Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Celebrity special treatment in the law
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Celebrity special treatment in the law
Do Celebrities Get A Pass?
Since even the earliest civilizations, there have been laws. Laws are a fundamental part of our government. They help the average citizen navigate through life when situations arise and accidents happen. They are there as guidelines for safety and overall well-being of a society. A citizen has the power to seek justice through the help of our court system. The legal system also determines the consequences for citizens who break the laws. For the “average citizen” the legal system is right and just.
What about celebrities and people who are constantly in the media? They are just like us, they make mistakes. They have run-ins with the law, they need justice too. When a celebrity needs compensation for a wrongful death case, is it handed to them? When a celebrity has a DUI are their punishments as severe as the usual? When a celebrity is charged with possession of drugs, do they get treated like everyone else? When a celebrity is called for jury duty, are they given a fair chance to participate in this civil duty? Does the legal system go about treating celebrities the same way they would a regular person, why and how?
In the case of Michael Jackson’s death multiple wrongful death suites were filed. His personal physician Conrad Murray was on trial for involuntary manslaughter. November, 7, 2011 he was charged with being guilty. He received four years in prison. The Jackson family also sued AEG Live, the concert promotor for the This Is It Tour. The company hired Murray to be his personal physician. The jury found that AEG was not responsible for Jackson’s death. AEG did not have to compensate Katherine Jackson with the millions of dollars she asked for. This trial and Michael Jackson’s death had the in...
... middle of paper ...
... everyone else. Laws which were created as guidelines for a better, safer, and happier community. Just like laws were there in even the earliest of civilizations they will be there for generations to come.
In conclusion, Through researching cases of Michael Jackson, Amanda Bynes, Lindsay Lohan, Tiger Woods, Justin Bieber, and other celebrities I have found that the legal system intends to treat celebrities equal to everyone else but sometimes their status can get in the way of what is truly just. Celebrities get caught up in their own ego and believe that they are invinsible. Hopefully as some of these stars mature they will begin to realize that the their actions will be measured to the same degree to those of non-celebrity status. I hope that famous people are given a fair opportunity to participate in jury duty and other roles in our government if they so wish to.
laws is to keep the bad things out from the old society out such as
After a lengthy two hundred and fifty-two-day trial “not guilty” were the words that left the world in shock. O.J Simpson was your typical golden boy. He had it all, the nice car, the football career, and his kids. Unfortunately, this all came to an end when two bodies came to be spotted deceased in Nicole Browns front yard and was a gruesome sight. O. J’s ex-wife Nicole Brown and her friend Ronald Goldman both found with brutal stab marks. Unfortunately, all his glory days now brought to an end, he went from playing on the field to begging for his freedom when becoming the main suspect of their murders. Since this trial has not only altered the way Americans viewed celebrities, but it also racially divided society,
laws made by others in our society, and decide whether or not the laws we make
The O.J. Simpson trial, as it became known, opened on January 24, 1995 and concluded October 3 the same year. Over the span of the trial, the prosecution team presented 72 witnesses including friends and family of Nicole, friends of O.J., and a 9-1-1 dispatcher. Given the trial’s notable and well-known defendant, those involved in the trial gained lifetime fame. To this day I can still recall the names Judge Lance Ito, Marcia Clark (Deputy District Attorney), and Simpson’s defense counsel, “The Dream Team,” which consisted of a number of high-profile attorneys, most notably Robert Shapiro and Johnnie Cochran. I chose this case because it left a lasting impression in my memory, as well as a lasting impression in our nation’s memory. There have been many high-profile cases over the years, but this case was not predicted to end the way it di...
In each of the cases discussed in this report, the court is presented the challenge of deciding whether to protect a celebrityʻs right to publicity or to protect and artistʻs constitutional right to free speech. These protections are at conflict because the First amendment encourages the unencumbered exchange of ideas and public discourse, which celebrities are an inextricable part of. Yet, the right to publicity entitles a celebrity to profit from their reputation and prevent others from doing so. Despite the similarities present between these cases, the evidence presented as well as the circumstances surrounding each case distinguish them from each other. For example, the first two cases involve the argument of a videogame companyʻs use of
Athletes and celebrities are always the star; when they play in the championship game, star in an award-winning movie, make the #1 album/single of the year, or win any type of award (Nobel, Pulitzer, Fields, Grammy, Tony, Oscar, etc). Even if they break the law, they still are the star of attention. With the cases of several celebrities and athletes, evidence is apparent of notable unfairness. One of the most popular cases of all time, the O.J. Simpson v. the People, also exhibits huge amounts of obvious inequitable treatment compared to the ordinary people’s cases. Though some people beg to differ with the visible proof that celebrities and athletes do receive undeserved special treatment and say that they just had some “good luck,” there
This sort of behavior is constant over time. Celebrities today are posted and paraded all over TV and magazines, no matter what they do. Justin Beiber was caught drunk driving, stealing property, and many more crimes.... ... middle of paper ... ...
Today most young people think that if a person is rich and famous, they can get away with anything. They see rappers get charged with felonies and then they see that the charges get dropped. They’ve heard of celebrities running over children while drunk and get away with it without doing any time. However, not all rappers have run-ins with the law, but the ones that do are very well known. Tupac Shakur (RIP), for example, had many run-ins with the law. He was arrested for aggravated assault, and charged with shooting two off duty police officers in Atlanta in 1993, but the charges were later dropped (bomp). He was also accused of beating a limousine driver in Los Angeles and found guilty of threatening a fellow rapper with a baseball bat in Michigan (bomp).
Law in my view may be described as a set of rules that are manmade, through the formal legislative frameworks such as the parliament, with the intention of regulating aspects of life of those subject to it.( "Province of Jurisprudence Determined”) It generally governs the social behavior of its subjects and affords rights, but also imposes duties and responsibilities on them with the purpose of creating order and certainty. Along with the aforementioned it generally provides for sanctions when these laws are not obeyed.(China Law review pg.1) What is important to notice is that in a modern constitutional democracy the constituency of law is theoretically decided on by the society, meaning their moral values are bound to influence what they would want to be law. Further laws are regulated by a constitution, or supreme law. In South Africa for instance the Constitution (The constitution of the republic of SA, 1996) is founded on values such as human dignity, equality and freedom. These are not only found in law, but also in morality.
Celebrities are often given sentences, but they do not end up having to fulfill them. “Richie (Nicole Richie) served the better part of a four-day jail sentence for driving under the influence of drugs in 82 minutes. She never saw the inside of a jail cell.” (Celebrity Justice). If it were an ordinary person, they would have seen the inside of a jail cell, and longer for 83 minutes. “Paris Hilton has been arrested multiple times for drunk driving, cocaine possession, and leaving the scene of an accident. In California, this is considered a misdemeanor crime, and is punishable by a maximum of six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. She didn’t have to do either of those.” (Celebrities Who Got Off Easy). It completely baffles me that someone can get away with their faults just because they have money or they are well known. It angers me that others or have committed the same exact crimes have served jail time, but these celebrities haven’t. Even when they are convicted, they get easier sentences. For example, Samuel Curtis Johnson II was given an incredibly weak sentence for an atrocious offense. “Billionaire Samuel Curtis Johnson II, of the SC Johnson household products empire, was given only four months in jail and a $6,000 fine for pleading guilty to child molestation charges. He did not even have to register as a sex offender.” (Celebrities Who Got Off Easy). Additionally, celebrities also get special treatment while they are in jail. They get bigger and better rooms, fast treatment, and unusual accomodations. “During Lindsay Lohan’s 14 days of jail, she got to have visitors after hours and she got to order special food.” When the rich and famous commit a crime, they should be held accountable. They should be there to pay the
In Collin Palmers short essay response, various amounts of people would agree with Palmers argument, but I feel that nowadays celebrities are not aware of their actions which goes around quickly. For example, in the Deborah Kings
Celebrities. We all want to live like they do; we all want to experience what they do; to be accepted in a way that is purely envious. More importantly, we want all the extras that celebrities receive in life. One of those extras seems to be the beating the justice system. Beating is a strong word; I prefer to use the word whitewashing. Why is it that when a celebrity goes on trial, the public seems to be transfixed on the outcome? Does the public even know why or how the accused celebrity manages to be not guilty after not guilty after not guilty? Lets be honest, it is jury of our peers that decides our fate in the legal system. Just because you are a celebrity does not mean that you have a hall pass to a not guilty plea. Now take a step back from all I have said; the extras that I had mentioned are the advantage that celebrities have over the average citizen. Money, the media, and even the jurors and the prosecution play roles that aid the defendant. The fact is that when celebrities are on trial for serious crimes, the advantages that they have are prevalent, and our usually overshadowed by the media coverage that comes with it.
There is a big social issue arising in the United States with all of these up and coming stars. Do celebrities, including athletes, have an obligation to speak out about social issues in our country? The answer is yes, their opinion holds more value in times like today than any average person. People will listen to celebrities because we admire them, and they have an obligation to help our country. This is a huge deal in our country because of many problems reoccurring in our country like racism, police brutality, and homosexuality.
What can they with so much money? It doesn't go off well to people that have a immense job like a doctor or lawyer, that they help out the world much more but don't get as much money as an person who just entertains. Police officers and firefighters are well respected professions that assure our lives while risking their own, and don't earn close to what these celebrities are making. Teachers educate the next generation of kids and have the biggest impact on kids besides their parents, while celebrities make millions acting in a movie, or creating a YouTube video. Celebrities don't even work for very long, unless they're good. They get too much money from endorsements that we buy from. Some people criticize that celebrities make unreasonable money, but don't do anything to stop it, instead they help celebrities make more
How far would you go to get that story or to snap that front page picture? How far is too far? The issue of privacy has taken a new toll, where do you draw the line? The news media (Toronto Star, CTV & CBC) are all networks that I believe still respect that value of privacy with the youth act not addressing there name or picture, or when it comes to getting the story it doesn’t seem that there exploiting people for the benefit of the story, on the other hand a lot of the debate and pressure is coming from the entertainment aspect of the media where a celebrity losses all privacy. My argument is that do we celebrities for the over exploitation on themselves or do we blame the tabloids/paparazzi. Is the way they go about in finding their stories different is there difference between the tabloids (shorten in length and full with pretty pictures