Kings' Artest pleads not guilty to misdemeanor charges

Updated: March 22, 2007, 9:19 PM ET
Kings' Artest pleads not guilty to misdemeanor charges

Associated Press

AUBURN, Calif. -- Sacramento Kings forward Ron Artest pleaded not guilty Thursday to misdemeanor charges stemming from a domestic dispute with his wife earlier this month.

A Placer County Superior Court judge also ordered him to stay at least 100 yards away from his wife and children until further notice. Artest's attorney, William Portanova, entered pleas of not guilty to charges of battery and corporal injury to a spouse, false imprisonment and dissuading a witness from reporting a crime.

Artest sat in the audience section of the small courtroom among other defendants and members of the media. He spoke only when asked direct questions by Judge Francis Kearney, responding no when asked if he owned firearms and yes when asked if he understood the conditions of the restraining order.

Thomas Leupp, an attorney for Kimsha Artest, told the judge Artest's wife was not requesting a restraining order. Artest will be allowed to communicate with his family by telephone, e-mail and letter, the judge said. "We all decided that was the right thing to do for the family," Portanova said. "That is the right thing for now."

Artest is due back in court April 5.

He was arrested March 5 at his estate in Loomis, 25 miles northeast of Sacramento. He is accused of grabbing, pushing and slapping his wife during an argument. The couple's 3-year-old daughter was home at the time. He did not answer reporters' questions after Thursday's hearing. Artest planned to fly to Phoenix to join his team for Thursday night's game against the Suns, but his flight was diverted to Ontario, Calif., because of thunderstorms. Further flight delays in California led Kings president Geoff Petrie to tell Artest to head back to Sacramento. Artest has since apologized to his family and his teammates, and he sat out two games.

Outside the courtroom, Artest, Portanova and a body guard left in a black Yukon SUV as seven protesters held signs and chanted the player should face even more charges -- for the alleged neglect of his dog. Last month, county animal control officers seized Artest's Great Dane, Socks, because it wasn't being fed. The dog has since been released to the custody of one of his lawyers. "He really shouldn't have animals," said Heather Ireland, a spokeswoman for the group. Assistant District Attorney Dan Quick told the judge the county is still considering animal abuse charges.

Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press
 
You know, I am fundamentally against animal cruelty or whatnot, but people go all nutty over that stuff sometimes when there are larger issues actually involving humans, not to mention children. Perspective.
 
You know, I am fundamentally against animal cruelty or whatnot, but people go all nutty over that stuff sometimes when there are larger issues actually involving humans, not to mention children. Perspective.
Well, yes. It's all criminal.
 
From the Bee article http://www.sacbee.com/351/story/142759.html

"
In another reminder of Artest's turbulent home life, animal-welfare protesters were waiting for him outside the Auburn courtroom Thursday. Dressed as caterers, they carried small cutouts of Great Danes mounted on silver platters.
In February, county animal officers seized Socks, Artest's malnourished Great Dane. That case has not been resolved.
The protesters' point, said organizer Heather Ireland, is their belief that Placer County "caters" to Artest because of his celebrity status."

So the protesters sybolize...the county?
The great dane cutouts sybolize the dogs being catered to...Ron?

I'm confused, and apparently the reporter was as well since they had to ask. Brainstorming session gone bad.
 
Well, yes. It's all criminal.

If the guy's name wasn't Ron Artest this probably never would have seen the light of day.

It is about perspective. Ron comes from a pretty turbulent background. He and Kimsha have been together for a long time. And, as some couples do, they get in what have been reported frequently as pretty heated arguments with some shoving, etc. Do I approve? No, but I'm not going to pretend it doesn't happen every day in an awful lot of families. And there's a pretty significant difference between this situation, IMHO, and the case of someone like Nicole Brown where the battering was pretty obvious.

This is a very sensitive issue for a lot of people of both genders but I think we need to keep things in perspective. Not all families are like Ozzie and Harriet. I'm not saying domestic violence should simply be accepted but I think there are a myriad of degrees of domestic violence. I've known victims of spousal violence and would not ever trivialize what they went through but in this situation I really think this is something where it's more a matter of both of them needing some kind of counseling than jail time.
 
Back
Top