Jump to content

Finally News: Haley Pullos to do 3 months in jail and ...


Recommended Posts

  • Members

During her latest day in court, Haley changed her plea to no contest on one DUI and in exchange, the district attorney dropped the second DUI charge along with the hit-and-run charge.

So, it could have been worse.

https://www.justjared.com/2024/04/29/general-hospital-actress-haley-pullos-receives-jail-time-following-dui-arrest/?=morehere

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13364051/General-Hospital-star-Haley-Pullos-months-jail-DUI-crash.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 7
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Having lost a relative to a person that was driving under the influence - 3 months is nothing. This is a joke of a ruling. If it was up to me - no less than a year. People should think twice before they put others' lives in risk with their behavior.  .08 BAC is WELL enough to impair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Reading the whole story, the hit-and-run part of the charge was actually for her hitting a parked car just before she got into the accident, so it wasn't that she hit the injured driver and then ran. She couldn't have since her car was destroyed.

"Also dismissed was a hit-and-run charge resulting from Pullos running into a parked car just before the freeway crash. But though prosecutors dropped that count, she will still have to pay restitution to the owner of the car she damaged."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

After the hit-and-run she proceeded to drive on the freeway at an extreme speed, lost control & her car jumped a 2 foot barrier & was then driving the wrong way toward oncoming traffic. One car swerved to avoid her & the car immediately behind was the car she hit & both her car & that car were destroyed then. 

Her car had to be moving at a high speed to create the final accident. I'm just spit-balling here but perhaps the hit-and-run was the first car, which swerved but was hit a glancing blow. 

There seems to be a considerable problem in this late reporting of what actually happened. 

Edited by Contessa Donatella
make clear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

No.

What Jason said is what was reported from last year.  The first accident (the hit-and-run) where she hit the parked car, was on the city streets of Pasadena a little while before she entered the freeway.   The first car wasn't on the freeway at all.

The only confusion in reporting is from outlets rushing to give updates on her sentencing deal, without actually reading the original reports.

When emergency responders (police/ambulance/etc) arrived at the at the scene of the freeway accident, they extricated her and attended to her, attended to the driver whose vehicle she crashed into, and the destroyed vehicles.  She was brought to the hospital etc.   At some point later that night/day, or within a few minutes/hours/days later, the police realized she'd hit the first car  in a completely separate incident just before she entered the freeway.  So then they charged her with both accidents. 

But yeah the original reports always said the first vehicle she hit was stationary or parked.

Edited by janea4old
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have no problem at all with this description of events regarding the hit-and-run. My point was that her car was not disabled at that point & I gave an accurate description of the wrong way, head-on crash which was the most serious part of the entire thing. If that is cleared up now, I am fine with how it stands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
    • Brooke did ads before ATWT too. That probably helped get her the job. After ATWT she seemed to branch more into hosting, along with ads.  I think I saw Kelley in an ad or two, but you're right she wasn't on as much. 
    •   Thanks for sharing these. I wonder if Charles might have been in the running for Adam. I know Preacher was a bit of a bad boy at times on EON, but Neal seemed to be a step down, and Robert Lupone had played a similar part on AMC. Given the huge cast turnover at this point I wonder who thought they had been there long enough to go.  Laura Malone/Chris Rich would get a remote within the next year. 
    • Interesting.  It seems to allude to that statement that Warren Burton made around that time about some AW actors getting special treatment.  I wonder who was resentful about not getting to go. 
    • Good morning, boys!  I figured that it was time that our Gio was introduced into the hotness thread

      Please register in order to view this content

      @ranger1rg I even included a close up of his face for ya!
    • Under all of Madonna's social media today there is this wave of negative, toxic, absurd comments by Lady Gaga fans telling her how Gaga surpassed her in concert in Copacabana. I mean... Who the hell cares? Why are these fan communities so freaking toxic??? I'm sure Madonna doesn't care... But still. Have some respect for M. Leave her social media alone. Go cheer Gaga and be happy. Why come and spew hate on M??? Crazy world.
    • FYI, again, Ruth/Letitia is not in either of these 2 episodes. So that concludes the 4 episodes I had from Nov. 1983. I don't have the October episodes.
    • Eddie has begun uploading the 1990 episodes. I'm so happy about that. I was mindfully taking a break till there's plenty of episodes I can binge watch when I feel like it. Now that 1989 is complete... I can't wait to press play on February 1989 and resume where I left off.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy