered through the slots on the door to get a better look and also the guards that ran after her }>

[Guest RushNY]

RE: What about punishment?

 

I have to admit i was shocked that she was found guilty of ANYTHING especially as the jury had the former chairman of Sony Pictures ,Peter Guber on it and that wasn't co-incidence ......:+

 

Well she will get a fine and community service which for a multi-millionaire movie star is basically a let off and she will go up a few pegs in the power list because of her 'notoriety'and she will benefit more than before ahhh Justice dontchya just love it....

[MiamiLooker]

BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. (Nov. 9) - Newly released court transcripts in the shoplifting trial of Winona Ryder revealed the actress was suspected of stealing from two other high-end department stores before her arrest at Saks Fifth Avenue in Beverly Hills.

 

Ryder was never charged in the alleged incidents at Barneys in New York and Neiman Marcus in Beverly Hills, according to the documents released Friday.

 

The Oscar-nominated actress was convicted Wednesday of felony grand theft and vandalism for shoplifting more than $5,500 worth of merchandise from Saks last December. The ``Little Women'' and ``Girl, Interrupted'' star was found innocent of a third charge of burglary. Her sentencing has been scheduled for Dec. 6.

 

The transcripts detail prosecution efforts during an Oct. 24 closed hearing to introduce evidence of Ryder's alleged ``prior bad acts'' into her shoplifting trial.

 

Ryder's attorney Mark Geragos declined comment late Friday, saying he had not been informed the documents were no longer under seal.

 

In the transcripts, Deputy District Attorney Ann Rundle argued jurors should hear about the three incidents before judging Ryder's behavior at the Beverly Hills Saks Fifth Avenue.

 

``We have videotapes of two prior instances wherein she is seen doing the identical conduct that they will see on the video in our case ... selecting items, concealing those items underneath heavy garment bags or underneath her own clothing, in and out of dressing rooms and ultimately walking out of the store without paying for the item,'' Rundle said.

 

Rundle told the judge that in one case, Ryder ``was seen by security selecting a hat, wandering around the store with a hat and then walking out the door with the hat on her head without paying for it, which is an almost identical act to what she is being charged with in this case.''

 

The instances occurred at Barneys on May 14, 2000, and Oct. 10, 2001, and Nov. 29, 2001, at the Neiman Marcus store in Beverly Hills, Rundle said. How those stores handled the incidents, including whether guards confronted Ryder or only observed and videotaped her, was not stated in the transcripts.

 

In defense arguments, Geragos said Ryder has ``never been detained. She's never been arrested.'' He claimed the prosecution was just trying to ``throw in more garbage'' because it had a weak case.

 

Superior Court Judge Elden Fox ruled against letting jurors hear of the prior acts, saying the evidence ``would impair the defendant's ability to have a fair trial.''

 

The judge released the transcripts of the closed hearings in response to a state appeals court decision in a case brought by The Associated Press, the Los Angeles Times and Los Angeles Daily Journal.

 

In an unrelated matter, the Los Angeles County Probation Department confirmed Friday that a copy of Ryder's ``pre-conviction report'' was missing from the department's Santa Monica office. Such a report normally contains information on a person's marital and financial status, medical history, criminal record if they have one, and the department's sentencing recommendation.

 

Backup copies of the copies exist, however, said Ken Kondo of the department.

 

Ryder faces a possible three-year prison term, though prosecutors have said they'll seek probation, community service and restitution.

 

11/09/02 16:10 EST

 

Copyright 2002 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.

[Godiva]

Winona Sentencing...Highlights

 

36mnths Probation

1 day in county jail which she was credited for

Fine of $2700 by 1/31/02 to California

Fine of $1000 for restitution

Fine of $6000 to Sax

480hrs of community service broken down into various charities

Drug counseling

Search and Seziure anytime

 

She has 60 days to appeal

 

The rest was Blahh... Blahh.... Blahh

 

My only concern was that the judge stated before that he did not want to treat her better or worse than anyone else..Then he goes on to share his sons thoughts about why she did what she did. Would he have brought that up if she was some Suzzie Schmoe on the street??

[ad rian]

I loved the feisty prosecutor who objected to Wynona's attempts to get credit for community service based on her prior work with some victim rights group. The prosecutor said words to the effect of, "I object to her coming in here and trying to get special treatment over the body of some dead child." At which point Wynona Ryder, nee Horowitz, stood up and had a Diva moment! She showed no remorse, and kept mumbling to her lawyer who didn't ever seem to tell her that the microphone was on.

[Guest Bitchboy]

At which point Wynona Ryder, nee Horowitz, stood up

>and had a Diva moment

 

 

LOL, is anyone surprised by that post?

[ad rian]

>At which point Wynona Ryder, nee Horowitz, stood up

>>and had a Diva moment

>

>

>LOL, is anyone surprised by that post?

 

Are you saying that was not her name?