I’m not sure why you don’t think “resources” qualifies as a reason. Probation officers are often overworked already. Why give them more work if it’s meaningless?

Yeah, that’s pretty much what unsupervised probation is. It’s a real thing, you know. “Do your community service, don’t get in trouble again, and if you do we’ll toss the book at you” is about what it is. Somebody comes along a checks at the end that you did what you said you did, but that’s about it. You don’t have…

I’ve yet to see you, or anyone else, make a cogent argument for why it would be necessary or useful. All you’ve claimed is that it’s not really that big of a waste because it doesn’t take much time for her to check in, ignoring the other resources needed or addressing the actual need for supervision, and failing to…

I don’t know anything about her, but if I were in her shoes, I wouldn’t need supervision to never ever ever pick up a gun again after killing someone like this.

Lol, you’re positing that killing a loved one unintentionally wouldn’t get through to her but checking in with a probation officer once a month would? This is a LAUGHABLE proposition, and just illustrates the uselessness of probation in this case.

You need to learn to read, apparently.

A person stupid enough to be talked into a stunt like this is stupid enough to be talked into anything. “Hey, go put your baby in the lake. He’ll float to the other side, I swear! Don’t worry about that alligator. They’re really very friendly.”

She did not willingly shoot a man to death. She willingly shot a book and an accident occured. Facts are important.

With stupidity of that intensity, it’s best she be supervised, because of COURSE she will end up in a bad relationship with another stupid guy and bad things will happen. Is there any doubt of that?

She’s going to serve a jail sentence, which no one is arguing with, so she’s not just “walking away” from it. Also, your own logic disagrees with you. It’s 5 minutes of time for both parties, so it’s not like it’s some additional punitive measure against her. If it’s no imposition upon the probation officer, then it’s…

I agree. If it was the guy’s idea, couldn’t it be considered that it was himself that pulled the trigger?

This is actually a good analogy - I was about to blast you for insinuating that a person who gets shitfaced and then gets behind the wheel has no culpability, but that’s not what you said.

If she does nothing wrong but show up for her visits or, eventually, be available for the probation officers calls, it’s, like 5 minutes out of that officers day.

Her paying 10 years worth of fees is revenue.

It’s not true at all that all probation is supervised up front. Courts can absolutely sentence people to unsupervised probation right away, at least in many states.

I said nothing about intent being a factor for consideration, so let’s not pretend I did. I also didn’t say probation wasn’t warranted, just that supervised probation wasn’t.

Unless that probation officer is actually with her 24/7, how will a probation officer prevent her from doing the same thing again?

Yup. All this is going to do is take the attention from a like already hugely overloaded probation officer.

Same thing I thought. Supervised probation seems like a waste of resources in this case.

What is 10 years of supervised probation going to accomplish here? Does anyone expect her to pursue a life of crime after she gets out? She had no criminal intent, just criminal stupidity.