Lindsay Lohan ordered back to court next month
Lindsay Lohan must return to court April 22 for a preliminary hearing on a felony grand theft charge for allegedly stealing a necklace from a Venice jewelry store and to decide whether she was in violation of her probation in a previous drunk driving case.
Judge Keith Schwartz said Judge Stephanie Sautner will preside over the April hearing.
Lohan arrived shortly after 9 a.m. wearing a beige dress, black tights and a long ponytail.
Schwartz admonished Lohan to present any additonal information under seal to keep the information away from the prying eyes of tabloid reporters.
"Thankfully this case doesn't involve military secrets," he said. "I can't belive TMZ and Radar Online. These guys ought to be in the foreign services. They ought to hook up with the CIA and work for them.
"I don't even tell my wife what's going on so I can't understand how they find out. It's not fair to either side to have these things leaked out in dribs or drabs. It doesn't benefit anybody, so please try to keep every offer I made confidential, and that's that."
Lohan is facing a felony grand theft charge for allegedly stealing a necklace from a Venice jewelry store.
Lohan has been seeking a deal that would keep her out of jail, but at her last court appearance Schwartz made it clear that would not be an option -- at least in his courtroom.
If convicted of grand theft, she could face significant jail time. If she decides not to accept the plea deal, her case will be set for a preliminary hearing in front of another judge to determine whether there is enough evidence for her to stand trial.
ALSO:
L.A. asks appeals court to allow enforcement of medical marijuana law
Officials fear rotting fish could imperil more sea life off Redondo Beach
Crime alerts for Pico-Robertson, Windsor Square and five other L.A. neighborhoods
-- Shan Li
Photo: Lindsay Lohan leaves court after her preliminary hearing Thursday morning. Credit: Al Seib / Los Angeles Times








Wait and see. Once again, LiLo will get off with no jail time.
Posted by: guillermo | March 10, 2011 at 09:46 AM
This judge is to be congratulated for making it clear the persecutors deals do not bind him. Upon conviction by verdict or plea, sentencing is the exclusive province of the judge.
Posted by: nat turner | March 10, 2011 at 10:02 AM
Wow, nice outfit for a change. And Lindsay, babe, ya gotta get off da drugs! You look like you are 38 years old. Drugs = fast aging. Before you know it, honey, you will be playing mama's on the screen.
Posted by: evad the slayer | March 10, 2011 at 10:18 AM
Stop putting this in the news
Posted by: CB | March 10, 2011 at 10:51 AM
Unless she gets an OJ type jury, this is not going to end well for her. But leave it to LA she will probably walk, the LA DA has a horrible track record with celebrity trials.
Posted by: East Coast Scout | March 10, 2011 at 11:19 AM
Gah. This little girl needs a spanking. This whole get out of jail free card isnt working obviously.
Posted by: Phunkh0u53 | March 10, 2011 at 11:34 AM
who cares!!!!
Posted by: Reality Chick | March 10, 2011 at 11:40 AM
Why is the judge admonishing Lohan? The jewelry store sold evidence - the video which shows a very small store and it seems obvious that she was loaned this necklace. Is the judge on drugs? Military secrets? The CIA? Has this gone to the lunatic's head?
Posted by: Tsiu Marpo | March 10, 2011 at 11:51 AM
Poor girl has not aged well. She looks more blown out than Sharon Stone, who is about twice her age.
Posted by: nat turner | March 10, 2011 at 12:23 PM
Fox even had a chopper follow her SUV to court. Surprised they didn't buy her a white Bronco.
Posted by: Rocco | March 10, 2011 at 12:25 PM
What Judge Schwartz apparently does not know is that TMZ, Perez Hilton and their ilk frequently operate unethically, if not illegally, to get their "scoops". They employ "spies", people with a lot of gall, money and probably charm who can pay big money for just about anything they want and talk themselves in and out of all kinds of places that "normal" folks wouldn't consider. THAT'S how that surveillance tape went public.
Posted by: K | March 10, 2011 at 12:50 PM