Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

LostEnroute t1_j65czkx wrote

Hmm, sounds like the judge disagrees with the all Reddit Experts from last week.

41

ShatteredAvenger t1_j64wr1d wrote

comments made were in fact tasteless and dumb, but nobody should get in trouble over saying dumb shit online. Good move.

35

hambone012 t1_j68zuvz wrote

That’s a dangerous statement my friend

−7

ShatteredAvenger t1_j6a0nt7 wrote

stand by it. I don’t determine “getting shunned by people” as getting in trouble, but nobody should go to jail for shitty sentiments on a facebook page.

4

[deleted] t1_j64wwha wrote

[deleted]

20

James19991 t1_j65d8dh wrote

Totally agree. I think she's an extremist too, but the things she said did not rise to the occasion of being specific enough to warrant an arrest for threats.

7

Redditmedaddy69 t1_j66u3od wrote

FBI: plz don't lock her up she rats on dozens of people for us every year

Judge: you got it dude

18

thereandfatagain t1_j65gfcp wrote

Zapp is elected trash the county refuses to kick to the curb so he just festers like a malignant dumpster tumor.

12

Alt_North t1_j65miw1 wrote

Son of a late state Supreme Court justice of the same name, appointed to fill a vacancy before perpetually reelected.

6

LostEnroute t1_j65rayx wrote

I thought you agreed with him in this instance? You were very eager for her to be jailed over her words. Not on the DAs side now?

1

Alt_North t1_j66v6o6 wrote

Zappala and Dawson? To me they're on the same side trying to trigger the same war. You think the DA was dumb to kick off his reelection effort by persecuting an arsonist who can't stop spouting death threats? He must see her as a gift that keeps on giving. But I NEVER said I wanted her jailed; jail could only make her worse, and make her a martyr making everything worse. I only wanted people to stop defending her actions.

3

yinzdaddy t1_j68i96z wrote

That 1st officer is really really red. Someone get that man some sunscreen

3

Gladhands t1_j68mw0j wrote

As I said in the first post, it’s highly unlikely anyone under the age of 50 would say “off the pigs”. Young people just don’t use “off” to mean murder. It’s far more likely that she typed “eff the pigs” and it autocorrected to “off”.

−2

anonymouspoliticker t1_j65ju75 wrote

She was delinquent with paying 5k in electronic monitoring fees and the motion to detain got her to pay up. Nice job Zappala

−11

PoorGuyCrypto t1_j6606gx wrote

"Monitoring fees" are immoral.

16

anonymouspoliticker t1_j6641m8 wrote

Why? It's an alternative to being in jail and it needs to be paid for somehow.

−3

PoorGuyCrypto t1_j664dvi wrote

For the same reason we don't charge prisoners rent for being in prison.

The state imposes and enforces the law. The state can pay for it.

Monitoring fees, probation fees, and things of the like can prevent someone from getting their life together - and create new "crimes" out of not having enough money.

Being broke should NEVER be criminalized.

23

69FunnyNumberGuy420 t1_j69ppgt wrote

Maybe Dawson and people like her are correct about what a shithole this nation is.

3

anonymouspoliticker t1_j6idt16 wrote

None of those are criminalizing being broke as they are all only applicable to people duly convicted by their peers. Criminalizing being broke would be like charging money for a public defender (but they are free). They owe a debt to society in a similar way that someone who parks in a fire line and gets ticketed does.

0

PoorGuyCrypto t1_j6ifnbv wrote

Fines and tickets are one-time fees based directly on the violation.

Charging someone a monthly "monitoring fee" in a system where people convicted of a crime can only get the lowest-paying jobs is completely immoral.

Charging them with further crimes for their inability to pay those monitoring fees is disgusting.

1