Paris Hilton and the Hollywood Aristocracy

On June 7, 2007, it was widely reported that pampered brat Paris Hilton was freed after serving only three days of a forty-five day sentence stemming from a parole violation following a previous reckless driving conviction. This is the latest example in the long history of celebrities receiving special treatment by our justice system.

Hilton was first arrested on a DUI charge and plead guilty to reckless driving, for which she was placed on parole. She was taken into custody again and ordered to spend 45 days in jail after she was found driving with a suspended license, a parole violation.

Thank God Hilton is back behind bars. When law enforcement authorities treat people of wealth and power differently from ordinary citizens charged with the same crimes, our democracy becomes imperiled.

Ms. Hilton, 26, a hotel chain heiress, is famous for her inebriated escapades with fellow bimbos Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan. The only obvious talent she ever displayed was playing her clueless self on the reality show "The Simple Life".

Hilton was never expected to serve more than 23 days of her 45-day sentence because inmates typically get half of their time off for good behavior. She was reportedly seen bawling during her first day in jail. Then two psychiatrists visited her, even though she was supposedly doing well. After three days, Ms. Hilton was released due to "an undisclosed illness."

According to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Office, Hilton was to serve the rest of her sentence, 40 days, under house arrest, during which she was to be monitored by an ankle bracelet. She was credited with an additional two days because she started serving her time shortly before midnight on a Sunday and was released at 2 a.m. on a Thursday.

During a June 7, 2007 broadcast of "The O'Reilly Factor", it was reported that Ms. Hilton's illness largely consisted of crying jags, and that Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca is celebrity-obsessed. Sheriff Baca, in effect, had altered the judge's sentence.

You didn't have to be a criminologist or psychiatrist to know that this stunk to high heaven. If you or I got sick in jail, we'd be sent to the prison infirmary or shackled to a bed in a local hospital under police guard. Paris couldn't handle being in the clink, and the psychiatrists were apparently willing to certify that she had a life-threatening illness, allowing her to be released from jail. Maybe daddy pulled a few strings, too.

On June 8, 2007, during a highly charged hearing in front of Superior Court Judge Michael T. Sauer, the heiress was ordered back to jail. Thank God. If a sheriff can spring a convict from jail because of her wealth, then we live in an aristocracy, not a democracy. America shouldn't have one set of rules for persons of privilege and another for ordinary folks. That's why we fought a revolution. We don't have kings and queens--at least we're not supposed to.

Ms. Hilton's defenders have said that LA courts routinely give very little or no jail time to parole violators under these circumstances, and that Paris, therefore, is being treated unfairly. I find that assertion very hard to believe since parole is, by definition, a conditional release from incarceration. If you violate the conditions, you go back to jail. To quote from Ballentine's Law Dictionary (1969): "Parole...does not set aside or affect the sentence; the convict remains in legal custody of the state and under control of its agents, subject at any time, for breach of condition, to be returned to the penal institution."

But even if Los Angeles has a ridiculously permissive system, that doesn't make Ms. Hilton's punishment unreasonable. A car is an inherently dangerous instrumentality. Driving recklessly or while impaired can have deadly consequences. A few weeks in jail for a parole violation following conviction on those charges is a small price to pay. You can't justify letting Paris walk by saying that everyone else does. By that logic, a convicted murderer should never serve any time because others have been given suspended sentences.

Another person of privilege recently under house arrest was domestic doyenne Martha Stewart, who was convicted several years ago of lying to federal investigators in connection with the suspicious timing of a profitable sale of ImClone stock. Moved by 1,000-plus letters of support from Stewart's fans, the trial judge went easy on her. Stewart served five months in a prison famously known as "Camp Cupcake" and was placed under house arrest with ankle bracelet- monitoring for another six months.

During her so-called house arrest, Ms. Stewart was permitted to spend 48 hours a week outside her home to attend meetings and other work-related activities. During that time, she attended many high-profile media events, including the National Magazine Awards. Stewart was investigated for violating the terms of her release when she was found hobnobbing at a Time Magazine gala, but no action was ever taken. She then petitioned a federal judge to increase her out-of-house time to 80 hours a week but was turned down.

You can bet that if the seventeenth century Italian astronomer Galileo, under house arrest for the last eight years of his life, had ever strayed off his property, he would have either been swiftly imprisoned or executed. Galileo was sentenced for teaching Copernican theory. Over the last few centuries, Western society has gone from persecuting the thoughtful to indulging the thoughtless, especially when they're rich and powerful.

The despicable supermodel Naomi Campbell, who has a history of assaulting people, served several days of community service for hitting her housekeeper with a cellphone. The maid needed four surgical staples to close the resulting gash.

Ms. Campbell turned the judicial wrist slap into a publicity gig, showing up to clean toilets in designer outfits and stilletto heels amidst a media frenzy. She even got a co-worker to carry her bags. Campbell should have been sent to an undisclosed location, forced to wear work clothes like everyone else, and forbidden to enlist co-workers as personal assistants. When the law is mocked, nobody can respect it.

Australian actor Russell Crowe, also known for his violent temper, was criminally charged after throwing a house phone at a clerk at a New York City hotel, causing injuries to the man's face that required medical treatment. But Crowe didn't serve a day in jail and settled a civil suit with the clerk out of court. The story is recounted on Australia's ABC Radio website at http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2005/s1386272.htm.

Crowe is a superb actor, but I'll never go to one of his movies again. Maybe if we hit out-of-control celebrities in the pocketbook hard enough, they'll start behaving more responsibly. In the meantime, judicial and law enforcement officials should take a cold shower and stop collectively masturbating over the "beautiful people."