by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright May 7, 2007
All Rights Reserved.

entenced to 45-days for violating probation, 26-year-old hotel heiress-supermodel-actress-singer-entrepreneur Paris Hilton got shafted in Los Angeles Superior Court, ordered to do time in county jail—the latest scapegoat for high-profile celebrities. No matter how you spin it, it's not reasonable to assign jail-time for minor infractions, when the LAPD needs to clean up its own act. Hilton's arrest, conviction and sentencing parallels the overreaction to former CBS radio talk show host Don Imus, recently fired for calling Rutgers women's basketball team “nappy-headed hos.” Hilton's problems stem from a Sept. 7, 2006 arrest for “drunk-driving,” where her blood alcohol-level was measured at only .08, the absolute minimum for “driving while intoxicated.” Hilton's sentence doesn't mete out justice to another spoiled celebrity: It turns criminal justice on its head.

      Convicting Paris of “drunk-driving” with a blood alcohol level of .08 shows the extremes to which prosecutors go to get into the limelight. Recent high-profile prosecutions, beginning with the sensational 1995 O.J. Simpson murder trial, made instant celebrities of ordinary attorneys and civil servants. No respectable defense attorney—including her savvy attorney Howard L. Weitzman—should have pled no contest unless he knew, with 100% certainty, the deck was stacked against her. Even so, Weitzman should have taken his chances in court, with such a low blood-alcohol reading. Hilton's conviction didn't level the playing field, it proved celebrity justice sometimes backfires, allowing, in Hilton's case, a lynch-mob mentality to rob her of her civil rights. Few celebrities, with frenzied schedules and managers handling all the details, deal with the everyday minutia.

      Superior Court Judge Michael T. Sauer lowered the boom, giving the Beverly Hills socialite a tongue-lashing. “She disregarded everything and continued to drive,” said Sauer, sentencing Paris to 45-days. He ordered her to report June 5 to Century Regional Detention Center in Lynwood, Calif. If she doesn't show up, Sauer promised to double her sentence. “I just sign what people tell me to sign . . . I'm a very busy person,” Paris told the judge, reflecting the shameful reality that most celebrities don't know what they're signing, or, for that matter, what's really going on. “I don't know what happened,” said Paris immediately after sentencing. “I did what they said,” failing to acknowledge that she was driving her 2007 Bentley coupe on a suspended license. After her Jan. 22, 2007 plea her license was suspended from Nov. 30, 2008 to March 31, 2007. Paris violated her probation three times.

      Los Angeles City Attorney claims that Hilton violated terms of her plea agreement in Dec. ‘06, Jan. ‘07 and Feb. ‘07. It's not clear when her license was suspended because she did not enter the plea until Jan. 22, 2007. Hilton blamed the discrepancy on her publicist Elliot Mintz, who informed her she could drive after a 30-day suspension, allowing her to drive in Oct. 2006. Weitzman couldn't believe Sauer's ruling, ordering Paris into detention June 5. “It's clear she was selectively prosecuted because of who she is,” said Weitzman, blaming Sauer but not explaining why he pled no contest when Hilton's blood-alcohol limit barely hit the .08 benchmark. Fluctuations in measurements on the Breathalyzer or blood tests could easily account for a false positive. Weitzman called the judge's actions “bordering on ludicrous,” despite the dismal plea bargain that caused her problems.

      LA City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo's office agreed with the judge's ruling, insisting the sentence sends a loud messagel about drunk driving. Hilton's 45-day sentence “sends a clear message that in the city of Los Angeles, no one is above the law,” ignoring the fact that the harshness of the sentence reflects an unfair double standard. Regardless of what you feel about Paris, Weitzman struck a plea deal when the state lacked compelling evidence. At the time of her Sept. 7, 2006 arrest, Paris explained she had only one Margarita hours before getting pulled over, failing to eat. While it's no excuse for driving drunk, the fact remains her blood-alcohol limit only barely met the legal definition. Hilton told the judge she would have never violated her probation had she known about the four-month suspension before her Jan. 22 plea. “I follow the law,” Paris told Sauer at her sentencing hearing.

      Throwing Paris in the slammer doesn't serve justice: It reinforces the very real fact she was railroaded because of her celebrity status. Before her Jan. 22 plea deal, it's reasonable to assume that she still operated with a valid drivers license. With a blood-alcohol level of .08, there were real questions about whether her arrest warranted a drunk-driving charge. “This is about the fault of Ms. Hilton,” said Deputy City Atty. David A. Bozanich. “She knew she couldn't drive, and she did it anyway,” explaining the sick rationale behind her harsh jail sentence. Whatever happened with Weitzman is anyone's guess. Relentlessly pursuing Hilton for drunk driving with a .08 blood-alcohol level indicates zealous prosecution. Judge Sauer had options other than jail time, including fines, more probation and community service. Putting Paris behind bars shames the system and disgraces the Superior court.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.