COMMENTARY: Paris Hilton: Cruel and Unusual Punishment or Equal?
By Tony RutherfordHuntington News Network Writer
Just when you thought the Paris Hilton saga could not take another twist (aside from the one in "Disturbia"), now, the Los Angeles County powers that be have started a jurisdictional battle over her body. No, she's not dead yet, like Anna Nicole Smith, but everything smells stronger than one of those infested houses on Ninth Avenue.
First, I'm bothered that our justice system (if you can call it that) has become the tool of mass media polling and instant text and verbal comments. I thought that's how it was at the Roman Colosseum .. hands up, they go free; thumbs down, it's the lion's belly.
We just endured the perils of media justice with the MSNBC / CBS controversy over , what's his name, the disc jockey who incurred the wrath of certain people for the audacity of being white and speaking like a rapper. Actually, Don Imus' sin goes beyond the last sentence, but the instant public polls influenced what should have been a thought out decision without the ooze of political correctness hovering in all four corners of the ring.
Public opinion polls --- and the rapidity of their broadcast --- now seem to influence office holders and candidates. Adjusting you stance to the poll represents the ultimate flip-flopper.
Second, although a celebrity Ms. Hilton has rights too... such as privacy and freedom from a cruel and unusual punishment.
Granted, celebrity status opens you life to scrutiny, just like holding public office. But an actor, actress, or athlete do not necessarily HAVE to be a role model, just because they are in the spotlight. Role model does not go in the casting call of what type of character will be played. Yet, a quasi-responsibility does follow, particularly when the celebrity has a following of young fans.
Before reaching the merits, I ask whether solitary confinement is cruel and unusual punishment under the Hilton circumstances? I have NOT researched jail procedures, other than knowing that non violent prisoners spend more than an hour in the day room. (Sheriff, correct me if I am incorrect.)
Next, medical privacy should be maintained for celebs too, well, unless the conduct occurs in public. The Los Angeles County sheriff at least appeared to be protecting a medical and/or psychiatric confidentiality right of the inmate. Suicidal blonde and rash from staph have surfaced, but not been elaborated upon.
Now, with the judge, sheriff, and district attorney fighting a jurisdictional jabberwocky over putting the heiress on home confinement, likely, the hearing will be televised and /or open to the press and viewers. If it's closed, public opinion will not be satisfied for WE will not hear the medical condition and the fine details.
If its before the cameras, Paris Hilton's punishment for violating probation now goes into a Scarlet Letter premise as deputies testify and a shrink testifies about her time in the cell.
Considering all of these circumstances, she has been held to a higher standard of conduct than we non-celebrity mortals. I only ask, will she be able to get on with a life or become another Marilyn Monroe? If I recall, the California sheriff first inquired about city facilities, then, when they were declined, he released his famous jail bird.
I'm not sure if she is acting, ill, or someone paid for favors... I'm just suggesting that in the areas of privacy and solitary confinement, well, the non violence probation violator likely would not have those rights infringed upon.