Pubdate: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 Source: Sidelines, The (TN Edu) Copyright: 2007 Middle Tennessee State University Contact: http://www.mtsusidelines.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2861 Author: Tiffany Gibson Note: Tiffany Gibson is a freshman English major Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/coke.htm (Cocaine) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/heroin.htm (Heroin) CELEBRITY 'JUSTICE' IMBALANCED Millions of people are sentenced to prison correctional facilities every year because a variety of criminal charges, but Lindsay Lohan walks away unfettered from cocaine possession due to her fame and fortune. What kind of message is this sending to society? Many celebrities over the years have used their fame and success as a way of avoiding actual consequences for their reckless behavior. Their carefree conduct and persuasive personalities have repeatedly factored over the years in various cases. Whether it's O.J. Simpson's murder trial or Hugh Grant's prostitute scandal, the justice system seems to favor these rich individuals by merely giving them a warning before patting them on the head and releasing them back into society. Both of these gentlemen and many more celebrities have been acquitted of all charges against them and set free, but the justice system finally has began to crack it's crude whip on celebrities such as Martha Stewart, Paris Hilton and most recently, Michael Vick. Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick is currently fighting for his freedom and innocence in the court room; however, if convicted, Vick could be fined $250,000 for interstate commerce, and sentenced to one year in prison along with an additional $100,000 fine for the dogfighting charge. Vick's animal cruelty case has caused worldwide controversy involving whether or not the judicial system is taking celebrity justice too far when in reality the judicial system is just beginning to take charge. Vick knew that what he was doing was wrong and continued to proceed; therefore, he committed a crime and is ultimately responsible for his own actions and poor decisions. By 'excusing' celebrities of breaking the law, the legal system is sending average citizens the wrong message. Perhaps it is quite acceptable to carry a baggie of cocaine around while shoplifting at a nearby department store or maybe it's alright to drive under the influence of alcohol and endanger innocent lives. Without order there is chaos, and chaos can lead to destruction. Therefore, the unbalanced scale of celebrity justice and injustice is desperately in need of tipping. When Stewart and Hilton were sentenced to time behind bars, many people became outraged about their images being tainted, while others proceeded to flaunt gigantic smiles across their faces. Clearly, it was about time someone knocked both Stewart and Hilton off of their high horses and brought them back down to reality. Hilton was repeatedly warned not to violate her probation or operate an automobile on a suspended license, but like most celebrities, she persisted with her audacious behavior. When it came time for sentencing, apparently the only thing Hilton felt was remorse, but the judge apparently grew tired of her lawyer's concocted plea and slammed the gavel, making history. By taking action against delinquent celebrities, the legal system has finally began to bestow the equality of social class on the United States and its citizens. Average people are now celebrating the fact that celebrities are beginning to receive proper punishment for their actions. Article 1 of the Untied States Constitution states that all human beings are born free and 'equal' in dignity and rights. Apparently this statement that has been left intact since the first draft of the Constitution has been completely forgotten. Celebrities are human beings that do not deserve any special treatment in society or in the courtroom, and even though these two judges felt punishment was suitable for Stewart and Hilton, many other judges proceed to work around jail time for convenience of the stars. When average people are charged with possession of a controlled substance or have simply committed a criminal act there is a good chance that they will serve a prison term. Lohan's failure to be tried on her counts of cocaine possession really irritated many people because the evidence was practically irrefutable. In fact, the law states that anyone with a first offense possession of any narcotics such as heroin, crack or cocaine is required to pay a $50,000 fine and can face up to seven years in prison. Nevertheless, "Mean Girls" star Lohan, held down the word "vomit" this time as she repeatedly stated the cocaine was not hers. This statement and ignorance of those around her allowed her to be cleared of all of the cocaine charges. People could barely believe their ears when they heard that Lohan was released on a rehabilitation agreement proposed by the judge. In reaction to Lohan's slap on the wrist, a blog, "The Superficial," lashed out at the young Hollywood star and the legal system by stating that "Lohan could roll up the Constitution and use it to snort a mile-long line of coke in front of the entire Supreme Court and still would not get charged with possession." Perhaps expensive lawyers and high-status careers cater to celeb invincibility, but their power and control over Hollywood Boulevard will not always affect their future in the courtroom. By sacrificing a few selected celebrities, the justice system has proven it's dedication to balancing authority, but the question still remains; will celebrity justice continued to be served? - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake