|
![]() |
|
|
Late last week, Grubman copped a plea bargain that will land her in prison for two months followed by five years on probation and a few months of community service. The New York Post reports that she also faces $8 million in civil lawsuits. Although Grubman had high-priced legal talent on her side, it didn't help. Non-intoxicated drivers without criminal records who negligently kill people rarely do much more time in the clink than Grubman will. Malcolm Gladwell has argued that the events were an error, albeit a negligent one, on Grubman's part. Were it not for the fact that she called the bouncer "f***ing white trash" and left the scene of the accident, it's unlikely that the district attorney would have even bothered with a criminal investigation. Grubman, however, was too tempting a target. As a p.r. agent, she belittled reporters all the time. As a person, she had life handed to her on a platter: Too academically disengaged to bother with finishing conventional high school, she never earned a college degree. Her "success" as a p.r. agent came almost entirely from her father's connections in the entertainment industry. It's satisfying to see someone like her come down. Satisfying but not entirely fair. Just as it's unfair when a drug-using Hollywood celebrity makes a repentant speech in court and gets to play tennis at a posh drug-rehab resort while a screwed-up inner-city gangbanger does hard time, it's unfair when a person's prominence results in extra punishment. It violates the fundamental principle of equality under the law. In Grubman's case, however, the punishment seems about fair for what she did. Had Grubman inflicted same injuries by accidentally discharging a gun, she would likely be looking at a year or two behind bars. The real problem isn't that Grubman is being punished too harshly; it's that other negligent drivers get punished too little. In many states, fleeing a crash even a fatal one is just a misdemeanor while driving while intoxicated is a felony. A driver who sobers up before turning himself in can often get less punishment than one who tries to help the people he injured. If Grubman was drunk, and there's no hard evidence she was, she may have actually saved herself jail time. Traffic crashes kill far more people than murders and, while crime has declined spectacularly since the early 1990s, traffic deaths have fallen only slightly. (Almost all of the decrease, furthermore, stems from airbags and increased vehicle sizes rather than better enforcement or improved driving.) Law-enforcement policies work best when they hold people responsible for their own behavior. British Academic Donald E. Lewis's landmark 1985 study shows that doubling the punishment for a crime reduced its likelihood of its being committed by about half. There's no reason why this shouldn't apply to traffic offenses: a bevy of studies, most prominently one the Los Angeles Police Department commissioned in the 1980s, prove that aggressively ticketing motorists tends to reduce speeding, red-light running, and thus, accidents. But few police agencies pay heed. Right now, indeed, even the language tilts against holding individuals responsible for car crashes: Most people, even police officers, call them accidents, thus suggesting that nobody is at fault. Better enforcement could also help reduce car crashes: The California State Highway Patrol's corridor-safety program implements effective community-policing principles along many of the state's most dangerous freeways. CHP has handed out more tickets but also improved traffic flow, put up new signs, and assigned many of its best officers to the project. The result: many fewer deaths and injuries. The New York courts have given Lizzie Grubman an unusually harsh, and in some respects unfair, punishment. But at least she's being held responsible. Her prison sentence provides a good warning to negligent motorists all over the country. Eli Lehrer is a senior editor of The American Enterprise. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||