Reply #46: Woah. I don't know how you got that from what I said. You're assuming alot about alot, imho.

[Skip Intro]

I've said all along, if she's guilty, she should get the same as anyone else would. That's called fairness. Equality under the law.

I've also said there is no way she'll get a 15 yr sentence, that is the extreme maximum. Now I don't have a problem with there being a tough maximum punishment for assaulting a police officer because I do think such actions should carry consequence, and if those actions are extreme, or are repeated by the offender, then there should be a leeway for the maximum sentence to be handed down. But I don't believe this is such a case.

No, I don't agree with "piling on charges" and I don't see any reason to believe that has happened here. What I do believe is that if a law was broken, especially in the presence of law enforcement, then there should be charges filed against the offender. Don't break the law, no charges. Break the law, charges. Couldn't be more simple. Fair trial? Absolutely. Punishment fit the crime? Absolutely. Leniency allowed in sentencing if warranted? Absolutely.

From what I've read about this case, my gut is as I've said - she cut in line, got called on it, made a scene, disrupted business, refused to leave, resisted arrest, and I suspect assaulted police. As I've also said, the tapes will likely show what happened. If she's guilty, she should get a fair punishment for her offense(s).

I'm not buying racism charge. It appears to me that she's using that as an attempt to escape having to accept the consequences of her actions. Either that, or the Wal Mart employees, the witnesses, and the police are all in some grand racist conspiracy against this woman. Yeah, I just don't quite buy that.