When Celebrities break the law should they be punished more severely?

[Crazyeighties]

Today after Justin Bieber was are placed under arrest for Drug, Alcohol and illegal street racing: he admitted to drinking befit driving (and street racing) he also admitted to taking illegal perceptions (perceptions that are not perceived to him)

 

So this brings my question do you think that celebrities should be charged more severely then the average citizen that commits the same or a similar crimes?

 

Especially because there are a lot of kids that look up to these celebrities , some of these kids are more impressionable then other k

Edited January 24, 2014 by Crazyeighties

[sivispacem]

Of course not. All people must be equal in the eyes of the law. To make criminal acts more serious for people based on their perceived fame is just silly.

However, it would be nice to have them actually treated equally to ordinary citizens in the eyes of the law. This is less of an issue in Europe than it is in the US though, I reckon.

[Kazandra]

Pfft....they are given bigger breaks than anyone.

 

I agree with sivispacem. We should all be treated equally under the law, and I don't even believe in the law. I believe in justice. Treating the rich with more respect and giving them more chances is not justice.

[Osho]

I know two things:

 

1. Celebrity is popular. Can easily associate the voice, face or name, i.e., his/her identity to a cause whether for free or not. As such, they are able to gain exposure or make choices that's not easy for the general public. In short, they have the sole right to exploit their status, fame or identity.

 

2. In India, compared to other countries (not sure or aware), the word "celebrity" (Celebrity rights, Privacy rights, are mentioned, but not the term, in specific) is not defined (correct me, if wrong), as such, references can be made in other categories that commonly called as celebs, famous personalities. Basically, they are no different than the general public in a legal context.

 

Coming to the topic, it's not that easy to answer, but in general, the law should not go easy on Celebrities

[K20]

celebrities abuse their position of power. i say this due to the last few years of unearthing of child abuse and sexual abuse on children by celebrities.

 

punishment should be harsh in certain circumstances. take for instance, jimmy savile. abused so many children, and got away with it, no punishment at all for him. people knew it was wrong, but they fed him more kids because of his position. and those who are caught before exiting this earth, they have some what political power, or money power to shut people up and get away with it.

 

who's to say brad pitt doesn't have a child in his basement who he rapes day in and day out for fun? its not impossible looking at the world we live in.

 

i'm sure there are LOADS of celebrities who commit crimes, but they are placed on a pedestal by the public who worship at their every needs, and are let off lightly or simply get away with it scot-free.

Edited January 24, 2014 by K20

[Killerdude]

Ugh, I hate Celebrities with a Passion, They could kill 50 people, and get sent to Rehab for 6 months and get a record wipe afterwards, whilst the average joe would probably get Death. ^{(Or at least a life sentence..)}

[Creed Bratton]

No. They too are average citizens. They just happen to be in the spotlight. The law should apply equally to everyone.

[Finn 7 five 11]

That's stupid, harsher punishments for celebrities? Haha what a joke.
The US seems to have a problem with letting them off too lightly though, but at the same time, it is particularly entertaining seeing some of them run around like maniacs.

[Fireman]

With almost all the celebrities being repeat offenders, it's about time they start dishing out harder punishments, instead of sending them to rehab for the fiftieth time. Just like any other repeat offender.

[WinterEdit]

Meh. If more severely = similar to normal people's punishments, then yes. Take Mr(s). Bieber for example. The guy's done lots of things (drugs, speeding, egging someone's house...) yet he just gets away with it like "HUEHUE I'M A CELEBRITY, CAN'T TOUCH THIS!".

 

If it was your average Joe from the street, he'd be serving a life sentence by now (at least in US). Finnish law system would tell both your average Joe and Mr. Bieber both "Plz act better", even after the 100(000)th misdemeanor, giving both probation at worst.

Edited January 24, 2014 by WinterEdit

[Black & White]

celebrities abuse their position of power. i say this due to the last few years of unearthing of child abuse and sexual abuse on children by celebrities.

 

punishment should be harsh in certain circumstances. take for instance, jimmy savile. abused so many children, and got away with it, no punishment at all for him. people knew it was wrong, but they fed him more kids because of his position. and those who are caught before exiting this earth, they have some what political power, or money power to shut people up and get away with it.

 

who's to say brad pitt doesn't have a child in his basement who he rapes day in and day out for fun? its not impossible looking at the world we live in.

 

i'm sure there are LOADS of celebrities who commit crimes, but they are placed on a pedestal by the public who worship at their every needs, and are let off lightly or simply get away with it scot-free.

 

[Stephan90]

No, everybody should be equal in front of the law (not counting children or mentally disabled people)

 

The big influence of famous people on others is not reason enough to judge on them differently, in my opinion.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Stephan90

[sivispacem]

Why should children and the mentally disabled be unequal in the eyes of the law? That's somewhat different to saying that being a child or mentally disabled are mitigating factors.

[Stephan90]

But I mean it as the same thing. Or does anyone here really want children or mentally disabled people to be punished harder than adults with "clear mind"?!

[RedDagger]

Define celebrity.

 

If this retarded idea were to be put into action, who does it apply to? Remember, this is law, so it has to be more than just 'discriminate against celebs'.

[Hodgey.]

No, just punish them the same as the rest of us.

[lil weasel]

This is less of an issue in Europe than it is in the US though, I reckon.

I would think it might be more of an issue outside of the U.S. While the American Press make a big deal of celebrity lapses.

What do the Police and (non-sensationalist) Press do when a member of 'Royalty' (broad brush peerage, etc.) gets caught in one of these situations? Do the Police release the details, or even admit that it occurred.

Yes, we've seen the Yellow-Rags, but what about the lesser 'crimes'. I imagine the people not involved don't even known about them.

 

I think people 'in trust' positions should be punished more heavily than the normal person.

 

We have double/triple penalties for people committing infractions in school/work zones.

Why not criminal government employees and Politicians too?

 

Triple penalties for Elected Officials.

Double penalties for Hired/Contract government workers.

Edited January 24, 2014 by lil weasel

[OysterBarron]

2 twitter trolls got put in prison today one for 12 weeks and one for 8 weeks. Bieber gets 1 night in prison and around a 1000 dollar fine. I don't know if the American justice system is a joke or if it's the uks?

 

It comes to something when a keyboard and mouse is more of a threat to public safety than racing while under the influence!

Edited January 24, 2014 by oysterbarron

[sivispacem]

 

This is less of an issue in Europe than it is in the US though, I reckon.

I would think it might be more of an issue outside of the U.S. While the American Press make a big deal of celebrity lapses.

 

 

One, that's far from a unique occurrence in the rest of the developed world. What makes you think the American press are more vulturous than that of other countries? Remember, the US is the libel capital of the world, with the burden of proof set very high for defendants compared to other nations.

 

Two, that's not quite the point I was making- my point was more that a degree of fame in the US seems to entitle people to preferential treatment in the eyes of the law. Whether that's a case of wealth buying legal support beyond the realms of the common man, or just the indoctrinated fascination with the infallibility of fame, I'm not sure, but it's difficult to dispute.

 

Allow me to furnish you with an example: I couldn't imagine middle-of-the-road but nonetheless household-name US pop stars (and there are plenty to choose from) being put on trial for conspiracy to supply cocaine based on a newspaper sting operation.Which isn't to say that there isn't a degree of preferential treatment afforded to celebrities in cases of criminal activity elsewhere other than in the US, but it certainly appears to be less common and less overt.

[lil weasel]

So, you are saying that in Europe if a Lord, Baron, or Earl is pulled over for under the influence driving or partying the Policia, Carbonari, or Garda won't keep it on quiet?

[RoadRunner71]

So, you are saying that in Europe if a Lord, Baron, or Earl is pulled over for under the influence driving or partying the Policia, Carbonari, or Garda won't keep it on quiet?

This.

 

Currently here in Spain the Infanta is being judicially processed for some serious fiscal offences. Even the prosecutor (which supposedly represents the State) and the Government are trying to protect her.

 

Like Sivispacem said, I think that celebrities should be equal under the law but I think that politicians and bankers should have higher penalties, at least in countries with a similar judicial system to Spain. The USA may be one of the few countries I've seen where they are severely punished. Over here, it doesn't matter how much and how long they've been stealing, in the rare case they go to prison, it won't take too until someone gives them the pardon...

 

They are who have to lead the country, they shouldn't have the less chance to harm and get away with it.

Edited January 24, 2014 by RoadRunner71

[Frank Brown]

 

Like Sivispacem said, I think that celebrities should be equal under the law but I think that politicians and bankers should have higher penalties

 

 

Why?

[WinterEdit]

 

 

Like Sivispacem said, I think that celebrities should be equal under the law but I think that politicians and bankers should have higher penalties

 

 

Why?

 

Because they and their jobs can effect our lives the most?

[Frank Brown]

 

 

 

Like Sivispacem said, I think that celebrities should be equal under the law but I think that politicians and bankers should have higher penalties

 

 

Why?

 

Because they and their jobs can effect our lives the most?

 

 

I don't see what that has to do with it. If a banker steals a client's money, they should be punished the same as anyone else. Politicians I could understand punishing them more severely if it's for a crime that effects everyone (i.e. a bribe to propose a bill) but if it's for smoking crack? No.

[RoadRunner71]

 

 

Like Sivispacem said, I think that celebrities should be equal under the law but I think that politicians and bankers should have higher penalties

 

 

Why?

 

I said in countries like Spain, where the penalties applied to their crimes are outrageously mild and the poli tical corruption levels are worryingly high. Politicians should work for the State, for the people they supposedly represent and not to take advantage of that for their own benefit, harming the country and giving the back to the people. Isn't a spy or someone who publicy releases secret info considered a traitor for harming the State? Well here the same. They are harming the State. The corruption won't stop if they can empty the public purse and get away with it thanks to the judicial system.

 

If it was like in the USA, where people like Madoff and such are actually imprisoned, I'd be fine.

 

Also, Vlynor, regarding your last post, I've never seen a banker over here getting the same sentence than someone who has assaulted a bank.

Edited January 24, 2014 by RoadRunner71

[Frank Brown]

 

 

 

Like Sivispacem said, I think that celebrities should be equal under the law but I think that politicians and bankers should have higher penalties

 

 

Why?

 

I said in countries like Spain, where the penalties applied to their crimes are outrageously mild and the poli tical corruption levels are worryingly high. Politicians should work for the State, for the people they supposedly represent and not to take advantage of that for their own benefit, harming the country and giving the back to the people. Isn't a spy or someone who publicy releases secret info considered a traitor for harming the State? Well here the same. They are harming the State. The corruption won't stop if they can empty the public purse and get away with it thanks to the judicial system.

 

If it was like in the USA, where people like Madoff and such are actually imprisoned, I'd be fine.

 

Also, Vlynor, regarding your last post, I've never seen a banker over here getting the same sentence than someone who has assaulted a bank.

 

 

I apologize then. Your post made it seem that politicians and bankers deserved higher penalties than the ordinary citizen, which I agree with, to an extent.

[WinterEdit]

 

 

 

 

Like Sivispacem said, I think that celebrities should be equal under the law but I think that politicians and bankers should have higher penalties

 

 

Why?

 

Because they and their jobs can effect our lives the most?

 

 

I don't see what that has to do with it. If a banker steals a client's money, they should be punished the same as anyone else. Politicians I could understand punishing them more severely if it's for a crime that effects everyone (i.e. a bribe to propose a bill) but if it's for smoking crack? No.

 

Hm.

I agree that they should not have any higher penalties than your average Joe if they do things like driving drunk or something. If they did a crime such as stealing a client's money (banker)/being corrupted (politician), then I think they should have a slightly higher penalty than if someone else did it.

 

Well, I do not think anyone else (such as your average Joe, that guy's famous in here by now) is in the position to do these crimes so that they really affect other people. But if the guy who is either a banker or a politician and is caught on a work-related crime, I think that the punishment for that crime should be more severe than if someone else did a work-related crime (a trucker drives drunk - he should get simply a normal 'driving drunk' misdemeanor, without any worse penalties following). That is what I am getting at.

[sivispacem]

So, you are saying that in Europe if a Lord, Baron, or Earl is pulled over for under the influence driving or partying the Policia, Carbonari, or Garda won't keep it on quiet?

No, which you'd have noted if you'd actually read my response instead of just assuming what I meant. I was extremely careful to caveat my response with the fact that what I was saying in no way implied that Europe was free from this phenomenon.

 

That said, there have been a couple of recent cases involving parliamentarians and illegal activity that have resulted in very proportionate sentences. Chris Huhne for Perverting the Course of Justice springs to mind.

 

-

 

As for the higher penalties for people in public office, there's some merit to the idea. In the UK we have a separate charge for "misconduct in a public office" which is effectively applicable to public figures who bring their profession or the reputation of the country/their industry into disrepute. Commonly used for police officers, occasionally for politicians, and most notably/most recently in relation to press barons and their lackeys, engaging in underhand tactics to obtain information from the police and Crown Prosecution Service.

 

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/misconduct_in_public_office/

[Con9mm]

What country or planet is the OP from?

 

Don't you know that MONEY buys FREEDOM????

 

Celebs and assholes like ETHAN COUCH and that phony "AFFLUENZA" excuse is a fuggin joke on all of us!

 

MONEY RULES THE COURTS.

 

THE END.

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

What a sh*t idea. No, that wouldn't even be allowed and it isn't something I would want to happen either. Stupid question... rubbish.