Lindsay Lohan case: No deal in sight as she returns to court
As Lindsay Lohan faces a judge Wednesday morning, sources told the Los Angeles Times she was not close to a plea deal.
Sources familar with the case told The Times that prosecutors were unlikely to accept a settlement in the case without some amount of jail time.Lohan's attorney has said the actress might be willing to plea bargain in the theft case if she were to receive no jail time. Lohan is accused of stealing a necklace from a Venice jewelry store.
Dmitry Gorin, a veteran former prosecutor, said Lohan's attorney Shawn Chapman Holley would have a hard time avoiding another trip to jail for her client. He noted that Lohan was already on probation for a 2007 conviction for driving under the influence. If she were to receive probation after being charged with a felony, Gorin said, the district attorney could face accusations of giving Lohan special treatment.
Her attorney, Shawn Chapman Holley, has said she is willing to consider a deal.
"Ms. Lohan maintains her innocence, and now that I've seen the police reports, I believe the case is entirely defensible," Holley said in an interview with CNN last week. "Having said that, we will entertain a discussion concerning a plea if it means no jail so that she can move forward with her recovery and her career."
The actress entered a plea of not guilty in the case before Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Keith L. Schwartz, but the judge immediately revoked her probation related to a 2007 drunk-driving conviction.
RELATED:
-- Richard WintonEDITOR'S PICKS:
The plea deal is the best Lindsay can hope for. Her probation on the DUI/drug charges has been revoked which means jail time. If she insists on going to trial on the felony charge, she'll spend 6 months in jail and be facing a possible three-year stint in state prison when she gets out. Unfortunately, when it comes to accepting responsibility for her consequences, Lindsay always tries to game the system. The system is finally fed up; she's not going to skate this time.
Posted by: windrider2 | February 23, 2011 at 07:36 AM
Hey Lindsay and Shawn, if it's defensible, then tell the D.A. to pound sand. Go to trial and see what happens. Good luck with that. Good thing LiLo likes women. She's about to explore that a little bit more.
Posted by: Paul R. | February 23, 2011 at 07:47 AM
Celebrity+big dollars+proper lawyer+light tap on hands and caution,"Be good now, you hear me!" =no jail time !! Seems to be the way the system works. Generally average citizens get 'INCARCERATION' !!
Posted by: yehudi | February 23, 2011 at 08:16 AM
Innocent people don't need to plea bargain, do they? Your nine lives are up, Linds.
Posted by: Hmph | February 23, 2011 at 08:37 AM
This judge is excepting bribes. By the law since he is corrupt he is not a judge. By the law since he has excepted the bribes he has no more lawfull authority to sit in judgement of her then you do (provided you are not a judge). $57,688.00 per year is alot of money to me. if the amount of money is the determing factor of the perception of bias. add up the years since he was elected and times it by appoxatly $50,000. L.A. county paid over 26.5 million in bribes in 2010 to L.A. Superior Court judges. Why is it that the L.A. times will not report on the retro active imunity from prosecution that the Judges received for taking bribes under Senate bill SBX211. FRAUD ON THE COURT
Posted by: daniel cooper | March 04, 2011 at 12:16 PM