• You must be logged in to see or use the Shoutbox. Besides, if you haven't registered, you really should. It's quick and it will make your life a little better. Trust me. So just register and make yourself at home with like-minded individuals who share either your morbid curiousity or sense of gallows humor.
From GU's link.
the female defendant in the video was in jail for failing to complete a diversion program for a prior shoplifting charge. During her time at Metro Corrections in Louisville she said she was never given a uniform and was forced to spend her time there without pants or feminine hygiene products.

Wolf immediately began making phone calls to Metro Corrections officials in the video, outraged over the treatment of the woman.

“I’m not trying to embarrass you, I’m very sorry,” Wolf told the defendant in court. “Can we get her something to cover up with? Anything, anything, anything. I don’t care what it is.”

Steve Durham, a spokesman for the jail, told local station WDRB that the woman had not been in custody long enough to receive a jail jumpsuit. She had been in the jail for three days prior to her court appearance.

“What the hell is going on?” Wolf can be heard saying on the phone. “I am holding her here until she is dressed appropriately to go back to jail. This is outrageous.”
[...]

The warden needs to be fired from his cushy chair.

This lady had been there 3 days without pants. Or any hygiene products.
 
Last edited:
This is disgusting that the gaurds and officers thought this is an appropriate manner to treat a fellow human. Pigs :mooning:
 
Also from the link:
Jail officials contend that the woman was wearing athletic shorts covered by a long shirt,
If this is true then maybe this whole situation is getting blown out of proportion?

I agree it's crazy that she hadn't been issued a uniform after being in jail for 3 days- however, if she was wearing short shorts with a long t-shirt then she wasn't exactly 'pants-less' as the title of the article claims.

I assume her outfit was probably the clothes she was wearing when she went into jail? Should the jail have given her a uniform that properly covered he up, yes- & was her appearance of being pants less inappropriate for court, of course.

Seems to me she chose to dress herself in short shorts that were too short to be seen under her shirt (which btw my teenager tries to do on a regular basis & I shut that shit down!) and then play the part of a victim when the judge flipped out instead of informing the court that she did in fact have shorts on.

This sounds to me like less of a crime against humanity & more of a crime against fashion!
 
Last edited:
The warden needs to be fired from his cushy chair.

Thought jails were run by sherriffs or some other city law enforcement officials. Wardens are with prisons.

Seems more likely anyway for some podunk sherrif to operate a shitshow like this.

Hopefully a greedy sleazebag lawyer got wind of this story and is already planning out the lawsuit, provided she was in fact pants-less. If she had shorts, even short shorts, then i see no big fuss and this uppity judge should take a fucking chill pill.
 
The woman stated that some women in the dorm were given clothing while others were not. So I did wonder if it were a size issue. However, then the woman had the yellow uniform, so I don't know.
The hygiene products... no excuse for that.
 
It was pretty clear to me by the judge's reaction there were NO pants. The podium blocked our view. The segment where the defendant was directed to walk to the back bench was edited out, that leads me to assume her ass was hanging out.
 
It was pretty clear to me by the judge's reaction there were NO pants. The podium blocked our view. The segment where the defendant was directed to walk to the back bench was edited out, that leads me to assume her ass was hanging out.
You know what they say about assuming
If the view is blocked there is no way of knowing. Maybe you couldn't see to make the story more news worthy then it really was
Always remained in my street cloths when held for just a few days
 
Last edited:
Why is the article pointing out that she's a black woman? Does it have anything to do with why she was sent there without pants? If not, it seems unnecessary.
 
Why is the article pointing out that she's a black woman? Does it have anything to do with why she was sent there without pants? If not, it seems unnecessary.
Guess this is why, whole story could be agenda driven

http://m.huffpost.com/us/author/sebastian-murdock
[doublepost=1469980490,1469980204][/doublepost]Well now, what have we here

. The woman, who hasn’t been named, was brought to Jefferson District Court on Friday after being held for three days wearing only a long t-shirt that covered her athletic shorts, making it look as if she had nothing on underneath.

https://www.rt.com/usa/354041-kentucky-judge-inmate-pants/
 
Even if she did have shorts on, I can't imagine what state they were in if she was on her period and wasn't given feminine hygiene products.
 
Even if she did have shorts on, I can't imagine what state they were in if she was on her period and wasn't given feminine hygiene products.
If she had been on her period and no feminine products for 3 days I'm sure the headline would be "inmate goes in front of judge caked in blood"...eeeew! I think the bloody woman in court would be mentioned before the one wearing shorts and a damn t shirt. I could be wrong though...
 
I have a question tho, if she felt comfortable enough to go out and about in what she was wearing in the courtroom, why did it become not appropriate after she was arrested?

I agree she should have been given a jumpsuit and whatever else she needed but really if she felt comfortable enough to walk around with a long top on and shorty shorts before why does it become a problem for her now?
 
I have a question tho, if she felt comfortable enough to go out and about in what she was wearing in the courtroom, why did it become not appropriate after she was arrested?

I agree she should have been given a jumpsuit and whatever else she needed but really if she felt comfortable enough to walk around with a long top on and shorty shorts before why does it become a problem for her now?
Like I said agenda driven, you can tell by the headline and the reporters other articles
Just like reporters posting Treyvon's picture as a harmless looking sweet 12 year old youngster or the constant lie hands up don't shoot Michael Brown BS
 
I'm so confused, I don't even know what to believe anymore.

If it is true that she went to court in the clothes she was arrested in (which includes shorts) I'm going to be pretty pissed. If she wasn't really on her period, or lying about the jail denying her feminine products (@Chrystan brings up a VERY good point) I'm going to be pissed too.
 
The inmate seems experienced enough with jail to game the system. The jailers should be smart enough to stop her. Either the jail,treated her badly as claimed or they stupidly let her win this round.
 
I have a question tho, if she felt comfortable enough to go out and about in what she was wearing in the courtroom, why did it become not appropriate after she was arrested?
Right? That was my thought exactly! I think she saw how outraged & apologetic the judge was when she thought this lady had been left pantsless for 3 days & I think she (perhaps brilliantly) used the sympathy to her advantage.
 
Maybe she had the skirt and shorts but the had drawstrings so they got confiscated. They always tool my boots becauseof the strings. Usually give you a paper suit or something when that happens, though
 
Judges have an attitude about courtroom attire. It's disrespful to appear in almost anything than your Sunday best or a jail issued uniform. The judge was probably pissed about her bare legs.
 
Back
Top