Judge gives knifepoint carjacker a chance to get her 'act together'

Gobbo said :

Now, who wants to open a book on whether Amanda will be able to comply with Justice Refshauge’s conditions on not to consume any drugs or alcohol with the Chrissy season upon us?

I don’t think you’ll get good odds on that one…

I just KNEW that a thread encouraging people to “have the opportunity to do a little criticising” was going to go bad as soon as some posters associated with certain aspects of an armed offenders life.

And what happened?

Now, who wants to open a book on whether Amanda will be able to comply with Justice Refshauge’s conditions on not to consume any drugs or alcohol with the Chrissy season upon us?

Oh Dexi, you know I think the world of you. It really isn’t your fault. It’s just human nature. But when you’ve been at the bottom of the great Australian ‘untouchable’ caste it does leave its mark. I know you understand.

Big hug,
Granny

dexi, really, stop trolling.

The ACT gaol is due to open in January so as I said previously the Judge would have deferred in order to send her there instead. I think until the gaol opens we might be seeing a couple of these results. It is used quite regularly for crooks to attend rehabs as well.

As for self defence – in the ACT you can bring a knife, pick the fight then stab the bloke in the head and it is still self defence.

Berraboy. Trollop is a woman regarded as slovenly or untidy, or a women seen as a whore or prostitute. Thanks for asking 🙂

Trollop has been used as a form of abuse in this thread by men, towards single mums with multiple children, who require government housing and welfare. Abuser believe their behavior is justified (thankyou sepi). Some men want to treat single mums in a harmful, injurious and offensive way, by reducing or removing their sole form of financial support and shelter. They have written insultingly, harsh, and unjust posts about single women’s choices. They justify this by claiming some financial saving’s in tax and moral enlightenment for the “Trollops”.

I think its just plain abuse.

These are some signs of abusers.
Jealousy
Controlling Behavior
Quick Involvement
Unrealistic Expectations
Hypersensitivity
Blames Others For His Problems
Blames Others For Feelings
Verbal Abuse

I understand how you could feel hurt Granny. I’m sorry that my first item lead to single mum bashing.

VYBerlina …. – I totally agree with #85. Regardless of her circumstances she voluntarily elected to commit a violent crime. Nothing in that case should excuse her from a prison sentence. No-one has forced her to pull a knife on the victim and steal her car … she chose to, and should suffer the consequences, those being removed from general society for a period of time.

Speaking of prison, why has the ACT govt wasted money building one? I mean who gets sent ot jail from our courts anyway. (also, the thing about prinsoners being closer to their families and friends cuts no ice with me – who gives a shit if they get sent a long way from home – should have thought about that before committing their crimes).

Question is what would have happened if the person in the car thought his or her life was threatoned and basically fought back and killed her in self defence. I bet then the bleading hearts would have come out and the person acting in self defence would have got some gaol time.

Exactly. And this is what sucks arse in this town. If someone knowingly threatens or harms you, and it’s obvious that’s what’s happening, then I think the rights of the potential victim should be paramount, to the extent that the rights of the attacker are reduced to zero if need be. In other words, if someone breaks into your home to beat you up and rape your wife, you should be allowed to kill them in self defence.

Perhaps we need to get back to the topic: a young woman decided it was ok to carjack someone at knifepoint. Whether she is a mum, pregnant, druggo (or not) whatever is, frankly, irrelevant. She chose to commit a crime, and I don’t see why she can possibly be let off. The judiciary are supposed to issue penalties in accordance with law, which is supposed to be set to represent the best interests of the community. Do we really think those interests have been represented? I sure don’t. I think a barrier should be put between people like this and the law abiding members of the community – this barrier being a custodial sentence.

“What incentive does she have to ‘get her act together’ if she gets away with behaviour like this?”

The incentive is staying out of gaol. But the thing is that should have been the incentive in the first place. But she comitted the crime anyway and was rewarded by basically getting let off.

Question is what would have happened if the person in the car thought his or her life was threatoned and basically fought back and killed her in self defence. I bet then the bleading hearts would have come out and the person acting in self defence would have got some gaol time.

I think providing jobs for single mums would be a form of welfare in itself.

Who would pay for the childcare they would need – assuming they could even get their kids into childcare – in the ACT it takes a long time on a waiting list to get a spot. It’s almost not worth applying if you don’t have a flexible job you can go back to as soon as you sort out childcare.

And if they don’t have a high income, the govt will have to subsidise their childcare anyway. And they will need a fair few days off work when their kids are sick. So their employment options are very very limited. Andif they are on the dole, they may well not have a car – making employment/childcare even harder to access.

It starts to seem simpler just to pay child support to those who have pre-schoolage kids, and hope that the kids are getting the basics they need. Think of the money going directly to the kids if that makes you feel better.

Contraception is only 99% effective at the best of times, so that alone would mean that many thousands of Canberrans were not born of choice. And even if they were, people’s circumstances change.

Society needs to look after the vulnerable.

Single mothers are an easy target. I wouldn’t be one if you paid me!

The woman in this case has had her children taken away, so raving about child support isn’t even that relevant to this case.

Come off it Granny – you can campaign for young single mums rights as much as you like. Pregnancy is a choice – pure and simple.

The poor abused single mum in this thread must have worked out she had no means to support children yet she kept having them. As for Welfare I am a Dad with two kids and a wife who is currently not working – that makes 2 children and one adult my paycheck supports. You don’t see me sticking knives into people to jack their car.

The bigotry and ostracism young mums, single mums, mums on welfare, and particularly all young, single mums on welfare are subjected to will always be personal to me. They have enough problems to worry about without mean-spirited, judgmental people making their lives hell … like how to feed four people with three dollars and twenty-eight cents and how to get the baby to casualty at two in the morning.

This whole subject is deeply hurtful to me, so I have nothing further to say.

Can anybody define trollop for me please, I’m lost?

Also, I don’t think anybody can assume that just because someone can get a job that the money they will earn will support their family. I know of several cases where single mums work very hard to scrape together some life for themselves and their kids yet they still need additional Gov’t funding to make ends meet.

How much can I earn before I lose my pension?

If you are a Sole Parent with one child, you can earn up to $1385.35 per fortnight before becoming ineligible for a part pension payment. This amount increases by $24.60 for each child in your care.

(Income Test for Pensions – “A guide to Australian Government Payments: 20 September – 31 December 2005”)

As long as you maintain a part payment of your Parenting Payment Single Pension, your employment income will have no effect on Rent Assistance, Pensioner Education Supplement, Child Care Benefit or any other Centrelink Benefit or Allowance you may receive.

Familys on welfare get more help than i do and for nothing. I have to work my ring out to support my family and i do it happily, however it makes me incredibly angry that my taxes go towards scumbags like this who dont apreciate anything they are given.

sepi said :

So what is the solution – cut single mothers loose and let the kids forage at the tip?
Any better ideas?

Apart from ensuring that the “father” (one could make an argument for “sperm donor”) has to shoulder their share of the expense of child rearing, and the mother has every opportunity to work to support themselves, why should we go further?

Do you not believe that the situation is exacerbated by the free money, free housing, free services we throw at some people, merely for the effort of getting themselves pregnant?

There are single fathers these days too – do you hate them also?

I hate no one. Can one not have a view on society without it being perverted into hate?

imhotep said :

What incentive does she have to ‘get her act together’ if she gets away with behaviour like this?

.

None whatsoever.

We read the outlines of a case, and make a judgment based on a few paragraphs and our own preconceptions. Judges have to hear the whole sorry saga, look a person in the eye and announce their punishment. Most of us, put in a judge’s position, might be inclined to leniency.

However, judges are there to enforce the law, which is supposed to reflect the community’s views. They are supposed to make the hard decision, not take the easy way out and let everyone off.

A functioning society should have limits. IMO, if you rob someone at knife-point, injure them and steal their car, then you should be punished. Our jails are not dungeons, and a bit of ‘time out’ may be in order.

What incentive does she have to ‘get her act together’ if she gets away with behaviour like this?

.

So what is the solution – cut single mothers loose and let the kids forage at the tip?
Any better ideas?

There are single fathers these days too – do you hate them also?

dexi said :

Pommy I hate to have to tell you the facts of life, but I think its more likley that at the point of conception a Trollop will be thinkng.”Not yet, not yet, Im nearly there”

Naturally, I don’t doubt it. But what is your point here?

Trollops already sunbscribe to certain societal values in order to get a house. They just not values you subscribe to. What ever they may be.

They do. However the majority of good hard working people should not tolerate these values to the point where we take fiscal responsibility for them.

As for trollop building their own house. Its a bit daft isn’t it. Have you ever seen the building code. Can you

Missing the point entirely I’m afraid. If they had to earn these houses by the sweat of their brows, as the rest of us do, they may think twice before placing themselves in the predicament of needing one.

Do you have anything to bring other than some bizarre attack on trollops.

[

plenty, how much would you like?

How do you know Amanda is a trollop?

I’ve never claimed she is one.

She is an armed hijacker.

That’s so much more responsible than being a trollop, do you think?

You might like to call her a trollop to her face.

See above.

At least her reaction might indicate any violent tendencies.

Pardon? That doesn’t make sense.

Pommy you might get a laugh from the movie “Idiocracy” 2006.

I’ve seen it. Too American for my tastes.

Pommy I hate to have to tell you the facts of life, but I think its more likley that at the point of conception a Trollop will be thinkng.”Not yet, not yet, Im nearly there”

Trollops already sunbscribe to certain societal values in order to get a house. They just not values you subscribe to. What ever they may be.

As for trollop building their own house. Its a bit daft isn’t it. Have you ever seen the building code. Can you imagine the neighbors whining about the wooden box bringing down their precious land values.

Do you have anything to bring other than some bizarre attack on trollops. How do you know Amanda is a trollop? She is an armed hijacker. You might like to call her a trollop to her face. At least her reaction might indicate any violent tendencies.

Pommy you might get a laugh from the movie “Idiocracy” 2006.

Sweeping generalisations do not help when applied to individuals.

However when describing a sub-set of society who we will call for example “trollops who pop out kids like shelling peas”, who are by definition and nature “trollops who pop out kids like shelling peas” then the description is apposite.

If one were to say “all pommys are bastards”, one could easily have ones generalisation disproved. However, if one were to say “all pommys who enjoy a cup of tea, enjoy a cup of tea”, then one’s assertion is difficult to disprove.

Therefore, my questioning whether “little trollops who pop out kids like shelling peas, would be happy to have to build their own accommodation, and subscribe to certain societal values in order to get a house,” is reasonable.

The fact that no one has challenged my assertion, rather have attacked my descriptors of a group they have no proven to not exist, is telling.

IMO and experience women, and even men, who end up in abusive relationships don’t start off with the mindset of “I think I’ll try to ruin my life today”. They start by meeting someone who appears to be nice and over time a relationship develops. Once they are committed to the relationship emotionally and/or financially the abuse starts. At this stage it is often very difficult to get yourself out of that cycle. It’s the same reason why people stay with partners who cheat. They have an investment, feel lost and don’t know what else to do. If a women (or man) can get out of a bad relationship sooner rather than later then much kudos to them.

I know some very good people who’s lives have gone backwards due to their partners behaviour. Lets face it, love hardly makes any of us act rationally.

Oh, and sweeping generalisations on people who receiving public funding don’t help Pommy B. Same as saying all pommies really are bastards – and I can say that, I am one:) Sure some mums are bad but the majority are simply doing their best for their families.

I did not aim anything at you “Granny”.

If you wish to include yourself in the catagory of “trollops who pop out kids like shelling peas”, that is your peroogative though.

It really isn’t all about you Granny.

Chill out.

So I’m a little trollop, huh? Go to hell, Pommy Bastard. Sure hope you haven’t bred.

It sets a precedent. Now every criminal is going to claim they were pissed and depressed and get another chance. What did the victim get?

Mayhap if the little trollops were expected to do as below to get a house, they’d think twice about popping out kids like shelling peas?

To qualify for a home, built on huge one-acre blocks acquired by Hammond with the proceeds of his life-insurance policy, a couple had to be unemployed, homeless, destitute and have at least three children. They also had to be “of good moral character”.

Though they weren’t “God-botherers”, the Hattons were among the pioneer settlers, arriving shortly after Hammondville’s official opening in 1932, when inner-city unemployment in suburbs such as Redfern was almost 50 per cent.

Only many years later did John Hatton, two at the time, realise just how poor his family was, how primitive were the conditions. There was no police, no doctor, no electricity nor sewerage. Human waste had to be buried.

The homes were wooden boxes. “Simple, weatherboard huts, 30 feet by 10 feet built by unemployed tradesmen.” But settlers could rent-buy their homes – paying weekly instalments from a work-for-the-dole income – and could improve them.

“New arrivals went to the village office and picked up hand tools, wood, wire netting and fibro to clear their blocks, put up fences and grow vegetables, or run … poultry. It was all about self-sufficiency, getting back to basics,” says Hatton.
.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/a-suburb-for-our-times/2008/11/28/1227491827207.html

Bet she has a big TV at home, smokes and drinks. Saves all her money for the important stuff. Maybe the blokes in her relationships were abused and thats why they didn’t stick around.

dexi said :

It costs nothing to raise kids if you are on government benefits.

No it doesn’t starscream. It will take all the money you have to feed clothe and house your children. You will need out side help with rego, education and medical stuff. Forget holidays. What it will cost a parent is there own needs. Like cloths, entertainment and hobbies/interests. I think you have no idea how little the government gives.

You say that like it’s a bad thing. The govt should give less, rather than a free ticket to breed indiscriminately.

Had it been Penfold J I’d have raised an eyebrow. Once I read it was Refshauge (ex DPP, so in theory a bit tough on crime…at least Grant Lalor is!) my potential ire was quelled.

It costs nothing to raise kids if you are on government benefits.

No it doesn’t starscream. It will take all the money you have to feed clothe and house your children. You will need out side help with rego, education and medical stuff. Forget holidays. What it will cost a parent is there own needs. Like cloths, entertainment and hobbies/interests. I think you have no idea how little the government gives.

It costs nothing to raise kids if you are on government benefits.

Settle petals. Why is it we accept that abuse is solely perpetrated by men? I see a pattern of violence where Amanda seems to be the central figure. This is why she came before the courts. It may be Amanda who has to address her own behavior.

Ill answer my own question and save you all the words.
“Why is it we accept that abuse is solely perpetrated by men?”
Because it’s men who are violent abusers.

I would still like to hear from someone who knows the girls involved or the victim.

Yes, why does any woman put up with abuse? If only they had judgment. I think Poptop’s post on this was excellent and I really have nothing to add.

I think you have no idea.

Granny, re #48, I really don’t vare how many partners she has, although the fact that they are all abusive really does say a lot about her poor judgement, the fact that she keeps falling pregnant to these losers, likewise bad judgement or lack of care, the fact that she has children almost certainly without the income or other skills and resources to support them, bad judgement, the choice to commit a crime such as she did, bad judgement. Its all part of a pattern of behaviour, which clearly shows poor judgement and life choices.

This really is a joke. So you can go to gaol for a fairly long time for hurting a bloody ferret but get off for car jacking at knife point scaring the bejesus out of some one.

So as long as the silly ferrets are ok society is ok. I wonder how long it will be before we start seeing people walk after killing some one. Oh yeah hang on a minute thats allready happened remember the loon who murdered is mum by stabing her 50 plus times and then got let off because he didnt mean to do it.

Fix up the bi-focals, DJ. This is what I was responding to.

Special G said :

Granny – do the sums on what sort of cash the govt throws at you for being a single mum with a couple of kids. It’s probably the best employment she can get.

Financially it is not worth Mrs G going back to work if the kids were in care as the cash bonuses equal her salary.

I did wonder where the judge saw such potential for improvement if her life has already deteriorated to the point that her children have been taken away.

Will anyone be monitoring her over the next 6 months to see if she drinks/does drugs, or will it only count if she commits another offence.

Granny said :

Yeah, thanks, Special G, living as a single mum with three kids on a government pension was such a ball, but I reckon I’ll pass like ever again!!

It’s called poverty actually.

But you’re welcome to try it, since you think it sounds so peachy.

Fix up the bi-focals Granny, you have missed the point of Special G…. I read into it that the Courts will not examine the truth of anything that an alleged offender states.

She could have hold the Court that she was raised by the Greens or by Communists or even monkeys and they would believe her. The evidence brought before any Court by the prosecution is tested all the time but the alleged offender (in this town) can claim almost anything with the Courts seemingly taking it all in hook line and sinker as the unblemished truth.

Just so you know, I’m not defending the car-jacking, nor have I ever said any such thing.

She was being attacked for her age, the number of sexual partners and her reproductive choices, however, and I consider that to be completely unacceptable.

So this woman was “abused” by her three partners.

What has this to do with car-jacking at knifepoint while drunk, and not getting a custodial sentence for her crime?

Is getting yourself into abusive relationships a “get out of jail free” card these days?

Yeah, thanks, Special G, living as a single mum with three kids on a government pension was such a ball, but I reckon I’ll pass like ever again!!

It’s called poverty actually.

But you’re welcome to try it, since you think it sounds so peachy.

“Dexi, the court, having actual data before them seemed satisfied that the woman had been abused by three partners.”

The actual data a Court gets is her saying – ‘I was abused as a kid, adult whatever’ They search for nothing more than her word on it. If you don’t believe me go sit in on a couple of trials.

Granny – do the sums on what sort of cash the govt throws at you for being a single mum with a couple of kids. It’s probably the best employment she can get.

Financially it is not worth Mrs G going back to work if the kids were in care as the cash bonuses equal her salary.

Dexi, the court, having actual data before them seemed satisfied that the woman had been abused by three partners.

Sorry if she doesn’t match your idea of how a woman should respond to abuse, but what of the women who kill their abuser – often in cold blood.

You can’t generalise about individuals I think. I am sorry for the victim, and sorry for the children, but how many children a woman has to how many fathers is totally irrelevant to her choice to commit a serious crime and should not even be brought into the discussion.

Oh poor little victim of society. They come up with the best stories to get themselves out of trouble.

I’m tipping the Judge is suspending her sentence until the prison is up and running as opposed to farming her out to the NSW system.

Sorry, Olwen, but I’ve had three baby bonuses and, guess what?

I may not be a financial genius but, hey, doesn’t it cost a couple of hundred thousand to raise a child?

Great bargain! I can’t think why everybody isn’t doing it.

Oh wait ….

They’re not.

Granny said :

Oh, and you’ve never slept with three different women? You’ve never had unprotected sex?

not three at the same time, well there was that one time at university….

Surprise, surprise, sterilisation rears it ugly head.

Granny and sepi. I agree with you about abused women. Its a complex and horrid thing. With it comes a certain amount of passive behavior. Not the sort of behavior that would find a victim of abuse, charged with a violent robbery.

Is this a case of, victim or a perpetrator of violence?

Best just to cut your balls off.

is that what you thought i was saying Granny? surely not!? I did it once with no expectation of any financial ‘bonus’… and I wouldn’t do it again for any amount of money.

But if I was a young woman with no job, no family, in need of love, with some tosser who was abusing me but ‘only because he loves me’ and we needed money to live on, I probably would consider it – as pop tart said – they see it as a way to get someone who will love you unconditionally – it might make the tosser sick around for a bit longer… they get some cute thing they can dress up and play with… *shakes head*

And I did point out it could be the male / the dad who is encouraged by the money – and they don’t have to give birth..I think you might you might have missed your chance on this baby bonus anyway Granny… the change and all…

All well and good, but once again the rights of the victim seem to have become lost…

I’m glad you would go through labour for a few thousand bucks, Olwen, ’cause I sure as hell wouldn’t.

I know Granny, and Poptart – and I so hope this is her rock bottom and she can make it back up, I really do.

But I do have an issue with the government ‘encouraging’ these woman AND yes men to have children (despite their life circumstances) to get a lump of cash. Paid maternity leave or nothing – I say.

I was quite surprised when I had my son and I got the paper work to claim my, then $600. Sure I took it and it helped pay for the second hand cot, a new cot mattress and a pram – total bonus – especially when we were quite strapped for cash. Now it is a few thousand – more than most young adults would ever have seen in their life. Just saying…

What can you do? Support fabulous organisations like Barnardos who are out there fighting to keep kids with their parents where-ever possible or else find somewhere sound for the kids and help support mum (and/or dad) through the tough times. Help break the cycle.

Look, it seems irrational but the research shows that people raised in abusive families tend to either end up abusers or abused. If abuse and make-up sex is all you know about how “love” and “relationships” work it is a hard cycle to break.

People don’t leave their abusive partners because they have had their self esteem dismantled over the time and can no longer distiguish what we might consider a healthy relationship.

Abuser believe their behaviour is justified.

Women often have children because they believe that children will love them uncritically. Babies don’t work that way – they are the consumate egotists.

Easy to stand on the sidelines and critique how foolish it appears, but what are you going to do?

It is a long, slow, difficult path to get rid of the sh*t life has dealt you, with lots of switchbacks.

Walk a mile, people.

Because abused women never get raped by their ‘partner’. They are in complete control of their lives and their sexuality. They have the freedom to go wherever they like, whenever they like, such as to the doctor or the family planning clinic.

This never makes their partners suspicious either.

They have plenty of money to spend on whatever they like including contraceptives, and they have partners that are so considerate of their welfare as a consequence of sexual activity.

I agree with Ian… birth control, birth control, birth control! Are we some third world country or something, with no access to birth control. Or is the thousands of dollars we now give to people to have a baby?

Whatever happens to her – it’s the poor littlies she is dragging through life, whilst still a child herself, who will suffer – and that’s what makes me sad.

Hardly!

Same thing..

No, this girl has probably been abused by a legion of do-gooders since she was a youth ….

This is so indicative of where we are going wrong as a society, there is no consequence for such criminal activity.

The silly girl has probably been shielded from life’s come backs by a legion of do-gooders since she was a youth…

Oh, and you’ve never slept with three different women? You’ve never had unprotected sex?

21, 3 kids by 3 different fathers, all abusive.

Obviously she is not too choosy, and also has never heard of birth control.

Judges should be able to make compulsory sterilisation orders for these sorts of idiots.

As for giving her more chances, I say the time for her to get her act together was long before she started pulling knives on people.

where the heck did the ACT get all these dud judges who have no idea of frustration that the feels with there bleeding heart decisions, I really wonder what a person has to do in the ACT to receive a jail sentence

Shoulda stomped on the throttle, then jammed it in reverse and run the bitch over!

: )

Sorry, it’s Friday and I need the weekend. Nothing Granny. *idiot…idiot tylers* 🙂

Not what, tylers?

Me too, sepi.

No yur not Granny. 🙂

Me too, sepi.

You’re such a sh1t-stirrer dexi.

…

Oh, and, yeah … lock ’em up, kill them all, houso scum, blah blah blah

You let people off for threatened violence agaoinst people and, the next thing you know, they’re off torturing ferrets.

Will nobody think of the ferrets?

If the reason for not jailing people like this is that jail will make them worse, then I hope once our new human rights jail is up and running that judges will feel more able to send people there.

and I really do hope the new jail is able to rehabilitate some of the prisoners.

You would have to question something. Shame the judge didn’t. Three men labeled abusive. I wonder what their story is.

It is sad…yes. Mind you…one abusive partner would be terrible. Two would be very bad luck indeed. Three & you’d have to seriously start questioning your own choices in life.

It’s kind of sad actually.

> All three fathers where abusive. What are the odds?

In the social circles I’m guessing she moves in? Pretty high I’d wager.

The message sent by the ACT courts to the community: “if you’re going to commit a serious offence like this you better make damn sure you’re on drugs”

I think the fact she was carrying around a knife suggests that it wasn’t a “one off” occurrence. Lock her up please!

I feel a bit bored today so I reckon I’ll go do me some carjacking! What are they going to do about it, huh?

Add to that.
CT….
“She now has three children by different fathers, all of whom were abusive. “

She has a history of something………….That would be what……..Abuse?

All three fathers where abusive. What are the odds?

The Brad said :

And 5 shots of Tequila? That would only just put her over the limit.

Lame excuses.

I disagree. Five 30ml shots of 40%AC Tequila will put you above .09. Try this calculator:

http://www.rupissed.com

I’m not defending her in any way, and wish the sentence were more severe.

Anyone got Refshauge’s address? I think I’ll go round, cut him with a knife and then tell him not to take it personally because “I’m not thinking”. The cheap Slut should have been put away.

“She maintained that she had never done anything like that before and that she had no history of violence.

But she admitted that alcohol made her angry, and that ”when I get angry, I can’t control myself”.”

no history of violence, yet she knows when she is angry she can’t control herself. Hmmmmm

ABC News is reporting a NZ women who stopped a car, threatened the driver with a knife then stole her handbag. The women was then killed by a car while running across the road trying to escape. That’s one way to avoids the necessity of fronting the courts….

”when I get angry, I can’t control myself”.

Isn’t that what anger is. Uncontrolled emotions.
And 5 shots of Tequila? That would only just put her over the limit.

Lame excuses.

I hope the kids find and stay in a good home, otherwise, we’re likely to have triple the trouble in 20 years.

Ahhhh, missed that line. Hopefully they got a stable loving family and get a decent chance in life.

The children were placed in foster care earlier this year.

Of course she deserves a chance to get her life in order, she only:

1 Violently attack an inocent person at knifepoint
2 Cause them to fear for their life
3 Steal their car
4 Destroy their self confidence so they live in continual fear

She did say sorry and it’s not as if she shoplifted or some other heinous crime.

She has had an oportunity to get her life in order already: the 21 years up until she decided that committing violent crimes is a good way to spend some quality time with friends. Take her kids away so that they get a chance at a normal life and lock the silly bint up.

poor girl, couldn’t afford a gun obviously

I have been angry and depressed a number of times, and I’ve never had any desire to threaten someone with a knife and demand they get out of their car.

She sounds like such a worthwhile individual: I give her three months before she f*cks up again.