Treatment Of Celebrities Research Paper
Treatment of Celebrities in Society and the Law
Celebrities are considered royalty in the eyes of the public, and like royalty, they receive biased treatment in many ways. As a result, celebrities are treated differently than civilians by prosecutors and jurors in the eyes of the law.
There have been several cases where celebrities are able to commit heinous crimes and get away with them, even though there were witnesses to protest. Other civilians are falsely accused of being guilty, then years after the court condemns them for a mistake they are found innocent. On January 6th, Thomas Gibson, Criminal Minds
Star, was charged with a DUI, driving under the influence, after he drove his SUV through a half marathon. His bond was posted at 15,000 dollars. He paid his bond and …show more content…
was released the next day. All of the charges were dropped because he is a rich celebrity that can swindle his way to get special treatment in a court of law.
Not only do national celebrities get special treatment in the court system, but local rich celebrities do as well. A Teenager was charged with four counts of murder while driving intoxicated. He was supposed to be sentenced to prison for 20 years, but instead the judge ruled only ten months of probation due affluenza, a physiological disease the 16 year old was diagnosed with during the trial. Affluenza is a psychological problem in which because the teen came from a rich family and has never been told no, or taught values, the teenager does not know the difference between right from wrong(Gonchor). Since his family is rich and has a celebrity status, this teenager received special treatment that civilians would otherwise not have received. In our court system, whomever has the most money is treated in the most biased manner.
Even though celebrities receive special treatment, there are some cases when our legal system can 't turn a blind eye to the crimes they commit. Being arrested for a
DUI is a serious offence and DUI charges can be charged against everyone, even iconic people like celebrities. The legal limit for your blood alcohol content is .08 percent. This means if a person is pulled over having .08 percent, or higher, of alcohol in your blood you are considered, by law, drunk. Paris Hilton was caught driving with a
Blood alcohol level of .08 and was arrested. She was released on bond, but she was still scheduled to meet in court to discuss the outcome of her arrest. A similar case was when Kevin Hart was Arrested on April 14th, 2013 for a DUI charge. He was placed on a
5000 dollar bond after he almost hit a tanker truck going ninety miles per hour. Even though these celebrities are loved in the eyes of the public, sometimes the crimes they commit are too severe to be let them off with a slap on the wrist.
Justin Bieber has been treated biasedly by the law on several occasions. He has been arrested three times and committed two felonies. Such as causing more than
$20,000 in property damage to his neighbors house in Los Angeles, and drag racing under the influence in Florida (Caldwell). Plus that is only in the United States, in Brazil he illegally “tagged” a wall or spray painted a wall, and in Canada he was charged with assaulting his limo driver. There is one common aspect in all these altercations though, and that is the lack of repercussions for his actions.
The “repercussions” that Justin faced are hardly repercussions at all. One major example of this is the fact that he has not yet been deported from the United States.
Obama has deported 1.6 million people over the past 4 years for petty crimes that could
be years old, yet Justin Bieber has committed several bigger crimes very recently and has not even been threatened to be deported. While on the other hand the government has deported people who should, above all others, get special treatment. For example
Howard Dean Bailey, he was a navy veteran, and had been a citizen for five years when he was deported for a possession of marijuana charge that was over nine years old.
Plus there is a “We The People” petition to have Justin deported with over 270 thousand signatures and yet the government just ignores it.
Another way he has been treated biasedly by the law is by the punishments he has been given in court for his actions. For example, in Florida the state says that if you are given a DUI charge the consequences will include, but are not limited to, six to nine months in jail, a fine up to $2000, and a license suspension between 180 days and one year(Stim). All that Justin Bieber had to do was pay a $500 fine, make a charitable donation, and take an anger management class. According to ‘Radio.com’ not only was he driving under the influence, he also had an expired license, and was resistant to the police without violence and that is the only repercussion he faced. Another example is his “repercussions” for causing property damage to his neighbors house. In the state of
California property damage exceeding $10,000 is punishable by up to one year in jail and $50,000 in fines. But once again Justin was merely “slapped on the wrist” and faced neither of these punishments.
The common misconception from the public is that celebrities get preferential treatment from the law but in fact in some cases they receive negative treatment from the media and the jury. The jury of so called peers are not actually his peers since they
are celebrities being tried in front of a jury of normal people that may be jealous of them.
The jury may be out to get the violators because, rooted inside human morality, we all wish that we had more money and fame (Gibeaut). Judges will treat these cases much differently and no matter how hard they try they will act differently. Jurors will be more focused on the popularity that they can gain rather than focused on the case he or she is responsible for. The defendant will seek the case out for future benefits that will help their career. In celebrity cases somebody commits a relatively minor crime and it becomes a big story yet in normal circumstances would not even be looked at by the law. In high profile cases the prosecutor is placed under such scrutiny to keep the trial unbiased that they end up overcompensating and inevitably treating them differently.
Being an athlete is not all glamorous since they constantly have paparazzi following them capturing every action good or bad. More often than not the media disregards the good that is done and they focus on making the bad stuff breaking news.
Michael Phelps, for example, was photographed in 2009 by paparazzi and was caught smoking marijuana. Millions of people smoke this illegal drug everyday and never get punished, however, when Phelps is photographed once he is highly criticized by the media (Hubpages). Even though some athletes may not get jail time for their misdemeanors, in many cases the organization they are a part of will take their own action by suspending the athlete from competition for a certain time. Michael Phelps for example was arrested for DUI and was released and is currently waiting for trial.
Although he has yet to receive punishment from the courts, The United States
Swimming Team suspended Phelps from swimming for six months for his actions outside the pool.
Athletes are part of the entertainment business and whether they want it or not, most of them are given the publicity of celebrities. Often times civilians argue that celebrities are given leeway to escape harsh consequences for actions that break the law, but of course the opinions of civilians are subjective. Oscar Pistorius, a South
African paralympic runner, is the first paralympic runner to set stage on the Olympics.
On February 14, 2013 Oscar was charged with murder for killing his wife, Reeva
Steenkamp. Oscar defended his case with noises from the restroom early in the morning, and as a result he chose to take 5 shots into the restroom (Channel 4 News).
Because of the myriad of factors that were presented, the verdict for this particular case would be a difficult one. If Oscar Pistorius was not handicapped the verdict would be an evident premeditated murder, however, because of his disability the case has become problematic. According to laws of South Africa, premeditated murder would be life in prison unless given special circumstances like a first offense or a disability
(SmithSpark). The final verdict on Pistorius was culpable homicide with a 5 year jail sentence without bail.
Some may say that the severity of Oscar Pistorius’ actions constitutes life in prison, and that it was because of his status as an accomplished athlete that he was given a easy way out. On the contrary, the same decision would have been implemented to someone without a celebrity status. Typically, first offenses are taken into serious consideration because it can cause the case to change from intentional to
accidental. In the case of Oscar Pistorius, the title of professional athlete had little to no impact to the Judge Thokozile’s decision. Oscar Pistorius is given the same treatment and quality of life as any prisoner of South Africa and like most cases all the evidence was examined thoroughly in a case that took almost an entire year to end.
Another case for which serious crimes were supported by justifiable consequence was an incident regarding dog fighting. Michael Vick, a current New York
Jets backup quarterback, and his group of associates shot, electrocuted, drowned, and hung dogs that did not perform well. They also used performance enhancing drugs on the dogs as entertainment purposes. Because of his active involvement in the incident he was charged with 2 class 6 felonies (ALDF). One was for the promoting of dog fighting for amusement, the gaining of money for illegal activities, and the selling of dogs intended for fighting. The other one for engaging in torturing, beating, maiming, mutilating, and killing of animals. Citizens who commit clas\ 6 felonies for the first time usually spend 12 years in jail and, on average, a 150,000 dollar restitution fee
(MinceDidlier). In Michael Vick’s case he was sentenced to 23 months in jail with numerous amounts of restitution fees adding up to over one million dollars. According to the comparison between Arizona state law and the verdict of Michael Vick’s case, it is conclusive to say that Michael Vick’s celebrity status as a professional NFL athlete had no impact towards the final decision for this actions. In fact, the comparison shows
Michael Vick was punished more severely due to his insurmountable attention in the media. In the two cases involving professional athletes Oscar Pistorius and Michael
Vick, the facts shows the circumstances and actions they performed were justified in a court of law. According to aforementioned government laws, regular citizens in circumstances like theirs would have the same punishment. It is unfair to assume that celebrities like professional athletes are given leeway in a court of law because of their value or influential capabilities. In fact, it is unequivocally easier to argue that publicity of professional athletes’ serious crimes are given more stringent punishments because of the influence of society. In conclusion, the two cases proves that celebrities that commit felonies or homicides are given the same, or even harsher treatment as regular citizens.
In summation celebrities that commit minor issues with law are treated with more leniency when compared to the law because of their value in monetary terms. Crimes and felonies, on the other hand, are considered to be cases that are difficult to be positively influenced by publicity and money, therefore, celebrities face the same punishment as man without fame and wealth.
Works Cited
"Animal Fighting Case Study: Michael Vick Animal Legal Defense Fund."Animal Legal
Defense Fund Animal Fighting Case Study Michael Vick Comments. N.p., Jan.
2011. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
Caldwell, Leigh Ann. "Is Justin Bieber Getting Special Treatment?" CNN. Cable News
Network, 01 Jan. 2012. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
"Celebrities Arrested For DUI In 2013." DUI Ease Celebrities Arrested For DUI In 2013
Comments. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
Cullinane, Susannah, Brian Walker, and Richard Allen Greene. "Oscar Pistorius Trial: 9
Things to Know." CNN. Cable News Network, 11 Sept. 2014. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
Gibeaut, John. "Celebrity Justice." ABA Journal. N.p., 25 Feb. 2005. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
"The Negative Effects of the Media on Celebrities." HubPages. N.p., 5 Feb. 2012. Web.
28 Oct. 2014.
Gonchor, Michael. "Do Rich People Get Off Easier When They Break the Law?" The
Learning Network Do Rich People Get Off Easier When They Break the Law
Comments. New York Times, 18 Dec. 2013. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
"Justin Bieber I Didn 't Know It Was Illegal to Spraypaint Rio Wall." TMZ.
N.p., 6 Nov.
2013. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
Lee, Esther Yushi. "Criminal Charges Could Get Justin Bieber
Deported."ThinkProgress RSS. N.p., 23 Jan. 2014. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
MinceDidier, Ave. "Arizona Felony Crimes by Class and Sentences | Criminal Law."
Criminal Defense Lawyer. NOLO, n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
"Oscar Pistorius Sentenced." Channel 4 News. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
"Paris Hilton Says DUI Arrest ‘was Nothing’." TODAY. N.p., 7 Sept. 2006. Web. 29 Oct.
2014.
Peyser, Andrea. "Proof That Celebrities Get Special Treatment in Court."New York Post
Proof That Celebrities Get Special Treatment Incourt Comments. New York Post,
18 Nov. 2013. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.
"Read Justin Bieber’s Police Report Radio.com." Radio. N.p., 23 Jan. 2014. Web. 29
Oct. 2014.
SmithSpark, Laura, Emily Smith, Hilary Whiteman, and Chris Eldergill. "Oscar Pistorius
Sentenced to 5 Years in Prison for Girlfriend 's Killing."CNN. Cable News Network,
21 Oct. 2014. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
Stim, Rich. "Florida DUI Laws, Penalties and Fines."Dui Driving Laws. N.p., n.d. Web.
29 Oct. 2014.
"The Negative Effects of the Media on Celebrities." HubPages. N.p., 5 Feb. 2012. Web.
28 Oct.
2014.
Celebrities are considered royalty in the eyes of the public, and like royalty, they receive biased treatment in many ways. As a result, celebrities are treated differently than civilians by prosecutors and jurors in the eyes of the law.
There have been several cases where celebrities are able to commit heinous crimes and get away with them, even though there were witnesses to protest. Other civilians are falsely accused of being guilty, then years after the court condemns them for a mistake they are found innocent. On January 6th, Thomas Gibson, Criminal Minds
Star, was charged with a DUI, driving under the influence, after he drove his SUV through a half marathon. His bond was posted at 15,000 dollars. He paid his bond and …show more content…
was released the next day. All of the charges were dropped because he is a rich celebrity that can swindle his way to get special treatment in a court of law.
Not only do national celebrities get special treatment in the court system, but local rich celebrities do as well. A Teenager was charged with four counts of murder while driving intoxicated. He was supposed to be sentenced to prison for 20 years, but instead the judge ruled only ten months of probation due affluenza, a physiological disease the 16 year old was diagnosed with during the trial. Affluenza is a psychological problem in which because the teen came from a rich family and has never been told no, or taught values, the teenager does not know the difference between right from wrong(Gonchor). Since his family is rich and has a celebrity status, this teenager received special treatment that civilians would otherwise not have received. In our court system, whomever has the most money is treated in the most biased manner.
Even though celebrities receive special treatment, there are some cases when our legal system can 't turn a blind eye to the crimes they commit. Being arrested for a
DUI is a serious offence and DUI charges can be charged against everyone, even iconic people like celebrities. The legal limit for your blood alcohol content is .08 percent. This means if a person is pulled over having .08 percent, or higher, of alcohol in your blood you are considered, by law, drunk. Paris Hilton was caught driving with a
Blood alcohol level of .08 and was arrested. She was released on bond, but she was still scheduled to meet in court to discuss the outcome of her arrest. A similar case was when Kevin Hart was Arrested on April 14th, 2013 for a DUI charge. He was placed on a
5000 dollar bond after he almost hit a tanker truck going ninety miles per hour. Even though these celebrities are loved in the eyes of the public, sometimes the crimes they commit are too severe to be let them off with a slap on the wrist.
Justin Bieber has been treated biasedly by the law on several occasions. He has been arrested three times and committed two felonies. Such as causing more than
$20,000 in property damage to his neighbors house in Los Angeles, and drag racing under the influence in Florida (Caldwell). Plus that is only in the United States, in Brazil he illegally “tagged” a wall or spray painted a wall, and in Canada he was charged with assaulting his limo driver. There is one common aspect in all these altercations though, and that is the lack of repercussions for his actions.
The “repercussions” that Justin faced are hardly repercussions at all. One major example of this is the fact that he has not yet been deported from the United States.
Obama has deported 1.6 million people over the past 4 years for petty crimes that could
be years old, yet Justin Bieber has committed several bigger crimes very recently and has not even been threatened to be deported. While on the other hand the government has deported people who should, above all others, get special treatment. For example
Howard Dean Bailey, he was a navy veteran, and had been a citizen for five years when he was deported for a possession of marijuana charge that was over nine years old.
Plus there is a “We The People” petition to have Justin deported with over 270 thousand signatures and yet the government just ignores it.
Another way he has been treated biasedly by the law is by the punishments he has been given in court for his actions. For example, in Florida the state says that if you are given a DUI charge the consequences will include, but are not limited to, six to nine months in jail, a fine up to $2000, and a license suspension between 180 days and one year(Stim). All that Justin Bieber had to do was pay a $500 fine, make a charitable donation, and take an anger management class. According to ‘Radio.com’ not only was he driving under the influence, he also had an expired license, and was resistant to the police without violence and that is the only repercussion he faced. Another example is his “repercussions” for causing property damage to his neighbors house. In the state of
California property damage exceeding $10,000 is punishable by up to one year in jail and $50,000 in fines. But once again Justin was merely “slapped on the wrist” and faced neither of these punishments.
The common misconception from the public is that celebrities get preferential treatment from the law but in fact in some cases they receive negative treatment from the media and the jury. The jury of so called peers are not actually his peers since they
are celebrities being tried in front of a jury of normal people that may be jealous of them.
The jury may be out to get the violators because, rooted inside human morality, we all wish that we had more money and fame (Gibeaut). Judges will treat these cases much differently and no matter how hard they try they will act differently. Jurors will be more focused on the popularity that they can gain rather than focused on the case he or she is responsible for. The defendant will seek the case out for future benefits that will help their career. In celebrity cases somebody commits a relatively minor crime and it becomes a big story yet in normal circumstances would not even be looked at by the law. In high profile cases the prosecutor is placed under such scrutiny to keep the trial unbiased that they end up overcompensating and inevitably treating them differently.
Being an athlete is not all glamorous since they constantly have paparazzi following them capturing every action good or bad. More often than not the media disregards the good that is done and they focus on making the bad stuff breaking news.
Michael Phelps, for example, was photographed in 2009 by paparazzi and was caught smoking marijuana. Millions of people smoke this illegal drug everyday and never get punished, however, when Phelps is photographed once he is highly criticized by the media (Hubpages). Even though some athletes may not get jail time for their misdemeanors, in many cases the organization they are a part of will take their own action by suspending the athlete from competition for a certain time. Michael Phelps for example was arrested for DUI and was released and is currently waiting for trial.
Although he has yet to receive punishment from the courts, The United States
Swimming Team suspended Phelps from swimming for six months for his actions outside the pool.
Athletes are part of the entertainment business and whether they want it or not, most of them are given the publicity of celebrities. Often times civilians argue that celebrities are given leeway to escape harsh consequences for actions that break the law, but of course the opinions of civilians are subjective. Oscar Pistorius, a South
African paralympic runner, is the first paralympic runner to set stage on the Olympics.
On February 14, 2013 Oscar was charged with murder for killing his wife, Reeva
Steenkamp. Oscar defended his case with noises from the restroom early in the morning, and as a result he chose to take 5 shots into the restroom (Channel 4 News).
Because of the myriad of factors that were presented, the verdict for this particular case would be a difficult one. If Oscar Pistorius was not handicapped the verdict would be an evident premeditated murder, however, because of his disability the case has become problematic. According to laws of South Africa, premeditated murder would be life in prison unless given special circumstances like a first offense or a disability
(SmithSpark). The final verdict on Pistorius was culpable homicide with a 5 year jail sentence without bail.
Some may say that the severity of Oscar Pistorius’ actions constitutes life in prison, and that it was because of his status as an accomplished athlete that he was given a easy way out. On the contrary, the same decision would have been implemented to someone without a celebrity status. Typically, first offenses are taken into serious consideration because it can cause the case to change from intentional to
accidental. In the case of Oscar Pistorius, the title of professional athlete had little to no impact to the Judge Thokozile’s decision. Oscar Pistorius is given the same treatment and quality of life as any prisoner of South Africa and like most cases all the evidence was examined thoroughly in a case that took almost an entire year to end.
Another case for which serious crimes were supported by justifiable consequence was an incident regarding dog fighting. Michael Vick, a current New York
Jets backup quarterback, and his group of associates shot, electrocuted, drowned, and hung dogs that did not perform well. They also used performance enhancing drugs on the dogs as entertainment purposes. Because of his active involvement in the incident he was charged with 2 class 6 felonies (ALDF). One was for the promoting of dog fighting for amusement, the gaining of money for illegal activities, and the selling of dogs intended for fighting. The other one for engaging in torturing, beating, maiming, mutilating, and killing of animals. Citizens who commit clas\ 6 felonies for the first time usually spend 12 years in jail and, on average, a 150,000 dollar restitution fee
(MinceDidlier). In Michael Vick’s case he was sentenced to 23 months in jail with numerous amounts of restitution fees adding up to over one million dollars. According to the comparison between Arizona state law and the verdict of Michael Vick’s case, it is conclusive to say that Michael Vick’s celebrity status as a professional NFL athlete had no impact towards the final decision for this actions. In fact, the comparison shows
Michael Vick was punished more severely due to his insurmountable attention in the media. In the two cases involving professional athletes Oscar Pistorius and Michael
Vick, the facts shows the circumstances and actions they performed were justified in a court of law. According to aforementioned government laws, regular citizens in circumstances like theirs would have the same punishment. It is unfair to assume that celebrities like professional athletes are given leeway in a court of law because of their value or influential capabilities. In fact, it is unequivocally easier to argue that publicity of professional athletes’ serious crimes are given more stringent punishments because of the influence of society. In conclusion, the two cases proves that celebrities that commit felonies or homicides are given the same, or even harsher treatment as regular citizens.
In summation celebrities that commit minor issues with law are treated with more leniency when compared to the law because of their value in monetary terms. Crimes and felonies, on the other hand, are considered to be cases that are difficult to be positively influenced by publicity and money, therefore, celebrities face the same punishment as man without fame and wealth.
Works Cited
"Animal Fighting Case Study: Michael Vick Animal Legal Defense Fund."Animal Legal
Defense Fund Animal Fighting Case Study Michael Vick Comments. N.p., Jan.
2011. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
Caldwell, Leigh Ann. "Is Justin Bieber Getting Special Treatment?" CNN. Cable News
Network, 01 Jan. 2012. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
"Celebrities Arrested For DUI In 2013." DUI Ease Celebrities Arrested For DUI In 2013
Comments. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
Cullinane, Susannah, Brian Walker, and Richard Allen Greene. "Oscar Pistorius Trial: 9
Things to Know." CNN. Cable News Network, 11 Sept. 2014. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
Gibeaut, John. "Celebrity Justice." ABA Journal. N.p., 25 Feb. 2005. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
"The Negative Effects of the Media on Celebrities." HubPages. N.p., 5 Feb. 2012. Web.
28 Oct. 2014.
Gonchor, Michael. "Do Rich People Get Off Easier When They Break the Law?" The
Learning Network Do Rich People Get Off Easier When They Break the Law
Comments. New York Times, 18 Dec. 2013. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
"Justin Bieber I Didn 't Know It Was Illegal to Spraypaint Rio Wall." TMZ.
N.p., 6 Nov.
2013. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
Lee, Esther Yushi. "Criminal Charges Could Get Justin Bieber
Deported."ThinkProgress RSS. N.p., 23 Jan. 2014. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
MinceDidier, Ave. "Arizona Felony Crimes by Class and Sentences | Criminal Law."
Criminal Defense Lawyer. NOLO, n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
"Oscar Pistorius Sentenced." Channel 4 News. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
"Paris Hilton Says DUI Arrest ‘was Nothing’." TODAY. N.p., 7 Sept. 2006. Web. 29 Oct.
2014.
Peyser, Andrea. "Proof That Celebrities Get Special Treatment in Court."New York Post
Proof That Celebrities Get Special Treatment Incourt Comments. New York Post,
18 Nov. 2013. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.
"Read Justin Bieber’s Police Report Radio.com." Radio. N.p., 23 Jan. 2014. Web. 29
Oct. 2014.
SmithSpark, Laura, Emily Smith, Hilary Whiteman, and Chris Eldergill. "Oscar Pistorius
Sentenced to 5 Years in Prison for Girlfriend 's Killing."CNN. Cable News Network,
21 Oct. 2014. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
Stim, Rich. "Florida DUI Laws, Penalties and Fines."Dui Driving Laws. N.p., n.d. Web.
29 Oct. 2014.
"The Negative Effects of the Media on Celebrities." HubPages. N.p., 5 Feb. 2012. Web.
28 Oct.
2014.