Lindsay Lohan may have had an excuse when media outlets insisted upon prying into her suspected involvement in a reported home robbery recently. But when one of your celebrity peers makes a joke referencing Lohan’s alleged penchant for other people’s jewelry, well, let’s just say it doesn’t look good. Why? Well it just so happens we have a court of public opinion in Hollywood, and it’s certainly unfriendly to potential thieves. So I guess if the law doesn’t get you, cause and effect will. Especially when you consider how senseless it is to come into a community that you have work in and end up acquiring an ignoble reputation that your peers feel they can’t trust you. It just doesn’t make sense.
Lohan is young, sought after by Hollywood’s elite producers, attractive, and a decent actress with a substantial fan base. Why then does she consistently find herself in the eye of a various celebrity controversies? Does she even know why media outlets and law enforcement agencies don’t give her the benefit of the doubt? It’s a rhetorical question. Surely the film star must be aware that karma is real and probably very much at work here.
Perhaps, we’ll never know, but what we can know is that mistrust does not emerge out of nothing.
Clearly, it’s Lohan’s track record, which repeatedly indicates that trouble seeks her out.
So today she goes to her Twitter to decry “lies” being told about her regarding a theft from a Hollywood Hills home.
Her comments came four days after the alleged incident.
“Whenever I’m doing great, people fabricate lies.” Lohan wrote on Twitter. “It’s such a shame.”
Los Angeles Police Department detectives had presented evidence to prosecutors Tuesday after several days of investigation identifying Lohan as well as Gavin Lawrence Doyle and Andrew Nicholas Payan as suspects in the case.
Lohan and one of the victims in the case, identified as millionaire Sam Magid, had a “longstanding relationship,” and he did not identify any of the suspects, prosecutors said.
Although one of the suspects made a “vague admission” that someone had taken something, none of the suspects was found with any property.
In addition, prosecutors noted in the filing that eyewitnesses in the case did not cooperate with authorities, and the victims did not wish to pursue a criminal prosecution of the case.
LAPD detectives have been seeking to talk with Lohan after several items, including cash, sunglasses and a credit card holder, were reported stolen from a home Aug. 18. Law enforcement sources said that reports of $100,000 taken from the home were inaccurate.
The incident is the latest in a series of brushes with the law for Lohan, who has been trying to put her much-chronicled legal troubles behind her and resume her acting career.
She was on probation for a 2007 conviction for driving under the influence. Since then she has also been convicted of shoplifting and was on probation for that offense as well.
Lohan was sent to jail several times for violating the terms of her probation. But she hewed to a strict regimen of counseling and community service at the county morgue. In March, a judge ended her probation in the DUI case and reduced the shoplifting probation to unsupervised status.
According to prosecutors, the victims were asleep in the residence about 7:45 a.m. Aug. 18, when they became aware that someone was trying to get into the master bedroom of the home. They searched for the suspects and saw a man later identified as Doyle standing outside the home.
The man fled. While trying to call 911, an unidentified woman at the home saw a newer model BMW parked in front of the home and a second man enter the vehicle, which then drove away.
When LAPD officers arrived at the home, the victims reported that keys from cars at the home as well as cash, sunglasses and a credit card holder were missing.
Day laborers working across the street identified two men and a woman who arrived at the residence in a tan BMW around the time the crime reportedly occurred and then went inside. But police were unable to find any evidence of forced entry into the cars or the home.
A security guard interviewed by police said that at 2 a.m. that morning Lohan came to the home and wanted to enter it to speak with Magid. She was told she could not come in and asked the guard if Magid was in the home with “some other girl.”
The conclusion from these accusations, innuendos, and just downright shenanigans is that Lindsay Lohan will not be prosecuted for a burglary at a home where she had been a houseguest, prosecutors determined Tuesday.
Prosecutors cited lack of evidence to prove Lohan was involved in the thefts. The items taken were described as keys, cash, sunglasses and a credit card holder. The homeowner, who is an acquaintance of Lohan, later told authorities that he did not want to pursue a case over the items.
One of the men suspected of the thefts told police that he, Lohan and another man went into the home early on Aug. 18 and some items were taken, but he refused to say who stole them.
“We do not have sufficient evidence to prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt,” a prosecutor wrote in a memo rejecting charges.
“Lindsay is glad this matter has been cleared up so she can focus on her upcoming projects,” her spokesman Steve Honig said in a statement after the prosecutor’s decision.
Lohan remains on probation for a 2011 case in which she pleaded no contest to taking a $2,500 necklace without permission. After completing a strict counseling and morgue cleanup duty program implemented by a judge, Lohan was allowed to forgo frequent court updates as long as she stays out of trouble.
In recent months she has resumed acting, portraying Elizabeth Taylor in a Lifetime movie about the actress’ love affair with Richard Burton.
She also recently filmed “The Canyons,” a film by “Less Than Zero” author Bret Easton Ellis. That film has Lohan playing opposite James Deen, who is best known as an adult film star with thousands of movies to his credit.
So to answer the question raised at the start of this article as to why you Lohan, why are we picking on you?
You know why, and so does anybody that takes a close look at the evidence; it’s that age old law that needs neither a police officer nor prosecutor to enforce its rule. Some have phrased it, “you get what give,” I simply prefer to call it, cause and effect, what you give is what you get.