When Keith Richards and Mick Jagger were sentenced to prison in 1967 for possession of drugs, the editor of the Times wrote an influential editorial entitled "Who Breaks a Butterfly on a Wheel?"
In the editorial, William Rees-Mogg maintained that Jagger and Richards had received manifestly harsher sentences than unknowndefendants and this simply wasn't fair.
The editorial helped sway the judiciary - later that month, Richards' conviction was overturned and Jagger's conviction was upheld but the sentence was quashed.
While you would hardly describe AC/DC drummer Phil Rudd as a butterfly - more a tatty old emperor moth these days - his conviction for possession of cannabis seems harsh.
I know that if you break the law you should expect to suffer the consequences - and the community magistrate who sentenced Rudd told him he'd been playing Russian roulette by possessing the drug.
But most first offenders are given a little leeway by the courts. There have been high-profile offenders who have been given diversion as a conviction would impede their ability to travel and thus ply their trade - surely Rudd is in the same category?
He's going to find it difficult to get visas to play with AC/DC in some countries as a result of this conviction. I suppose he should have thought of that before he chose to use an illegal drug but come on. If this is the biggest criminal to be found in Tauranga, the Bay of Plenty is a fortunate place indeed.
