Too far?

Re: Too far?

• ILoveBeachMusic member

  

  July 2020

  This is a poorly written article. IDK but if she refuses to sign something she will need to live with the consequences which in Kentucky is house arrest.

  Report0 Reply
• banana468 member

  

  July 2020

  So she's refused to sign and "didn't do anything wrong".  That's not the argument here.  Whether or not it's wrong to not sign does not change the fact that failing to do so is illegal.  
  
  Was this a great use of taxpayer resources?  Possibly not.
  
  Did she break the law? It appears she did.

  Report0 Reply
• GBCK member

  

  July 2020

  fuck them and the horses they rode in on.
  
  Truly, our society and our courts have accepted that in the interest of the public good, people who are a clear and prsent danger to others (and to a lesser extent, themselves) can be detained.
  They're getting off easy. 
  
  We can lock people away (in real ways, not just ankle bracelets) for implying they want to self harm, but I"m supposed to respect the location-autonomy of people who could KILL MY MOM by breathing on her?
  
  Like I said, fuck 'em.  I'm sure in a different day in a different year, I might be willing to discuss the nuance of this.  But until we're willing to look at some BIGGER issues related to incarceration and conservatorship?  these fuckwits should consider themselves off easy.

  Report9 Reply
• MyNameIsNot member

  

  July 2020

  Agree that the article is poorly written. It's wholly from the woman's side. The journalist didn't even pull the court documents or ask for comment from the sheriff. And there are sentences that
  
  AP suggests that the issue is that she refused to notify the health department before getting on any kind of public transportation, including a plane. Sounds like she was still trying to go to Michigan. 
  
  https://apnews.com/f85205a479ac9bd488faa6833030cd22
  

  Report2 Reply
• banana468 member

  

  July 2020

  MyNameIsNot said:

  Agree that the article is poorly written. It's wholly from the woman's side. The journalist didn't even pull the court documents or ask for comment from the sheriff. And there are sentences that
  
  AP suggests that the issue is that she refused to notify the health department before getting on any kind of public transportation, including a plane. Sounds like she was still trying to go to Michigan. 
  
  https://apnews.com/f85205a479ac9bd488faa6833030cd22
  

  Right.   She's essentially saying, "We stayed where we were supposed to stay," and is therefore hinging on that as her, "We didn't do anything wrong." 
  
  But there's a mandate she refused to sign which is therefore breaking the law.  If you don't want to be under arrest then don't break the law.
  
  You want to protest a law?  Protest it and hire an attorney.   But this isn't the way to take a stand - it's how to attempt to go traveling out of sight.  
  
  And what mom wants you when you're covid positive? 

  Report0 Reply
• charlotte989875 member

  

  July 2020

  Nope, not too far. Exactly the right amount. If you’re positive and still going to grocery stores/anywhere you’re putting others at risk. If there’s an emergency you call 911. Otherwise sit your ass inside and keep others safe. 

  Report6 Reply
• bubblylove member

  

  July 2020

  Thanks for posting the other article with more information. I was very curious the exact wording. 

  Report0 Reply
• short+sassy member

  

  July 2020

  I'm not speaking about this article specifically.  But the level of journalism integrity in our country has become so pathetic and slipshod, how can you (general you) even believe anything you read anymore?
  
  This is especially fresh for me because I was reading a news article last week...right on Yahoo's front page...that had bold-faced lies in it.  Not a "slant" I didn't agree with.  Lies.  Either the person the reporter was interviewing was lying and the reporter didn't bother taking 15-30 minutes to verify the story (probably this).  Or the reporter was lying.
  
  It was one of those articles about eviction moratoriums ending, where they always "highlight" 2-3 people's personal stories.  Just so happens one of those personal stories highlighted a New Orleans woman (I'll call her Jane) who was evicted and court-ordered to be out of her home on July 25th.  I KNOW how eviction court works here.  These were the lies:
  
  --Background:  A landlord files for an eviction.  The court date is set at the time of filing.  The tenant receives a notice on their door typically 1-2 days later.  The fastest I have ever seen a court date set up is 2-3 weeks, but it's usually more like 4-5 weeks.  Those are "normal" times.  But, KIM, the eviction courts were closed for 3 months and just started again in mid June.  I assume they are still backed up.
     --Jane received her notice on the door about court on July 6th.  The day I read the article was July 16th...10 days later...and her court case had already happened.  Within the realm of possibility by some extremely unusual circumstance?  I guess.  But more probably completely outlandish?  Yes.
  
  -- Per the reporter...which is info I assume came from Jane...the eviction court had ordered TWO things.  For her to be out of the home by July 25th.  And that she also needed to pay the property owner $3,199 in back rent.
  
  BULLS**T!!  Eviction courts here don't deal with monetary damages.  They only return possession of the premises back to the owner.  Believe you me, I WISH they handled monetary damages also.  But no.  That is a totally separate small claims case, which would be done after a tenant vacated.
  
  A money-grubbing city like NOLA would not let a property owner get away with one set of court costs when they could potentially get TWO sets of exorbitant court costs, even for essentially the same case.  No indeed.  Evictions are $191 in court costs.  Small claims are around 250 bucks, once you include the cost for service.   
  

  

  Report0 Reply
• ei34 member

  

  July 2020

  Too far?  Absolutely perfect, honestly.  Lol that the article was from the "victim's" perspective and she still came off 100% in the wrong.
  

  Report3 Reply
• mrsconn23 member

  

  July 2020

    ei34 said:

  Too far?  Absolutely perfect, honestly.  Lol that the article was from the "victim's" perspective and she still came off 100% in the wrong.
  

  This.  I'd say jail was too far, but home confinement and monitoring is the best solution to this fuckery.  
  

  Report3 Reply
• banana468 member

  

  July 2020

  mrsconn23 said:

    ei34 said:

  Too far?  Absolutely perfect, honestly.  Lol that the article was from the "victim's" perspective and she still came off 100% in the wrong.
  

  This.  I'd say jail was too far, but home confinement and monitoring is the best solution to this fuckery.  
  

  Right.   5 cop cars may be much but I wonder how much of that is over stated. 

  Report1 Reply