Yeah, I know– not the most original title. There’s probably a zillion bloggers/columnists who have used this title already (Howard Kurtz is one, for example). But there’s nothing like being a follower, is there?

I wasn’t originally going to blog about Paris Hilton, anywhere, but recent events changed my mind. Whether Paris Hilton deserved her sentence or not doesn’t bother me. The fact that Paris Hilton was busted to begin with doesn’t concern me. To my mind, a world without a mention of Paris Hilton and her pals like Nicole, and the entire echelon of rich heirs and heiresses who fritter away their lives simply because they were lucky enough to be born into the right family and have way too much money would be a much more pleasant world indeed. I could also do without their pals Britney and Lindsay, who also epitomize the strata of young, highly overpaid performers with no sense of self-decorum. While there are plenty of things about the first half of the 20th century I don’t miss, I certainly do wish we could get back some degree of the days of the studios. Back then, they really kept their stars and up-and-comers under control as much as possible. While I don’t wish for the sort of semi-bondage some of the film stars were under to return, it would certainly be refreshing if we could read and hear and watch news without the constant blather about people like Paris and her pals. The studios and the moguls who headed them were very conscious of PR and the news– today’s stars don’t have that kind of protection anymore, and if they do, some don’t use it all that well.

I don’t have cable, and I’m not tethered to TV, but based on past experiences with similar situations, I’d imagine cable news and network entertainment shows have been wall-to-wall Paris the last few weeks, 24/7. It certainly has been prevalent to a degree on the internet, and has seeped into the newspapers as well (again, Howard Kurtz, for example…).

So, you ask, why even bring up Paris Hilton? Well, I think that regardless of what you think of Los Angeles Sheriff Lee Baca, or Superior Court Judge Michael T. Sauer, or even what you think of Paris Hilton herself, her case exposes the realities of our judicial system. I suspect that one central reason why this case has attracted so much attention (aside from the fact our lazy Corporate Media and aggressive paparazzi can’t get enough lurid news to satisfy their appetite, and seemingly ours) is because we have this notion in our country that “all men are created equal.” We have been brought up with the idea that we are all equal under the law, and this philosophical notion has remained largely unchallenged, even though the reality is quite the opposite.

The sad reality has always been that if you are from the upper class and you have money, the system skews in your favor. Poor and indigent defendants know it, and I think most of us at some level also know it. Whether you have money or not is the difference between a top-notch lawyer and a public defender, between someone who can devote as much time as needed to your individual situation and an overworked, sometimes overwhelmed, barrister who can only do so much, in spite of their personal dedication to their clients.

Because of the fantasy that we’ve collectively been sold since the early days of the Republic and the underbelly of the disconcerting reality, we have a skewed perception of crime and justice. I think this has affected public perception of this particular case. I think people want Paris Hilton to serve the complete sentence (or even more time, if that was possible) for two main reasons: 1) the belief that we are “all equal under the law,” and 2) because she’s filthy rich. I have no problem with the first reason; I don’t think she should be granted any special favors, or any dispensation of any kind due to her status. I’m a little concerned about the second reason. While I think quite a few rich people, and quite a few famous people, and more than a few rich and famous people are arrogant and could use a few days (or more) of being brought down to earth among us mere mortals, I don’t think excessive vengeance is a good factor to play out in the courts. I think there are quite a few people who want Paris Hilton to be punished simply so she can be brought down a peg. If she was a philanthropist, or had contributed something of value to society, I don’t think people would be as hellbent in their opinions about whether she should serve the full sentence or not, regardless of her wealth.

The far more serious issue here though is the fact that there exists a two-tiered system of justice in this country: a system for those with wealth, power, and connections, and one for the rest of us. Most of the time we all have our blinkers on, and pretend that the system and the people affiliated with it, from the local town deputy all the way to the highest courts, applies the law and its consequences to everyone, regardless of status (I have news for you: the only system that treats everyone equitably is the genetic system. No matter who we are, we’ll all die someday). It’s only when you have the drama that we’ve seen in this case the last few days that the curtain is pulled back, and we see the man behind the mask. Regardless of who pulled strings, someone did, and the result is that Paris Hilton was allowed to leave prison, with the remainder of her sentence to be served at home.

It won’t happen, and even if it did happen, the discussion wouldn’t last as long as the coverage about Paris Hilton will, but I think it would be A Good Idea if society stopped for a minute and examined how our legal system works, how it doesn’t work, and how we can fix it. If Paris Hilton had been successfully allowed to serve just 10% of her sentence, then logically shouldn’t we allow everyone in prison to serve just 10% of their sentence? Should everyone who has medical problems be granted the opportunity for home arrest? How do we determine what mitigating factors can be used, or should be used? Should someone who is driving illegally and is caught even be sent to prison at all (Yes, I know she was initially in trouble due to DUI, which I think definitely deserves a serious penalty; but the initial sentence she received was 36 months of probation, alcohol education, and a fine, which isn’t exactly as serious as the consequence she’s undergoing now)? At a time of overcrowding in the prisons (a central factor that is part of of Sherriff Baca’s reasoning/defense), should everyone who is found guilty be thrown in the slammer?

Aside from the legal questions, there’s also a urgent need (at least in my mind) to re-evaluate the Corporate Media. Why do we allow the media to get away with Paris Hilton all-the-time? Why do we allow ourselves to be distracted from larger issues and far more important concerns? Why is someone like Paris Hilton even in the news, to begin with? Until she had the unfortunate luck of having her sexual romp with an old beau distributed across cyberspace, I doubt most people could have even told you who she is. To me, she’s not anything special: rich, spoiled kids are a dime a dozen, really. Other than quite a few people knowing what she looks like in the nude and starring in a dismal reality show, she’s done nothing that I consider newsworthy.

The sole bright spot in this mess is that regardless of whatever poor judgment she’s shown up to now, even Paris Hilton recognizes an essential truth, and had the intelligence to share her insight with the media (and via the media, the rest of us):

“I must also say that I was shocked to see all of the attention devoted to the amount of time I would spend in jail for what I had done by the media, public and city officials. I would hope going forward that the public and the media will focus on more important things, like the men and women serving our country in Iraq and other places around the world.”

I agree, Paris, I agree. Here’s looking at you, kid.