And I think that your question has been answered by me and some other people. Sentences are given not only to help the person, but to punish them. It also may serve as a deterrent to others who may contemplate the same behaviour. If it were just the public sex act I think that she might have gotten off with less, but the fact that she was on probation made it that much worse. The court may have been trying to send a message to others who may be tempted to violate their probation.

The judge heard all the facts. Her lawyer and the prosecuting attorney heard all of the facts and worked out a deal to let her off easy. They are the ones who understand what sentence is appropriate under law and under the sentencing guidelines. They don;t just pull these things out of a hat.

Taking a case to trial costs big bucks. Maybe she accepted the plea deal cause she couldn't afford any further lawyer bills.
The wealthy who can afford expert lawyers get better justice than regular people. Just ask OJ Simpson.

The plea bargain saved the taxpayers a bundle. She did the crime(s), let her do the time.

Geez, let it go. It's over and done.

Yes. It is over for now. Hopefully there will be no encore - by Peggy and David or another pair of paramours.

And if you happen to see someone else, be sure to go up, tap one of them on the shoulder and suggest that they are gonna get arrested. Be sure to let us know how that works out.

A waste of taxpayers money.

Yes, but then there are George Zimmerman and Casey Anthony. Some lawyers like a challenging case and the publicity it gives them and their firms if they have one.

I do still think that justice comes down to whom the jury believe, so to even things out we need more sophisticated members of the jury who know all the tricks of the trade and are not easily manipulated. We had classes at the University of Minnesota Law School that pretty much taught trial lawyers trade craft. Like Irving Younger's various courses online. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBP2if0l-a8[/ame] More magician or theater director than someone out to get the best outcome based on the law and the facts of each case. That's our adversary system. It works if the lawyers and more importantly the press on them is fair and balanced. OJ Simpson had the dream team even if they were supposedly bickering in the background and then putting on a game day face.

I could not get into Irving Younger's "Evidence" Class at the University of Minnesota Law School. Too popular and the 3rd Years who had not taken an Evidence class yet got first dibs. And, he died while I was at the University of Minnesota Law School. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Younger

The most important thing is if
 

Great post. Thank you. I was thinking the same thing. Six months could spur her on to recovery.

In a survey of 88,000 U.S. physicians 75% believed alcoholism is due to personal and emotional problems. Cancer is scientifically proven to be a disease. Alcoholism is only sociologically considered to be a disease, largely through the efforts of AA. It is a behavioral problem, a moral disorder.

http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol/Cont...l#.U97jUaXfQfE

What about this then-- Alcohol Use Disorders | National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)

This person obviously had problems but the publicity is way out of order and the sentence seems to be extremely severe when you look at other things happening. Why do we continue this thread? All has been said, the world knows due to Drudge Report etc. Let it rest and don't cast stones. Notice no discussion regarding the man. Remember that this person must come back and try to reestablish herself with family and friends. Are we putting a Scarlet Letter on her?

We need a like button .. thanks for the common sense post.

Yes. And it's also listed in the DSM IV. Alcoholism is a horrible disease and I hope she can find peace and the strength to overcome it. :pray:
I vote for being supportive rather than condemnation.