Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(   Judge hands down 10-month ban on TV watching to credit-card thief   ( divider line
    More: Strange  
•       •       •

2478 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Mar 2002 at 1:35 PM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

29 Comments     (+0 »)
2002-03-07 01:37:15 PM  
With the crap that is on TV these days, its not much of a punishment.
2002-03-07 01:38:07 PM  
That I could live with. Computer, no.
2002-03-07 01:38:12 PM  
Seems more like a reward to me.
2002-03-07 01:38:44 PM  
Yeah, my cable company put an indefinate ban on my cable when they discovered I stopped paying. Such is life.
2002-03-07 01:39:21 PM  
damn mofo has 7 fvcken teevee's in his house, take those away and sell them to pay of creditors sheesh.
2002-03-07 01:39:43 PM  
Now he'll get up off his ass and commit more sophisticated crimes.
2002-03-07 01:40:15 PM  
7 tv's? sounds a little low
2002-03-07 01:44:15 PM  
So basically he's grounded.
Sent to his room with no tv.
2002-03-07 01:45:20 PM  
I thought it was against the law to issue "cruel and unusual punishments".. This is unusual.
2002-03-07 01:48:18 PM  
No TV is cruel? Heck, Send him to a Jail with no TV. That sounds better.
2002-03-07 01:48:51 PM  
how does banning someone from watching tv violate their right to free speech?
2002-03-07 01:49:51 PM  
No spanktervision?
2002-03-07 01:51:23 PM  

You know, I never understood what the hell that was supposed to mean.. Unusual? How about they slap the guy with wet pasta or something..
2002-03-07 01:53:30 PM  
I havent watched TV in years... this guy isnt missing anything.

In fact it will probably make him more human.
2002-03-07 01:54:01 PM  
Ummmm, Why?

First off the 1st ammendment think is a load of hooey. But "forcing quiet introspection"? What kinda lame-ass crap is that?
2002-03-07 01:54:13 PM  
....Hell!! If'n I was 'de judge...I'da put him in a cell wit a t.b. that only gots 'Galavision' heh?!!
2002-03-07 01:59:11 PM  

I think the treatment should be reversed instead of taking away TV from someone who has seven...

[image from too old to be available]

Alex: What exactly is the treatment here going to be then?

Dr. Brannon: Quite simple really. Were going to show you some films.

Alex: You mean like going to the pictures?

Dr. Brannon: Something like that.

2002-03-07 02:00:47 PM  
Make him watch nothing but Full House for 10 months.
2002-03-07 02:06:25 PM  
this mut be the same judge from an earlier entry who banned football from the Atlanta airport guy...
2002-03-07 02:10:27 PM  
I know you can get radio over the internet, can't you get TV too? Not to mention, if his computer has a DVD player, you don't need the damn tv.
2002-03-07 02:14:44 PM  
TV is a privelege, not a right.
If TV was a right then the government would be required to make sure everyone in the US had, at least, easy and immediate access to a television at all times for the rest of their lives.
It's like banning someone from using a toaster but not toaster ovens. There are newspapers and magazines he can glean info-tainment from.
2002-03-07 02:21:21 PM  
it says no cruel AND unusual punishment.
Nothing about no cruel OR unusual punishment. Cruel is okay, unusual is okay, just not both.
::stupid smirk off::
2002-03-07 02:40:24 PM  
Oh darn, no 'Everybody Loves Raymond' reruns.....
2002-03-07 03:03:51 PM  
I don't get it, where does someone who should be in jail but insted gets told he has to stay home for 10 months and can't watch TV biatch that no TV infringes on his first amendment right, and how does s judge see this as a fit punishment??? I say they should singapore cane his ass, or at leastlet the people who's credit cards he used throw a couple of stones at him
2002-03-07 03:04:33 PM  
The good: Supports an impressive number of media types; excellent content-creation software bundle; innovative home video-server feature; hardware MPEG-2 encoder.
2002-03-07 03:06:27 PM  
2002-03-07 03:07:31 PM  
fark this, i'm not in the mood to fix the tags, delete my Boobiess.
2002-03-07 03:27:14 PM  
The defendant's lawyers have argued that the television ban violates their client's First Amendment rights and last week won a temporary stay until they can argue the case before a federal appeals court.

In addition to the TV ban, Hellerstein ordered Bello to 10 months home detention and said he could only leave the house for work, grocery shopping, church, educational or medical reasons. Bello, a vending machine repairman, was also ordered to pay 10 percent of his annual income to banks and merchants as restitution for the nearly $27,000 he racked up using stolen credit cards.
A temporary stay? What kind of addict is this guy? While I wouldn't welcome having TV-watching banned for me (I like The Simpsons), I'd be pretty okie-dokie with that in preference to hard time. There's no WAY that he's going to repay that $27,000 any time soon. It's an unusual punishment, but it certainly isn't cruel. That $27,000 is going to come to me by way of higher interest rates.
2002-03-07 03:39:46 PM  
Good. That way he can catch up on his reading.
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.