At least, not at first.
But after more than an hour spent in closed chambers, Judge Stephanie Sautner ruled—rather amazingly—that Lindsay was not in violation of her probation.
However, she was found guilty on one count…
"If there is an ambiguity it gets resolved in favor of the defendant," Judge Sautner said once the parties returned to open court. "If you are guilty of a violation of probation, I don't see it. But what you are guilty of is extremely poor judgment. Having parties on the roof."
Lucky for Lindsay, Sautner noted, "Poor judgment is not a violation of your probation."
Sautner underscored her scolding by adding that Lohan's neighbors have been writing letters to the court complaining about her behavior.
So yes, Lindsay once again managed to escape jail time—but she didn't walk away without any additional punishments. While Lindsay will remain under house arrest through the end of her original sentence, additional restrictions have been put in place for her final week in lockdown.
"I am not happy about this house arrest, it was the sheriff's doing...You are not allowed to have parties," Sautner said. "I am ordering it. House arrest is akin to being in jail. You can have one friend over at a time, and your family, should you want them. That is it."
So, that might be the end of those camera crews.
Right now there is no drug or testing in effect," Sautner continued, denying the District Attorney's request to modify her probation to include drug and alcohol testing.
"Do you want to go on with your life?" the judge, who delivered a serious scolding in open court, said.
"Yes, I do," Lohan responded.
"You knew I was unhappy with house arrest and yet you had a party on your roof?" Sautner went on. "How dumb is that...I'm sure you and I will be very happy if we never have to see each other again." Ouch.
Still, the question remains: if Lindsay was not in violation of her probation, what gives with the positive alcohol test?
Well, that's where the judge's own, well, judgment came in.
While a test did provide a positive reading for alcohol (but not narcotics), the level likely either fell within a margin or error that couldn't be verified or was a test that otherwise could not be confirmed by subsequent readings. In instances such as that—and when a defendant's freedom is at stake—judges typically give the defendant the benefit of the doubt.
Of course, to hear Shawn Holley tell it, there was never any doubt to begin with.
"She's in compliance with the terms and conditions of her probation," she said after the hearing. "She has obeyed all laws. She's done nothing wrong, she's done everything right…I know you are all disappointed to hear that.
"It's not a positive test, she's not supposed to be tested after Feb. 25 at all," Holley said. "I don't know if she drank alcohol or not…But she is permitted to drink alcohol in her home. Alcohol is not a violation of her probation."
According to the probation report, Lohan actually failed to submit to two narcotic tests, one on May 31, and one on June 2. It was the test she took on June 13 that gave the positive reading for alcohol. As for her May 30 incident, when the device went off and officers were sent to her home, the report said that officials found a "stick substance" on the home unit and that Lindsay had informed them that a bottled drink spilled on the device.
In any case, sounds like we can chalk this one up to a misunderstanding. Again.
Lindsay, who for once dressed appropriately for her appearance, left swiftly following the hearing. Another progress report has been set for July 21.
—Additional reporting by Marcus Mulick
(Originally published June 23, 2011 at 12:14 p.m. PT)