Celebrity Justice Rules!
The world will, I’m sure, join with me in protesting at the miscarriage of American justice that is before us. No, I am not referring to Guantanamo Bay nor to the extradition of three British bankers. I am talking of the gross misunderstanding that has led to Paris Hilton, socialite, celebrity no-body and runner-up in the lowest IQ stakes, being sentenced to a brief spell in the slammer.
Surely, to any legal mind it is obvious that “banned from operating a motor vehicle for 36 months” does not apply to those driving Bentleys. Nor to those who have a bit of a hereditary interest in a major hotel chain.
As Miss Hilton cannot read, apparently, she was advised by someone who could that, “banned from operating a motor vehicle for 36 months” only really means “banned from operating a motor vehicle for 36 months.”
So the charge is obviously false.
The extenuating circumstances that she was driving without lights in order not to dazzle oncoming traffic seem to have had no influence on the judge who clearly has no idea of how justice should be served.
More interestingly are the grounds on which Miss Hilton is appealing her sentence.
As she never reads any documents and just signs what she is told to, she is innocent. This interesting concept of law may now replace that old and hoary entry in the law books that “ignorance is no excuse.” It will be named the Paris Hilton Defence. It reinforces the general opinion that her IQ is somewhere below sea-level, but she feels that it is her duty to take the stance for future generations.
The second of the grounds is she is a “celebrity” and that consigning her to the hoosegow will upset millions of fans around the world. On her YouTube site she request that all “sihn” her petition, and has some difficulty in the use of lower and uppercase letters in the appropriate places.
Once more, an interesting new concept in the principles of law.
“M’lud, my client Joseph Hoskins is innocent. Firstly, his PA and consultant failed to make it clear that hitting Mr. Bagworth over the head with a half-brick could in any way be construed as an assault. But most importantly, Mr. Hoskins is a celebrity. His stand-up comedy routines at the Merry Fiddlers in Dagenham on a Saturday night are remembered with affection……….I beg your pardon, M’lud? That was Max Bygraves? Perhaps your Lordship is correct but it was Mr. Hoskins who moved the piano in for him from the bar parlour.”
Surely, to any legal mind it is obvious that “banned from operating a motor vehicle for 36 months” does not apply to those driving Bentleys. Nor to those who have a bit of a hereditary interest in a major hotel chain.
As Miss Hilton cannot read, apparently, she was advised by someone who could that, “banned from operating a motor vehicle for 36 months” only really means “banned from operating a motor vehicle for 36 months.”
So the charge is obviously false.
The extenuating circumstances that she was driving without lights in order not to dazzle oncoming traffic seem to have had no influence on the judge who clearly has no idea of how justice should be served.
More interestingly are the grounds on which Miss Hilton is appealing her sentence.
As she never reads any documents and just signs what she is told to, she is innocent. This interesting concept of law may now replace that old and hoary entry in the law books that “ignorance is no excuse.” It will be named the Paris Hilton Defence. It reinforces the general opinion that her IQ is somewhere below sea-level, but she feels that it is her duty to take the stance for future generations.
The second of the grounds is she is a “celebrity” and that consigning her to the hoosegow will upset millions of fans around the world. On her YouTube site she request that all “sihn” her petition, and has some difficulty in the use of lower and uppercase letters in the appropriate places.
Once more, an interesting new concept in the principles of law.
“M’lud, my client Joseph Hoskins is innocent. Firstly, his PA and consultant failed to make it clear that hitting Mr. Bagworth over the head with a half-brick could in any way be construed as an assault. But most importantly, Mr. Hoskins is a celebrity. His stand-up comedy routines at the Merry Fiddlers in Dagenham on a Saturday night are remembered with affection……….I beg your pardon, M’lud? That was Max Bygraves? Perhaps your Lordship is correct but it was Mr. Hoskins who moved the piano in for him from the bar parlour.”
Labels: Paris Hilton
posted by Diary of a Ghost Writer at 9:40 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home