HAN SEO HEE submits an APPEAL (to Court) against the Judgment
of her (Original) First Trial (of 1.5 YEARS in PRISON) ; 2021.11.23
(Note: I may revise and add / update this over time , as seems reasonable)
--- Begin ---
It is likely to take even *6 MONTHS* for the APPEALS COURT (JUDGE) to act on the HSH request for a review of her PRISON PUNISHMENT duration (currently now *ONE YEAR plus 6 MONTHS* in time).
Back on June 10, 2021 ... At the *beginning* of the Original First Trial , IF that HAN SEO HEE had done a GUILTY PLEA ... And stated REMORSE , and stated FEAR about doing PRISON time duration (reasonable to me) ... THEN , I would say *ONE YEAR of PRISON* was a LOT more likely for HSH , and even the lesser *9 MONTHS* , with consideration given to the *HAIR TEST* outcome of NO ILLEGAL DRUGS for HSH ... But those options for HSH on June 10, 2021 are long gone now ... Which is why that I suspect that *15 MONTHS* of PRISON Punishment is the likely amount that the APPEALS COURT JUDGE will choose for HSH on it.
--- End ---
--- Begin ---
*** HAN SEO HEE ; PRISON PUNISHMENT , 'Best Guess' ***
(1) I will guess that IF HSH can get the JUDGE to lower her punishment to *ONE YEAR of PRISON* , that would be a fairly GOOD OUTCOME overall for her ... NOT sure that you can expect to get say *9 MONTHS* of PRISON duration ... But I suppose one can always hope for that.
(2) HSH gets a 3 MONTHS reduction , to 15 MONTHS of PRISON duration ... I would say this is surely possible.
But it ALL depends on factors as -->
(A) Does HSH seem truly sorry and remorseful about her situation.
(B) The Court Room bad behavior *apology* of HSH would be JUDGE accepted as FEAR of PRISON motivated , and SURPRISE at her GUILITY finding resulting in an IMMEDIATE ARREST and PRISON situation for HSH.
(C) NOT sure if that HSH has to ADMIT that she LIED about using the LSD now (on APPEAL) , so changes completely from her Original Court Trial denial statements ... That MAY be what the APPEALS COURT JUDGE wants it ... FULL GUILTY admission on all factors , on the part of HSH.
(D) And will HSH seem convincing to the JUDGE in making her reversal statements , NO IDEA here on it.
(3) The JUDGE just figures that the *ONE YEAR of PUNISHMENT* requested originally by the PROSECUTOR , seems like a good punishment level to use it with HSH.
So , I suspect that *15 MONTHS* in PRISON is most likely from the APPEALS COURT as punishment for HSH , say *60%* likely ... Then , *12 MONTHS* of PRISON , would seem as *30%* likely ... Finally , *9 MONTHS* of PRISON , would seem as *10%* likely ... The *problem* that HAN SEO HEE has it ... Is that HSH likely needs to ADMIT that she was LYING about NOT using the LSD (even if that is actually NOT true , remember the *HAIR TEST* showed NO ILLEGAL DRUGS for HSH in August 2020) ... And show *considerable* REMORSE and SHAME about being in her situation , and 'wasting' the Original Court Trial *time and money* involved ... It all seems a *difficult* situation for HAN SEO HEE to *reverse* herself now (Original Court Trial statements) , and seem *convincing* on it to the JUDGE ... BUT , maybe the JUDGE just sees HAN SEO HEE as *significantly* AFRAID of being in PRISON (seems reasonable) ... And looks at the *HAIR TEST* as showing NO ILLEGAL DRUGS usage for HSH ... Meaning , HSH is *not* a repeated *drug addict* level user of LSD ... Which would *show* in the *HAIR TEST* in a situation of *repeated* LSD usage by HSH ... And the JUDGE figures that the PROSECUTOR was satisfied with *ONE YEAR in PRISON* for HSH in the beginning ... So , the JUDGE figures that *ONE YEAR in PRISON* seems enough punishment for HSH ... NOT sure that the JUDGE will see it all that way ... And again , my *guess* on the outcome , is *15 MONTHS in PRISON* for HAN SEO HEE at this point.
--- End ---
--- Begin ---
*** HAN SEO HEE ; APPEALS COURT , Further Considerations ***
Currently , the HSH punishment is 1.5 YEARS in PRISON ... Which , the PROSECUTOR did *request* as punishment *lesser* time duration of *ONE YEAR* in PRISON for HSH ... So , the Original Court JUDGE involved , was likely NOT impressed much with HAN SEO HEE , because -->
(1) HSH had a likely somewhat fabricated story about her Urine Test Sample Cup dropping into the toilet bowl water (June 2020) ... Which the JUDGE said she found all of the chatter on it as NOT meaningful.
(2) HSH did likely seem to be questioning the performance level of Probation Office Workers who perform the illegal drugs Urine Testing ... Which , the JUDGE is NOT going to be liking to hear that from HSH either.
(3) The PROSECUTOR was *apparently* saying of knowing the *exact* LOCATION (date ???) of the HSH illegal drugs LSD usage ... Which was said to be when HAN SEO HEE was near a "Buddhist Statue" somewhere in Seoul City ... A lot of the Court Trial Events for HSH were CLOSED COURT , so there is a record , but NOT a PUBLIC one exactly (???).
(4) The JUDGE and PROSECUTOR seemed very convinced that the Urine Test result (showing illegal LSD drugs for HSH) was a VALID one.
(5) There seemed NO CONSIDERATION that HAN SEO HEE had *passed* a 'follow up' N.I.S.I Government Lab *HAIR TEST* (more accurate in many ways than the Urine Test) that showed NO ILLEGAL DRUGS USAGE for HSH in July of Year 2020 ... In the previous Court Trial that took place in July 2020 , a *different* JUDGE requested the *HAIR TEST* for HSH , and then released HSH on the basis of a NO ILLEGAL DRUGS Test Result , and maintained her Court Probation status ... This time (Nov. 17th) , the *different* JUDGE seemed to NOT consider that *HAIR TEST* result in any way ... Which , that is a *legal choice* (ignore the *HAIR TEST*) that the JUDGE can make it , at their option ... Apparently , the failed Urine Test is justification enough , IF the JUDGE chooses it , to determine a GUILTY Court Probation Period violation for HSH ... Which is what was determined by the JUDGE this time.
(6) HAN SEO HEE seemed to have NO IDEA that she would be ARRESTED and sent to PRISON ... Her LAWYER , if HSH had one (?) , should have prepared HSH for that clear possibility (PRISON ARREST) taking place ... And the HSH subsequent anger outburst in COURT , upon ARREST, is NOT to her advantage at all.
--- End ---
--- Begin ---
*** HAN SEO HEE ; APPEALS COURT Punishment Considerations ***
For HAN SEO HEE , the violation of her Court Probation Period , was set as *3 YEARS in PRISON* ... So , *1.5 YEARS in PRISON* is *less* than *3 YEARS in PRISON* ... However , the PROSECUTOR requested only *ONE YEAR* in PRISON as punishment for HAN SEO HEE ... So , *usually* , the JUDGE would *tend* to use the *ONE YEAR PRISON* duration as a *maximum* punishment ... And then , consider to give LESS punishment time duration IF there were considerations that might merit that taking place ... Say , the *HAIR TEST* showing NO ILLEGAL DRUGS USAGE for HSH , *might* be such a consideration ... However , the JUDGE gave out *6 MONTHS MORE* PRISON duration than the PROSECUTOR requested it ... Which , NOT quite sure on the JUDGE motivation on that ... But I have mentioned above a couple of *negative* aspects of what HAN SEO HEE was arguing it in her COURT defense activities.
*** HAN SEO HEE ; Options on APPEALS COURT Prison Punishment ***
(1) The APPEALS COURT JUDGE chooses to give some *consideration* to the HSH *HAIR TEST* showing NO ILLEGAL DRUGS USAGE for her in August 2020 ... This is likely HSH's best hope to justify LESS punishment ... Also , the PROSECUTOR requested *ONE YEAR* and not *1.5 YEARS* of punishment.
... (A) Which , that could change in the APPEALS COURT for the PROSECUTOR request ... He could INCREASE it to *1.5 YEARS* , due to 'no remorse' shown by HSH ... And bad behavior by HSH in the Court Room ... Who knows , the PROSECUTOR might request now even *2 YEARS of PRISON* for HSH in the APPEALS COURT event.
(2) The JUDGE *adds* MORE punishment time onto the HSH PRISON DURATION ... This is possible ... The logic would be as --> "You , HSH , might have done a GUILITY PLEA on June 10, 2021 ... At the *beginning* Original First Trial Event ... And gotten likely *ONE YEAR in PRISON* as punishment ... Instead , HSH , you wanted to argue about everything ... And you , HSH got *1.5 YEARS in PRISON* instead ... And then , HSH , you did behave badly in the COURT ROOM with the JUDGE ... So , HSH , I am going to add another *6 MONTHS* onto your punishment time , making it now *TWO YEARS in PRISON* for you ... And good luck , HAN SEO HEE."
I personally find added PRISON duration punishment as NOT so likely on a APPEALS JUDGE decision , but NOT impossible either at all ... So , the JUDGE logic , would be as HSH should have admitted guilt , and figured that the (PROSECUTOR suggested) *ONE YEAR* in PRISON is a LOT LESS than *3 YEARS* in PRISON specified by the HSH Court Probation decision of September 2017 ... There is no way to know IF that the Original Trial Court JUDGE might have chosen say 1.5 YEARS punishment anyway for HSH ... Or maybe , upon *apology* from HSH , the JUDGE gives HSH instead say *9 MONTHS* as PRISON time duration ... As reward for the HSH Guilty Plea resulting in NO WASTED TIME and MONEY with multiple COURT TRIAL events too ... So , HSH does 'face the music' (Plead Guilty) , and hopes for some mercy in the PRISON duration time ... Instead , HSH chose to DEBATE with the PROSECUTOR about the her illegal drugs situation ... And maybe the APPEALS COURT JUDGE is *not* impressed with HSH on her decision to DEBATE it all ... And maybe the APPEALS COURT JUDGE does NOT like the bad verbal behavior of HSH in the Original Court Trial , toward the JUDGE (apparently somewhat) either.
--- End ---
