Celebrities admit to past drug use all the time on TV, some even admit they sold drugs at one time in their life. Nothing ever seems to happen to them legally. But if you were to admit to something like murder or arson in a similar forum you'd probably be arrested and prosecuted. At the very least the police would launch an investigation.
I'm not really bothered by that disparity. But it does seem odd that in a country supposedly in the middle of a war on drugs, people can be so free to admit they flaunt the law. Logic would seem to dictate that either it's a serious criminal offense or it isn't. As it is, it seems like it's serious if you get caught doing it today, but if you do it today and admit to it next week, no one cares.
Why is that?
2007-07-20 05:04:24 · 5 answers · asked by Science Guy 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
There is a disparity. First, let me address someone's statement about the right not to incriminate theirself. That applies to testimony. If someone makes a spontaneous, unsolicited statement that they committed a crime, that is valid evidence.
As police, we don't investigate it much because of a couple reasons. First, where did the crime occur? Artie Lange (on the Howard Stern show) admits to using heroin all the time, but never says where it happens. So who would investigate, NYPD, a New Jersey department, or someone else?
Second, how much resources can I devote to investigating something that happened three to four months ago? When I usually make a drug arrest, it is because I have found drugs on that person, in their vehicle, or in their house during a legal search.
Third, just because someone says something on TV, where is the proof? They can come back later and say they were just saying it to sound cool, or make their past sound sordid. In order to get a conviction, I need proof. I need a quantity of drugs that I removed from the pocket, a blood sample legally drawn, direct eyewitnesses, etc.
The difficulty of proving the crime, where it happened, etc. makes it unreasonable to investigate. What is more bothersome to me is that people continue to idolize these nuts despite some of the things they do. I continue to be amazed that parents allow their little girls to claim they want to be like Paris Hilton.
2007-07-20 05:22:53 · answer #1 · answered by Matt 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Even if a DA was able to bring a charge from these statements to court, there are two things that present an problem:
Statute of limitations - For most drug felonies is 5 - 7 years. If someone says "Yeah, I sold drugs in the 80's" the DA could not get a conviction because it was too long ago.
Right not to incriminate yourself - The DA does not have proof of the crime, only the persons public statement. If the DA brought the charge to court without other compelling evidence what would he do when the person says "I only said that as part of a publicity stunt"? Since the statement was made without the person having been read their rights, they could probably get the statement thrown out of court.
It really has nothing to do with money or power. It would not really take a high priced lawyer to fight frivolous charges like that.
2007-07-20 05:14:29 · answer #2 · answered by davidmi711 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They have the wealth of money and crooked lawyers!!! Money can nearly get you out of most of anything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!but without it they put you so far back that you will probably never see sunlight again....It is called corruption!!!!!!!
2007-07-20 05:19:16 · answer #3 · answered by Carol H 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What makes you think it's OK?
2007-07-20 06:16:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
money and power
2007-07-20 05:14:16 · answer #5 · answered by lek 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋