This today, in The Sun newspaper.
GEORGE Michael could fight a drug-drive rap claiming he was only charged due to his fame.
The star, 43, is preparing to take the battle to London’s High Court.
Michael was due before magistrates in North London yesterday charged with driving whilst unfit through drugs but the case was suddenly adjourned.
The Sun has learnt he now wants a judicial review of the decision to charge him.
The former Wham! star was arrested in September after being found at the wheel of his Mercedes. Experts believe he will argue others arrested over the same matter were only cautioned.
Top human rights lawyer Paul Gilbert, of Finers, Stephens and Innocent, said: “I’ve never heard of a judicial review in such a matter.
“I suspect they are challenging the decision to charge. Was he charged because his name is George Michael rather than George Bloggs?”
Michael will appear before Brent Magistrates next Wednesday.
I’m not sure about this story. It says George was due in court yesterday. But, previous reports said the case was being heard on the 11 January. So, it could all be rubbish.
If this story is true, though, I’m not sure challenging the police’s decision to charge is going to impress the magistrate particularly. I guess it really depends on whether these is enough evidence to get a conviction. If there is evidence (and evidence does NOT have to include blood/urine tests), then there’s every reason for the police to charge.
The risk with this tactic is that, on the surface, it makes it sound as though George thinks it’s OK to drive under the influence of drugs (which I’m sure he doesn’t actually think); and that this is not a serious matter (which I’m sure he knows it is). Having said that, given that George has already said publically that what happened isn’t a big deal, and shown it through his actions – he’s obviously done his falling asleep thing more than once, maybe his legal team feel they have nothing to lose by pushing hard.
Of course, all this pre-supposes George is guilty. If he’s innocent, or there is insufficient evidence to be able to get a conviction, there’s no reason for him not to fight his corner.