No Prison Party For Nicole Richie Or Lindsay Lohan!
While on Fox & Friends, criminal defense attorney Don Schweitzer provides legal commentary on Nicole Richie's eighty-two minute jail sentence and on the light sentence given to Lindsay Lohan for her DUI.
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 2:51 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
September 17, 2007
O.J. Simpson and His New Trial of the Century
O.J. Simpson appears to have dug his own grave by freely speaking to the police and to the press about the details of his “sting operation,” which we all know was an armed robbery. When a person speaks to the police or to the press without the assistance of an attorney, he or she will normally hurt whatever defenses may apply to a case. But I, for one, will not underestimate O.J.’s ability to dodge, duck, and run ram shod over law enforcement agencies. It was O.J., after all, who was found not guilty of a brutal double murder in a case where there was ten times the amount of evidence that is normally required to convict.
Let us not forget it was O.J. who Johnny Cochran once characterized as the smartest criminal defendant he ever represented. And it is O.J. who was a criminal long before he ever stepped on a football field, i.e., he has a lifetime of experience beating the police at their own game.
Has the Las Vegas Police Department finally tackled O.J., when no other law enforcement agency within the country has been able to do so? Again, I am not that confident. In my mind this case is less provable than the double homicide, given that the victims in this case have shady backgrounds and at least one of them appears to have second thoughts about cooperating with the prosecution of O.J.. The media has also had a feeding frenzy on some of the key witnesses to the case which always causes problems for the prosecution.
However, there are two things about this case that may lead to a conviction. First, this is a case in which O.J. will have multiple co-defendants. As any prosecutor or criminal defense attorney will tell you, a defendant’s chances of beating the rap is diminished where there are co-defendants. The biggest problem O.J.’s attorney will have is contending with other attorneys who may not be on the same page with O.J.’s defense. And there is always the strong possibility that the defendants will point their fingers at one another during the trial.
In addition, O.J. cannot pay for another dream team, Johnny Cochran and Robert Kardashian are dead, and there is a real possibility that he no longer has friends like Al Cowlings who will go to extreme lengths to help O.J. evade justice.
Stand-by, as you are about to observe, once again, a hall of fame football player and perhaps the most cunning criminal defendant in the history of this country, be the star of another trial of the century. Whew!!
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 2:42 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
July 24, 2007
Lindsay Lohan Arrested for DUI and Cocaine Possession
Lindsay Lohan arrested again on suspicion of DUI and possession of cocaine after allegedly engaging in a pursuit of a woman in Santa Monica. Attorney Don Schweitzer appears on Fox News and weighs in on the matter and potential consequences of Ms. Lohans actions if found guilty. See the video
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 5:07 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
June 19, 2007
Kim Kardashian's Video - Is She A Victim Or A Promoter?
Kim Kardashian, a popular socialite, claims she intends on filing a lawsuit to try to stop the DVD release of a three-year-old sex tape featuring her and actor-rapper Ray J, whom she was dating at the time the video was made. Vivid Entertainment shelled out $1 million to an undisclosed third party for the tape and is planning to add Kim Kardashian Superstar to the homemade adult entertainment canon in the near future, despite objections over the deal’s legality.
Ms. Kardashian is reported to have said that she feels hurt and betrayed, but will not point a finger at the people responsible for releasing the tape. For the following three reasons, we should be at least suspicious of Ms. Kardashian’s assertion that she is not behind the release of the video:
1) Ms. Kardashian is about to promote a major line of clothing for Christopher Brian Apparel. She will model and design some of the street-wear line clothing in Christopher Stokes' multimillion dollar ad campaign. Having a little name recognition like a sex video certainly cannot hurt Ms. Kardashian’s opportunity of promoting her goods (the clothing line).
2) To date, Ms. Kardashian has not filed any type of lawsuit. If Ms. Kardashian truly intends on stopping the release of the video, she would have filed a request for a temporary injunction with the Los Angeles Superior court by now.
3) Ms. Kardashian is the daughter of the infamous Robert Kardashian, who taught her everything he knew about hanging around celebrities and cashing in when the time was right. You will recall, Robert Kardashian was a member of OJ's "Dream-Team."
Really folks, why would anyone in their right mind agree to taping themselves having sex? You have to expect at some point that videos or pictures will end up on the internet. Unless of course, that is what you intend to happen.
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 5:07 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
May 31, 2007
Lindsay Lohan Addicted To Oxycontin
While on Nancy Grace, criminal defense attorney Don Schweitzer provides legal commentary on Lindsay Lohan, who, according to her father, is addicted to Oxycontin.
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 4:34 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
May 29, 2007
Lindsay Lohan's Hit And Run Accident
Walking the streets of Los Angeles is becoming more and more hazardous, given the amount of drunken celebrities on our roads. This past weekend we became aware that Lindsay Lohan was arrested in Los Angeles for hit and run, and driving while under the influence of alcohol. It also appears that the police located a white powdery substance believed to be cocaine either within Ms. Lohan’s vehicle or personal possession.
The preliminary information gathered from the police revealed that Ms. Lohan had two passengers in the car at the time she crashed into a curb and some shrubbery, causing injury to herself and her vehicle. Ms. Lohan then fled the scene of the accident without notifying the police. She was later located at a nearby hospital by the police who observed she was exhibiting signs of alcohol influence.
Apparently this was the third car accident for Ms. Lohan within two years. Ms. Lohan, who has been in and out of a rehab center for alcohol abuse, is obviously a dangerous driver.
From the prosecutor’s point of view, Ms. Lohan should be sentenced to a significant amount of jail time for this offense, possibly six months. Any defense attorney in Los Angeles will tell you that the District Attorney’s Office and the Courts do not treat cases like this lightly. The aggravating factors involved with this case include: 1) Ms. Lohan fled the scene of an accident; 2) There were two passengers within her vehicle who could have been injured; 3) Ms. Lohan has a history of bad driving; and 4) She caused injuries to herself.
In California, first time DUI offenders are sentenced to attend a DUI class, pay approximately $1,100 of fines, and placed on three years summary probation. Hit and run offenders who have caused injuries, on the other hand, can be charged with a felony, and usually receive stiff prison or jail time, depending upon the seriousness of the injuries.
Unfortunately, the Los Angeles courts tend to coddle our celebrities, so I am not expecting Ms. Lohan to be sentenced similar to what an ordinary citizen would receive under similar circumstances. In my opinion, we are not doing Ms. Lohan or the public any favors by treating this crime lightly. There is no better way to catch a person’s attention than to sentence him or her to a healthy dose of jail time.
Ms. Lohan is also a huge role model for thousands of would be actresses. I believe we send the wrong message to our youth when we treat celebrities as royalty, as if they are above the law. The impression we do not want our youth to have is that law enforcement gives these people special treatment because being drunk and out of control are essential ingredients to success.
In cases like this numerous commentators discuss the stress of the actress and the demands of her jobs as an excuse for her behavior. I agree that celebrities do suffer from a lot of stress. However, in no way can they be excused for drunk driving. Celebrities like Lindsay Lohan, more than most people, can afford a private driver, call a cab, or call upon a friend to drive them home.
From the defense point of view, there may be a “no drive” defense, given that the police did not observe Ms. Lohan driving and we know there were two other people in her car, who could claim to have been driving. However, as I tell my clients who face similar charges, we will not know what defenses, if any, are available until we see the police reports. In this case, the passengers may have told the police that Ms. Lohan was driving, and it appears there may have been a photographer that places her behind the wheel.
In the meantime, Ms. Lohan's attorneys have wisely placed her into the Promises Residential Treatment Center in Malibu, Caliornia with the hope they can convinve the judge she has finally cleaned up her act.
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 5:39 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
Paris Hilton Goes To Jail
While on Nancy Grace, criminal defense attorney Don Schweitzer provides legal commentary on Paris Hilton on her last days of freedom before turning herself into the sheriff's department in Los Angeles County.
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 2:42 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
April 27, 2007
Richard Gere And Eric Baldwin Display Obscene Behavior
Criminal defense and family law attorney Don Schweitzer appears on Live Desk. He provides legal commentary on both of the following: •Legal complaints involving Richard Gere and Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty The pair violated strict public obscenity laws, when Gere kissed Shetty at an HIV/AIDS awareness event in New Delhi, India. Both could serve jail time. •The verbally abusive message Eric Baldwin left on his daughter's voicemail
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 5:19 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
December 21, 2006
The Owner Of Girls Gone Wild Gets Off Too Easy
The judge in this case gave the owner, Joe Francis, of GGW a very lenient sentence for behavior that amounted to the sexual exploitation of minors. Having to serve only eight hours a month for thirty months of community service is a joke. People who commit these types of crimes typically serve jail or prison time.
The judge’s statement that this sentence was harsher on Mr. Francis and the company than a money sanction is ludicrous.
The next thing we are going to see are numerous lawsuits and huge jury awards, which will be the end of this company and hopefully put an end to this type of entertainment.
Mr. Francis appears to have known that lawsuits were inevitable. Recently I watched a television show displaying his enormous mansion located in Mexico. You have to wonder if Mr. Francis has purchased property south of the border in an attempt to become “judgment proof.”
I also think we are letting many of the woman involved in these incidents off the hook too easily. If a drunken man stripped down in the middle of Main Street and happened to be photographed, I doubt that he would be considered a victim.
The story about the seventeen year old girl who is alleging rape is something we would expect to happen when GGW enters a bar and begins taping. The types of people who are employed in this type of “entertainment” are warped and likely to take advantage of drunken girls. Reportedly, there is a pattern of GGW employees getting girls drunk and luring them onto the company bus. In my opinion, there should be laws passed to discourage this type of an industry from growing further.
The seventeen year old girl’s statement that the prosecution is not doing enough sounds pretty silly. After all, she cannot identify the man she was with and the prosecution has sent out subpoenas to GGW in an attempt to identify the people who were working for the company when the incident happened. If the man is eventually identified, I hope there will be corroborating evidence, since the victim’s statement by itself will not be enough to convict.
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 4:14 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
Anna Nicole Smith Contests To DNA Testing
Ms. Smith shows her strong interest in getting her money, to the extent she has dared to return to California where the paternity case is being heard and allowing herself to be personally served by her ex-boyfriend.
The judge in this case , Robert A. Schnider, is a no nonsense judge who understands that children need their fathers as much as their mothers. If there are any facts to support a DNA test, Judge Schnider will order it. I have appeared before Judge Schnider on many occasions and can tell you that he is not going to allow Ms. Smith to keep frustrating contact between the child and her father.
I find it interesting whenever someone like Ms. Smith contests DNA testing. The test only costs about $150 and is relatively non-invasive. Ms. Smith must know that the Mr. Birkhead is the father of the child, otherwise the DNA testing would have been done a long time ago to rule him out.
As far as drug testing is concerned, the court will not rule on this issue until DNA tests establish that Mr. Birkhead is the father. However, if and when this is established, Ms. Smith is going to have problems, since the court will order drug testing in a case like this, and can possibly alter custody based on Ms. Smith’s continuous abuse of drugs.
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 11:10 AM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
December 20, 2006
Is Naomi Campbell...A Criminal Or Just A Bad Judge Of Character?
Last week, Britain's Crown Prosecution Service released a statement that Naomi Campvell will not be charged with assault because there is insufficient evidence. Charges were not filed in part because there was the complaintant has left Britain and would not return to testify. Also, there was also a report from E! reporter Gina Serpe, that indicated that Britain's Crown Prosecution said it would not add to to Campbell’s already extensive RAP sheet over the alleged incident. This statement indicates there is something wrong with the prosecution. Criminal charges are not filed based on how well they may add or detract from a person’s RAP sheet. We are not talking about a job resume!
If there are mitigating factors involved in the case or if there is a lack of evidence, fine. But, whether or not the charges add to the person’s RAP sheet is irrelevant.
Another issue with this case is that Ms. Campbell appears to be using a lot of people as scapegoats for her behavior. Ms. Campbell is quoted as saying that she needs to be a better judge in finding people to assist her, as if that is her only fault. It seems to me that a person facing criminal charges should show a little remorse for her actions. She needs to admit she has an anger management problem and show the court and her fans that she is taking steps (such as going to a class) to address this problem.
There is nothing about Ms. Campbell’s recent statements or behavior that would lead us to believe she will be changing her ways in the near future.
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 12:22 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
October 19, 2006
Definitely A Divorcing Diva
Dear Sara,
I was quite moved by your appearance on "Dancing with the Stars" earlier this week, when you got up in front of all of America on one of the most popular shows on Prime-Time TV, and explained why it was necessary for you to drop out of the competition. It must have been really difficult for you to speak out publicly about a very private matter. It's a good thing you're so used to performing under pressure.
Of course, I thought that you had already sufficiently explained your reasons, in a statement made by you the week before. I'm can't quite figure out why you thought it was also necessary for you to announce it on the show as well. Hmm. Oh, I remember, it was out of concern for your children's emotional well-being.
I know it was important for you to drop out of the show so you could spend time with your children during this difficult time. I wonder... were they backstage waiting for you in the green room as you taped your appearance for the show to talk about why you were divorcing their Daddy.
I really do hope that that you can find the privacy you were requesting of your fans and viewers during this very difficult time. Of course, it might be somewhat difficult when you are speaking publicly about every dirty detail of your marriage and the reasons you have indicated were the cause of the break-up. I wonder if your publicist or family law attorney ever advised you against being interviewed for the show. They should have told you it might appear self-serving to do so, and that it could actually appear as if you were using your celebrity status to further your cause in your case. If they didn't tell you that, you may want to consider firing them both.
There are many celebrity women who have endured rumors of infidelity and abuse in their marriage and unlike you, they exercised restraint and had enough class not to go on national TV and discuss what many of us consider to be a private and personal matter. I am now convinced that it really was your plan all along to expose the father of your children in as demeaning a way as possible, and create as much drama and attention in support of your case as you could.
Of course, all of this being done for the sake of protecting your children emotionally. Written by Maria Schweitzer
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 1:51 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
October 13, 2006
Sara Evans-Country Singer, Dancing Diva or Drama Queen?
There is shocking news today, about Sara Evans, the "Dancing with the Stars" celebrity. For those of you who are out of the loop, Sara Evans is a country music singer who has been competing for the past several weeks on ABC's hit show "Dancing with the Stars," third season. There are several celebrities who are each paired with professional dancers. Each celebrity is taught a new dance by their professional dance partner, and the routines are performed live every week. The celebrities are judged by a panel of professional judges and also voted on by the at-home audience. Every week, the celebrity with the lowest score from the judges for that week's performance, as well as the least votes from the viewers goes home on a second live show, the evening following their performances. At the end of the series, the last celebrity remaining is the winner.
All these weeks, Sara Evans has worked diligently to learn her weekly routines and unbeknownst to the viewers and apparently even her dance partner, she has also been working on filing for a divorce against her husband Craig Schelske. The divorce papers were filed yesterday, the day after she stood onstage with her dance partner, smiling, as a result of being spared from going home, solely due to the viewing audience votes. Today, Ms. Evans has announced she is dropping out of the show so she can spend more time with her children, and has asked that her fans and TV viewers respect her family's privacy during this very difficult time. In the divorce documents filed in Tennessee, Ms. Evans is accuses her husband of abuse, infidelity and addiction to pornography. WOW! Who could have seen that coming?
I am sure she has been pondering the decision to file for the divorce for quite some time. It is not unusual in our law practice to see people who come in for an initial consultation and then wait several months, even a year or more before coming back to actually move forward with the process.
I just can't figure out why Ms. Evans would actually agree to appear on this very popular show in the midst of their family crisis. Prior to her being on "Dancing with the Stars," I believe she was relatively unknown to most of us who don't follow the country music scene. I also don't understand her request for privacy for her and her family. Her divorce filing would have had a lot less publicity and attention, had she not appeared on the show and dropped this bombshell in the middle of the series.
Was Ms. Evans using the show as a way to escape from her troubles? Or, was she using the show to draw more attention to herself and expose her husband's dirty little secrets. We may never know. Written by Maria Schweitzer
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 2:17 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
October 9, 2006
Basinger And Baldwin's Ongoing Custody Saga
Kim Basinger has been charged with violating court orders concerning ex-husband Alec Baldwin's visitation rights with their daughter. Basinger plead not guilty, and, if convicted, faces up to two months in jail and a 12,000 fine. Her trial will start on Jan 15.
Every day thousands of custodial parents, such as Ms. Basinger, take the law into their own hands, violating court ordered visitation with the non-custodial parent. If in fact, Kim Basinger did violate the court order; she should be punished for her actions.
Kim Basinger's issues with Alec Baldwin are irrelevant. It is not up to Ms. Basinger to unilaterally decide when she should and should not follow a custody order issued by the court. When Ms. Basinger chose Alec Baldwin to be the father of her child, she made the decision to permanently attach herself to Alec Baldwin, by way of their daughter, Ireland, regardless of the relationship between herself and Mr. Baldwin.
If she did not want the father of her child to be involved in the upbringing of her child, she should have thought about utilizing a sperm donor.
Since that is not the case, and Mr. Baldwin does want to have an active role in the upbringing of their daughter, Ms. Basinger needs to respect the court's decision. Written by Maria Schweitzer
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 2:27 PM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
According to the judges, an emphatic no! While most of us see it as just entertainment, these judges are serious, and are willing to give the two best dancers on the show, Mario Lopez, and Joey Lawrence some seriously low scores to prove their point.
In the ballroom dancing world the rules are the "law," and the penalties are stiff. All the hard work and effort by the dancers can and will be thrown out the window for a violation of the "law."
While I disagree with the judges extremely low scores for the violations of the rules, I understand their point that this is a competition, and the rules are in place to provide a benchmark by which they can assess the dancer's programs. And most importantly the judges are not to be defied.
So, please Mario and Joey, straighten up, for the sake of the viewers, because we definitely can't imagine a world in which Jerry Springer takes the win because of a technicality! Written by Maria Schweitzer
Posted by The Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer at 8:54 AM|Permalink
| Comments (0)
DISCLAIMER - Using this website does not create an attorney client relationship between you and the Law Offices of Donald P. Schweitzer or any individual attorney. None of the materials available at this site constitute legal advice. This site has been designed to provide you with general information regarding our firm, our attorneys, and the types of services we provide. If you need legal advice, or desire to establish an attorney client relationship with any of the firm's attorneys, please contact us.
