CELEBRITIES ARE ABOVE THE LAW. It’s official. Last night, the Union of Vacuous Celebrities issued a statement demanding that their fabled immunity to prosecution be enshrined in law.
“We're not talking about being let off parking fines. Our better-known members already get away with murder, drug offences, rape and child abuse, and we feel that privilege should be extended to all famous people,” the union said in a statement.
Film stars and other entertainers around the world agreed enthusiastically. “All right thinking people agree that celebrities should be let off crimes, but up to now judges have not found it easy to do so because they feel this silly obligation to follow the law,” said a spokeswoman from the Association of Airheaded TV Presenters, giggling and dropping her script. “This step would bring the judiciary in line with reality and thus, oh sorry, I’ve lost my page.”
The move was triggered by last week’s detention of filmmaker Roman Polanksi on charges of child rape.
The man in the street was outraged. “I hear this man is a celebrity. This means he should be allowed to get away with anything,” said a man in the street, reading from a sheet taped to the bottom of the camera. “By the way, who is this dude, and where do I collect the free autographed Paris Hilton video I was promised?”
While judicial experts say that turning unwritten laws into statutes is never easy, the celebs' legal team is confident of a win. “Law is built on precedents, which means that if one celebrity gets away with something, the law evolves,” the head of the legal team said.
His team will point out that there was clear evidence that OJ Simpson killed two victims but he's a celeb, so he got off.
Michael Jackson was a known drug abuser who admitted sleeping with children, but he's a celeb so he wasn't condemned.
David Letterman was a married boss who slept with his staff, but the person who exposed him is seen as the offender.
A court sentenced Paris Hilton to 45 days in jail but she was released almost immediately.
Rob Lowe, Mel Gibson, R. Kelly and many others have got out of serious trouble thanks to their status as celebs.
There has been only token opposition to the move.
“Celebrities should NOT be above the law,” said a spokeswoman for the Victims Support Group. She added: “With the exception of Johnny Depp, who can do anything he likes to me, as long as he is wearing his Jack Sparrow make-up at the time.”
The only other complaint came from the Association of Grammarians. “You can't really stop celebrities getting away with crimes, but what has deeply upset our members is the fact that the name Union of Vacuous Celebrities is tautologous,” a spokesman said.
*
PLEASE NOTE. Before writing angry letters to me, please note that this posting is 82.5 per cent ironic, and of the rest of the material, about six or seven per cent could be classified as bitterly sardonic.
We may be living in bizarre times when we are prevented from using the law against celebs, but we can still use tools such as irony and sarcasm; they can be delightfully sharp and satisfying. Heh heh heh.
*
*
*
THE SERIOUS BIT.
From the files:
Here is the court transcript of the case:
On March 10, 1977, Polanski picked up the 13-year-old victim at her house and took her to Jack Nicholson’s home for a modeling shoot. The victim testified that Polanski served her champagne and gave her part of a Quaalude before getting in a whirlpool bath with her while they were naked. No one else was home.
Q: What happened then?
A: He goes, ‘Come down here.’
And I said, ‘No. No, I got to get out.’
And he goes, ‘No, come down here.’
And then I said that I had asthma and that I couldn’t — I had to get out because of the warm air and the cold air or something like that.
And he said, ‘Just come down here for a second.’
So I finally went down.
And then he went — there was a lot of Whirlpool bath jets. He goes, ‘Doesn’t it feel better down here?’
And he was like holding me up because it is almost over my head.
And I went, ‘Yeah, but I better get out.’
So I got out.
___
The victim testified that after she left the whirlpool bath, Polanski told her to go into a nearby bedroom and lie down.
A: I was going, ‘No, I think I better go home,’ because I was afraid. So I just went and I sat down on the couch.
Q: What were you afraid of?
A: Him.
(a few minutes later)
A: He sat down beside me and asked me if I was OK.
Q: What did you say, if anything?
A: I said, ‘No.’
Q: What did he say?
A: He goes, ‘Well, you’ll be better.’ And I go, ‘No, I won’t. I have to go home.’
Q: What happened then?
A: He reached over and he kissed me. And I was telling him, ‘No,’ you know, ‘Keep away.’
___
After Polanski kissed her, the victim alleged, he began to engage in oral sex.
A: … I was ready to cry. I was kind of — I was going, ‘No. Come on. Stop it.’ But I was afraid.
Q: And what did he say, if anything?
A: He wasn’t saying anything that I can remember. He was — sometimes he was saying stuff, but I was just blocking him out, you know.
___
The victim testified that Polanski began having sex with her, but sodomized her when he learned she wasn’t using birth control.
A: He asked, he goes, ‘Are you on the pill?’
And I went, ‘No.’
And he goes, ‘When did you last have your period?’
And I said, I don’t know. A week or two. I’m not sure.’
Q: And what did he say?
A: He goes, ‘Come on. You have to remember.’
And I told him I didn’t.
Q: Did he say anything after that?
A: Yes. He goes, ‘Would you want me to go through your back? And I went, ‘No.’
___
The victim testified that afterwards, she got dressed and waited in the car for Polanski to drive her home.
Before driving her home, he asked her to keep the incident a secret.
A: He said to me, he goes, ‘Oh, don’t tell your mother about this.’ …
Q: What did you say?
A: I wasn’t saying anything.
He says, ‘Don’t tell your mother about this and don’t tell your boyfriend either.’ … He said something like, ‘This is our secret.’
And I went, ‘Yeah.’
And then later he said, ‘You know, when I first met you I promised myself I wouldn’t do anything like this with you.’












I always invent great and innovative murder methods when I imagine that there could be something like that happening to my children and the person commiting these crimes running around free....
Something like: peel his skin away, salt him lightly, tar and feather him, put him on the wheel and afterwards a little of the recent Guantanamo water torture ...
Posted by: Uli | Wednesday, 14 October 2009 at 03:03 PM
He's a pig... no wait.. I like pigs, I do not want to insult them.
He's a dirty sleaze bag and I can't believe the long line of celebrities that came to his defence when he was arrested. Not to mention those who have worked with him on his films through the years since his crime.
Posted by: TS | Wednesday, 14 October 2009 at 03:04 PM
This transcript is disturbing
13 years old daughter:
Mum , I am going out for a date;
Mother:
OK
13 years old daughter gets picked up at her house, and has a date with old entertainer
Daughter, coming home
Hi mum,
Here is 20 Dollars!
What; that's all you are bringing back?
Let's go to the Police
I am sure that we can squeeze this b.......... out of a few millions.
Uli
You are a good mother
You would not allow your 13 year old child by herself with an old entertainer, would you?
Posted by: fardel | Wednesday, 14 October 2009 at 04:12 PM
Uli
You are a good mother
You would not allow your 13 year old child by herself with an old entertainer, would you?
---
point well taken. it would be interesting to hear the whole story. poor girl.
Posted by: stef | Wednesday, 14 October 2009 at 04:54 PM
Me: Mom, do you know that creep who got arrested, Polanski --
Mom: Yeah I always knew he was a creep! He makes weird movies anyway. What were you saying?
Me: Our English Studies professor showed us his production of Macbeth today. It's supposed to be a tragedy but really funny, especially when the characters were killing each other
Mom: Well that exactly proves my point! Who with a right mind would make these stupid movies that no one wants to watch? Ha! I *knew* he was a creep.
Posted by: Christy | Wednesday, 14 October 2009 at 08:25 PM
Given that most celebrities are insane, they already have a ready-to-use escape hatch anyway.
But yes, why should only diplomats get immunity? Celebrities bring people and nations together into harmony almost as frequently as diplomats bring nations together into war.
I would extend their immunity to include exemption from the laws of grammar and syntax. "Watchoo talkin' bout?" is acceptable in a PhD thesis submitted by Gary Coleman.
Even laws of economics should be held in abeyance for celebrities (e.g., demand for Elvis Presley should not be affected by him not being in supply anymore).
If the law of gravity had been suspended, we would still have Christopher Reeve with us. (And he would really be superman too).
Naturally, there will be raised the question: who is celebrity enough to earn immunity? Hard to say. Making a quiet positive, lasting contribution to our world surely is not enough (a Nobel Prize is more than sufficient compensation for that).
Posted by: Vince A | Wednesday, 14 October 2009 at 09:17 PM
is'nt it necessary to regulate the entertainment industry and make it follow a minimum age policy ?
Why do we allow these youngsters to work in this industry ?
Even the Olympic games, has a minimum age policy ?
Posted by: Karuna | Wednesday, 14 October 2009 at 10:30 PM
Hey Nury,
this is irrelevant. I dare you write something about the Chief Executive's recent mess up with English Grammar when critising the pan-democrats for their protest signs. Get it published on the standard. I'd worship you.
Posted by: Mr Bam | Thursday, 15 October 2009 at 12:09 PM
Interesting post. This is definitely happening that celebrities are getting away with murder LITERALLY.
Has a formal study been done on this? i would be interested to see the results. any links??
mr bam you clearly don't know this is a syndicated column published in lots of countries i dont know who or what you are talking about and i can hardly see how a slip in english grammar by some ceo is relevant to the world, while people around the world getting away with murder is not. idiot.
Posted by: Watchman | Thursday, 15 October 2009 at 12:27 PM
Watchman, you sound like an inbred flipper baby. George Bush gets wacked by the media all the time for being bad at English. Let's give Donald Tsang some spotlight.
Posted by: Mr Bam | Friday, 16 October 2009 at 03:11 PM
Mr. Jam, now you need not ridicule celebs and George Bush, you have enough fodder right here.;-)
Posted by: mahjuja | Friday, 16 October 2009 at 10:52 PM
Was the kid's mom only bothered about the money when sending her daughter with the celebrity?
Child abusers should be shot with salted bullets, to mention a modern saying from Sri Lanka.
Posted by: Chamin | Sunday, 25 October 2009 at 08:40 AM
again I hate to leave a comment here. I'm not taking any sides here but in stead of blindly blaming someone either try to know the whole story (it means try to understand both point of view & don't let anger, ignorance, confusion etc take over) or if it seems that much of a hard work then leave it alone. After all none of us do anything useful by leaving useless comments. I mean these comments change nothing in the end, right? sorry again for my offending point of view.
Posted by: Gwyllgi | Monday, 07 December 2009 at 06:22 AM
You have the Uncle Rice Wisdom Nuri San.
It is decided
*sounds gong*
Posted by: Uncle Rice | Monday, 15 March 2010 at 11:01 PM
This is very interesting, You are a very skilled blogger. I have joined your feed and look forward to seeking more of your great post.
Posted by: Singha Tours | Wednesday, 29 September 2010 at 07:43 PM
Hello, just discovered your web-site when i google something and wonder what webhosting do you use for your website,the speed is more faster than my website, i really need it.will back to check it out,thank you!
Posted by: Ekal Kumbh | Friday, 01 October 2010 at 04:50 PM
I recommended it on stumbleupon. The only thing that it’s missing is a bit of new design.
Posted by: Protestant Lawyers NY | Wednesday, 06 October 2010 at 04:09 PM
Awesome ! Thanks for sharing with us..
Posted by: David J Marchant | Monday, 18 October 2010 at 02:54 PM