What’s being done to Paris Hilton is plain wrong.

Let me preface the above with this: She’s an ill-bred slut; a skunk with expensive clothes. She’s a stupid, rude, uneducated, and unkind woman (consider how she and her sidekick mocked those sweet quilting ladies on their reality show, and how they generally show contempt for the “yokels” with whom they slum it on the show).

Every time I’ve heard Paris speak, my impressions have been confirmed; she’s repulsive. As for her so-called allure, in “Sluts Galore,” I identified her as part of the “porn aesthetic,” sporting “sly, weasel-like looks.” I also thoroughly resent that her name mars one of my favorite fragrances, “Paris” by Yves Saint Laurent. (The allure of Paris the city, nothing can alter, except rioting Muslims.)

However, Hilton she was given unprecedented sentence for a low-level misdemeanor.

Here’s what Thomas Mesereau, a defense attorney for whom I have a great deal of respect, said. I praised his defense of Michael Jackson. (The article about that defense almost no one wanted to publish, including a large libertarian site.) Mesereau has said this about the legal plight of Paris—including the sentence, and the subsequent usurpation by the Judge of the sheriff’s authority:

“…you have a judge who is not following the law and who is willing to undermine our sheriff’s department. This judge absolutely has violated every procedure that applies to a situation like this. All her attorneys can do at this point is file an appeal, try and get her out on bail, as a misdemeanor permits one to do, and take it from there…

But I think the whole situation is a disgrace, because this judge undermined our sheriff and actually treated Paris Hilton far worse than anyone else would have been treated in this situation…

This judge knows darn well, because he’s in the criminal justice system, that people convicted of crimes like this, low-level misdemeanors, only spend a few days in jail, because they need to stop overcrowding, and they have to keep violent felons or people accused of violent felonies in jail.

I have had people go in the morning and leave that afternoon. Nobody gets 45 days like this. Nobody is told, you must spend all 45 days. He did it for the cameras. …And I think it’s highly improper…

I think equality should be the major message in our justice system, that, no matter who you are, you’re treated equally with everybody else.

This is a case of celebrity injustice. He did things with her because of who she is, and how much wealth she has, and because there were paparazzi and cameras around, that he wouldn’t have done with anybody else. And he’s created a difficult situation for our sheriff, who is a dedicated public servant, a very decent man. I know him very well.

And he’s trying to treat everybody equally. He didn’t treat Paris Hilton any differently from anyone else. And the judge tried to make it look like he had…”

Update: As usual, the media and the punditocracy are always wrong. Weeks after the fact, Greta Van Susteren of Faux News discovered (not due to any research she had conducted) that Hilton received more time than a wife batterer would. The Los Angeles Times did the journalist footwork (I can’t locate a link). After presiding over a gaggle of “experts” who hooted and hollered for Hilton’s head, Van Susteren has reversed her position.
About this you can be certain: mainstream media are always wrong. I put it down to cultural dumbing down: egalitarian hiring and the feminization of news.

In the chat I had with Jim Ostrowski of Paleo Radio last week, we agreed about the Hilton case, only I insisted on making the following distinctions (they are not mutually exclusive):
1) Hilton is a Ho—an unkind, classless slut. She’s huge because the market adjudicates popularity, not quality.
2) Hilton received unjust treatment by the legal system. (As a mother, I must say that the cry she let out to hers, “Mother, mother, this is unfair,” was horrible to hear.)

In this case, the injustice was by popular demand. The people—the pitchfork-hoisting, philosophical acolytes of the French Revolution—demanded Paris’s empty head, and got it.

Another young girl died overseas on a school trip. I saw the item on CNN, but cannot find the link (help please). The parents allege foul play.
American and European parents are blasé about their kids, be it in the way they discipline or supervise them. They are also stupendously naïve, sending their precious progeny, during their most stupid years—the teens—to dangerous spots around the world. Bermuda, for instance, which “US and British crime advisories have warned of as having a medium-high crime rate.”

Consider the case of Rebecca Middleton. This Canadian 16-year-old was packed off to Bermuda by starry-eyed parents with her friend Jasmine Meens, ready for a “trip of a lifetime.” A left-liberal mindset has these folks believing the world is one big happy place, and that walking the streets of Mogadishu and those of Montreal (lovely city) are one and the same thing.
In any event, Middleton “accepted rides on motorcycles, operated by Mr. Smith and Mr. Mundy.” (Here’s Justis Smith.) the Bermuda Online described what these predators did to the girl as “the most animal sexually-depraved, most violent and inhuman murder of any woman or man anywhere in the world.” (Wild and Wooly English, that’s for sure.) Intriguingly, the appeals in the case—no one was convicted—were argued in the Bermudan courts by Cherie Booth Blair.
The hippie spirit was also alive and well in Natalie Holloway’s family. (Never mind the male predators waiting to prey on trusting North American girls, I would not have entrusted my child to any adult chaperon chosen by a North America schools.)

Denis Collins, juror in Scooter Libby’s trial, said that Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff was the fall guy. “‘What are we doing with this guy here? Where’s Rove? Where are these other guys?'” is how Collins described the pickle jurors found themselves in during Libby’s scuttlebutt-driven trial. Still, it did not prevent them from convicting Libby, and rendering conflicting verdicts, to boot.

Not that he was a sympathetic sort, but CIA director George ‘Slam-Dunk’ Tenet was also the fall guy for Cheney, Bush, Rove, and Rice. They’re good at letting the minions take the wrap for their infractions.

More crucially, the “crime” for which Libby was convicted was also the crime for which Martha Stewart went to jail: lying to the FBI. Not for leaking the identity of former (so-called) classified CIA operative Valerie Plame. (Or, in Stewart’s case, insider trading.) Richard Armitage did that.

Where a prosecutor could never hope to prove his case in a court of law, he goes looking for other charges. He manufactures crimes. If he can’t get a defendant —usually a high-profile one —on the facts; the prosecutor will often get him for lying. After all, if the prosecutor has not been able to prove his case, this must mean the hapless accused has been lying, right?

Republicans failed to protest Stewart’s sham of a trial, but have been perfectly capable of articulating why Scooter Libby’s conviction is suspect. But that’s to be expected. Stewart is a rock-ribbed Democrat; Scooter a Republican. Democrats are as partisan.

Let’s hope Cheney cashes in some Halliburton shares to help defray the costs of Libby’s $6-million defense.

It goes without saying that the late Kathryn Johnston, a heroic 92-year-old pistol packing Atlanta resident, had every right and reason to open fire on the goons who were in the process of breaking down her front door. But they were the law, so they shot her dead.

Armed to the teeth, wearing bulletproof riot vests, and carrying riot shields, these big, “brave” men killed a very old lady in her own home. She was armed with a “rusty old revolver,” meant to repel the neighborhood rapists and drug dealers.

The goons have backup. Although neighbors say Miss Johnston lived alone, the Assistant Chief of the Atlanta Police Department and the County district attorney are claiming their “undercover officers bought illegal drugs from a man at the house in the afternoon and the officers returned in the evening to execute a ‘no knock’ warrant, which is used in cases where officers believe that a suspect may have time to hide evidence or escape if given time to answer the door…”

According to FMNN columnist, Radley Balko

a ‘no-knock’ raid occurs when police forcibly enter a private residence without first knocking and announcing that they’re the police. These raids are often launched on tips from notoriously unreliable confidential informants. Rubber-stamp judges, dicey informants, and aggressive policing have thus given rise to the countless examples of ‘wrong door’ raids we read about in the news. In fact, there’s a disturbingly long list of completely innocent people who’ve been killed in ‘wrong door’ raids.
No-knock raids are typically carried out by masked, heavily armed SWAT teams using paramilitary tactics more appropriate for the battlefield than the living room. No-knock raids have been justified on the flimsiest of reasons, including that the suspect was a licensed, registered gun owner (NRA, take note!)

Basically, the protocol followed is for the police to announce themselves, wait a couple of seconds, and then force the door. Imagine how scared and confused a 92-year-old woman would have been. She probably knew nothing about the “no-knock” abomination and failed to spot the “comforting” sight of the marked patrol car in front of the home she thought was her castle, but was in fact the government’s.