As I was going through the articles that my google reader account pulled up (for those of you who might not be familiar with it, it's basically an RSS reader system that I use to get news), I came across this headline from BBC news (full article here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7465195.stm): "Campbell Gets Community Service: Supermodel Naomi Campbell has been sentenced to 200 hours' community service after pleading guilty to assault"
Community service for assault? I was intrigued and decided to read more. Apparently, Campbell had been heading back to Los Angeles from Heathrow Airport when she overheard some of the crew saying that some of the luggage had been lost. She asked the crew if they could check and see if any of her bags had been lost. When she recieved news that one of her bags HAD been lost, apparently she became "clearly upset."
The pilot himself, upon hearing that her luggage had been lost, came out in order to apologize and explain the situation. Campbell gets even more upset, demanding to know where her luggage is, cursing at the pilot, telling him to get off the plane and find her luggage, and calling him a racist when he tried to leave. She was asked to get off the plane when she became disruptive, but refused, continuing to shout. The police were called and when they arrived, she kicked one in the thigh, one in the shin, and then wedged herself between two seats and spat at them.
She was sentenced to 200 hours of community service and £2300 in fines. The chief magistrate of the court had the following to say, "Whilst we accept that the loss of your suitcase would have been stressful your subsequent behaviour cannot be justified."
Now I don't know if the sentence was lenient or not, though I'm inclined to think not. She didn't seriously injure anyone and for a national of another nation in a first offense, it seems pretty fair. However, this article got me thinking, and I've decided that celebrities are confusing.
First of all, they're people. Regular old people who are put in high-stress situations like losing your luggage on occasion. On the other hand, they're more than that. They carry weight simply by being who they are and they're used to getting what they want when they want it. They're also put in the public spotlight a lot more than normal people, potentially adding stress to a high-stress situation. In this case, the lost luggage apparently had a Yves Saint Laurent outfit in it that she was contracted to wear on a talk show. How many times would a "normal person" get into this sort of situation?
However, how childish is it to wedge yourself between two airplane seats and spit at police officers? It seems like something a child would do when they threw a temper tantrum, just replace police officers with parents. Seriously, where did she ever get the idea that this was a good way to behave? And even if she had lost the outfit, I'm sure there was some clause her cadre of lawyers put in that contract to cover loss or damage to it. I'm also sure that she would have had something amazing to wear on the show waiting for her when she landed all because she's famous. There was no reason for this level of anger, certainly.
Which leaves me with a conflict of emotion. I feel a little bad for her, because I'm sure there have been other passengers who have thrown a hissy fit when their luggage has been lost, but it simply hasn't made national news. She didn't need to throw a fit, though, since she wouldn't have suffered as much as a normal person without massive funds to replace what was lost. In the end, I guess I just don't care enough about it to rectify my feelings, but I'd love to hear some other opinions.
The article ended on a humorous note, though, for me at least. It said: "Her lawyer Simon Nicholls said: 'All my client wanted [was] to be dealt with as though she was anybody else.'" Yeah, right.
