Here Today... Gone To Hell!

http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/TV/03/11/dawn.wells.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

From the article:

            Wells' lawyer, Ron Swafford, said that a friend of Wells testified he'd left a small amount of marijuana in the vehicle after                                                         
             using it that day, and that Wells was unaware of it.


She should just own up to bogin' on a blunt.

Gilligan got busted for pot too didn't he?

No wonder they couldn't figure out how to get off that island.

hee hee!! ;D

They actually did get off the island back in the 1970's:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_From_Gilligan%27s_Island

I dont blame her for having some drugs in driggs. God that place is a shithole. I spent some time there a couple years ago and god does it suck.   :smoking:

Uh...I know, it was a joke.

Yea, why the hell would she be hanging out in Driggs?

Hell, at 69, just let the woman do what she wants to do. Anyone 65+ should be able to do whatever the hell they want to, it could have been medicinal and isn't readily available in vending machines? But, love the fact that Marianne got caught with Mary Jane!

She was sooo much hotter than Ginger.   :yes:

And I always thought Ginger was the naughty one.  ;D

This is the son of a bitch that arrested her a couple of weeks later.


As I read about this case, my second reaction -- my first being, "Wait a
second -- Mary Ann lives here in Idaho?" -- was a moment of disgusted
recognition when I read the name of the officer involved in her arrest:
Deputy Sheriff Joseph Gutierrez.

About a month after he collared Gilligan's girlfriend, Deputy Gutierrez
committed a felony by illegally attempting to murder a Black Labrador
Retriever mix named "Bobby," a dog owned by Leo Barboza of a small town
called Felt. Leo and his family got Bobby as a puppy about five years
ago, and everybody in their neighborhood seemed to find the dog friendly
and agreeable -- except for one mentally handicapped lady, who filed
several police reports claiming that the dog had attacked her. This
troubled woman, significantly, was notorious for causing problems with
dogs, rather than being the victim of canine misconduct.

On November 12 <http://www.kidk. com/news/ local/11726496. html>, Deputy
Gutierrez materialized on the front porch of the Barboza family's home
and announced that he was there to kill their dog
<http://www.ktvb. com/news/ localnews/ stories/ktvbn- nov2307-dog_ shot.2fb360dd. html>.
Alarmed, Leo demanded to know what proof there was that Bobby had done
any harm to anyone; Gutierrez arrogantly proclaimed that he didn't need
any proof.

Yes, he may have had a steenkin' badge, but Deputy Gutierrez didn't need
no steenkin' evidence.

Cowed by the presence of a bellicose bully in a State-issued costume,
Leo obediently brought out Bobby and tied him up in the front yard. His
wife, father-in-law, and three-year-old son all watched in a state of
growing agitation as Gutierrez retrieved a rifle from his vehicle.
Nearby, a bus deposited a group of curious schoolchildren -- who stood
paralyzed in the street, their innocent eyes growing wide with
incredulous alarm as they took in the spectacle coalescing in front of them.

In what could be described as a "life-imitates- Napoleon Dynamite
<http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=MG91VCdK_ vw>" moment -- but worse --
Gutierrez shot Bobby in the head three times as the screams of terrified
children rent the air.

At about 3:30 that afternoon, Gutierrez wrote in his incident report:
"Shots fired. Dog is dead." Barboza's traumatized family had to endure
another shock as Leo's aging father-in-law suffered a severe anxiety
attack that left him hospitalized.

When the family returned, they found, to their astonishment, that Bobby
was alive -- albeit severely wounded and bleeding profusely. They called
the local media <http://www.breitbar t.tv/?p=8356> to report the atrocity
committed by Gutierrez, and shortly thereafter filed a lawsuit
<http://www.kidk. com/news/ local/11730201. html>.

Although Gutierrez was suspended, Sheriff Kim Cooke insisted -- let's
say it together, now -- that he had acted properly according to
department policy. Cooke maintained that Gutierrez was authorized to
kill the dog under Section 8.11.4 of County Ordinances, which permit
"vicious" dogs to be destroyed if they are "found at large" and "cannot
be safely taken up and impounded." He also simpered that his department
had received numerous death threats because of the publicity Gutierrez's
crime had received.

Oh, I see: It's a matter of officer safety again.

Only in this case, Gutierrez's criminal actions had created a threat to
officer safety -- assuming that the comments reported by Cooke were
actually made, and should be taken seriously.

Bobby was not at large; he was on Barboza's property. He was not a
"vicious" animal, since he submitted to being tied up and shot without
much difficulty (Gutierrez, by his own account, was on the Barboza's
property a total of ten minutes.) County ordinances and Idaho law
specify <http://www.kidk. com/news/ local/11677526. html> that a dog must
be found to have committed two confirmed attacks before being regarded
as vicious, and that its owner has ten days to challenge that
designation before a judge.

MORE (http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/03/whos-afraid-of-rate-my-cop.html)