This sounds like an acceptable resolution for everyone involved. I think the
kids know they made a huge mistakes in their actions, but they are probably good
kids deep inside. Instead of going directly to prison (for right now) they have
been given the opportunity to prove themselves. If they fulfill all the
requirements of the plea, then they will be better people in the long run. This
also save taxpayers a lot of money keeping them out of prison. However, if they
screw up and don't take the plea agreement seriously, then it's off to
prison and they'll have to learn the hard way. Sounds like a fair deal to
I agree with the judge that this ought to be a misdemeanor.That said,
logic declares that there is no "attempted" in their actions. They set
off water bottle bombs.It's too bad you have to create a lie to make
use of the law. Sigh.
It is pathetic to think a prosecuting attorney would even consider a felony
charge in this case.
This was a wise judge and a great outcome. Now it's up to the kids to
ensure that this decision was the very best outcome. I trust them that it is
and that they will make it appear as though the system worked in this case."Sorry don't get it done, Dude" was spoken to Dean Martin
when being drunk nearly got people killed. It's the same here. All kids
need to be taught that you can't bring folks in accidental death back with
an "I'm sorry". This could have been far more tragic. Lucky
kids.Congratulations, so far, to the judge.
Boy did they get off easy!
I wonder if this case would have had a different outcome if the people involved
I think this whole case was overblown. We need to spend our time and energy
worrying about real criminals.
This type of story is good for opening a discussion with your children about
decision making. Talking about what types of activities are harmless and what
type of activities can lead to injury, property damage and/or legal problems.
Risky activities always seem fun and exciting until somebody gets hurt or
arrested.The sentence here seems pretty reasonable to me.
So three 18 year olds pull a dumb prank like hundreds of other 18 year olds do
every day but this makes the news because she's a former Miss Riverton??
Seems like justice would have been better served to have just let the court
system do its thing rather than running her through the court of public opinion
They should have just been fined for littering and leave it at that.
To some posters here that don't take mischief seriously: If your
family or property were damaged, you may accept their apology. I'm sure
you will feel good about that. I bet you would sing a different tune. In this
case, I'm glad they were not treated as though they were littering. If
someone is killed because of a driver texting or being drunk, is it only an
issue because someone dies? I guess that's why attempted murder can bring
a slap on the wrist, when the only difference between that and actual murder is
whether or not the shooter is a good shot. I think there are times when pranks
need to be treated with severity, else no lesson is learned and my family or
property may be next; or yours. Congratulations judge! You did right.
To Cinci Man. You make it sound like these bombs were very, very dangerous.
They were "bombs" made out over harmless material. I have been around
when one went off, no harm done, just noise. I have been close to one when they
went off, no harm done, just noise. I have been within 5 to 10 feet of one when
it when off, no harm done, just noise. Bottom line, no harm done, just
noise.This was blown way out of proportion...
one thing in the article says that they were initially charged with possesion of
an explosive device. does that mean having a firecracker is a felony? they are
Crazy.This country needs to lighten up.
Hey Dixie Dan: You write: "I wonder if this case would have had a
different outcome if the people involved were minorities?"Think
about it! -- Kendra is a minority! She's a pageant queen. I wonder if the
sentence would have been lighter if Kendra was not a pageant queen. Probably
so. And, no doubt, the press probably wouldn't even cover a story like
In regards to Dixie Dan's comment, they weren't minorities and so we
don't know the outcome. To Milner, Yes $500 and 200 hours of
service. The costs of an attorney and they are not cheap. The loss of an
opportunity to possibly be Miss Utah and go to the Miss America Pageant. The
embarrassment of having all of the negative notoriety. Facing and explaining to
Mom and Dad. This is just a start and When everything is
considered, it doesn't appear to be a "cheap" experience. There is a lot of wisdom with the Judge and his decision to avoid making
all of them criminals.
I think it was resolved appropriately. The costs for attorneys will increase
the out of pocket cost and with the fine and time for "service" is
appropriate.No system is perfect and in time a cooler decision was
made.It did highlight a need for more adult supervision in the
county attorney's office. Overcharging seems a fair assessment of the way
this was handled by the prosecution. It got them a lot of "tough on
crime" face time and I am sure this was appreciated by those who seek
election or re-election.To me, some time picking up litter on the
highways, and scrubbing graffiti off of walls would be appropriate instead of
talking to young people.You can mark me as one not impressed with
the county attorney's office in this matter.
She is getting off too easy...should have to pay the full time or penalty. If it
is not tough she will once again choose to be involved in harming others. Put
her behind bars with all of the other out-of-control young people. What a
disgrace...when will they ever learn?
Dixie Dan asks a question that isn't really answerable, but still quite
important to consider. As a prosecutor, I've worried about that part of
human nature that may make us more likely to punish someone we subconsciously
perceive differently, even as we try to be nonprejudiced and even-handed. When
we evaluate a defendant, especially a young one, it's natural to think of
that person as a basically good person who got mixed up in some very bad
choices, or as a basically threatening person whose choices show him to be
dangerous, and we don't always have a fair or rational basis for those
feelings. I try to distrust myself, and not be ruled by whether a defendant
seems articulate, or pretty, or white, or any of a number of qualities that I
know aren't really fair to consider, but that tend to influence our
judgment in subtle and insidious ways.