I believe (I do not have the guidelines in front of me) the arrest ought to have been conducted in a much different manner!

First, they ought to have gotten the key from his housekeeper, then, upon entering (and removing their shoes, leaving them on the doormat), they ought to have gently struck a glockenspiel to stir him from his slumber. “Mr. Stone,” they should have murmured, in a low, warm whisper, “there has been some general unpleasantness, which we will tell you about shortly, when you are ready to hear it.”

AD

AD

Then, as he began to recombobulate himself, one of the agents should have drawn him a warm bath. Another agent should have prepared some toast and tea, and laid out a newspaper, his favorite pajamas and a robe, as well as a pipe and slippers. A third agent should have played classical music or a CD of Mr. Stone’s choosing, and a fourth ought to have offered him a soothing shoulder rub and lit some sticks of incense to render the ambiance more pleasing.

Once Mr. Stone had finished his breakfast of toast and jam and had read the newspaper, one agent should gently have cleared his throat and said, “Mr. Stone, about the unpleasantness.” Once Mr. Stone looked up to signal him to continue, the agent should have gone on, “I hate to trouble you, but if you could surrender yourself to us at your convenience, it seems you may inadvertently have run somewhat afoul of the law.”

The agents should have then withdrawn, giving him due time to gather himself after this announcement.

AD

AD

Yes, I understand that this is hardly standard operating procedure for an arrest of this kind. It does not mean that an exception could not have been made.

After all, certain people are always saying there are two systems of justice: one for those with privilege, and one for those without. All I am asking is to be able really to see that. By all rights, Mr. Stone ought to have been in Justice First Class, but he appears to be in Justice Economy Plus, at best, with his knees jammed uncomfortably into a stranger’s justice seat-back. This was the arrest equivalent of being given a single shrink-wrapped speculoos cookie and being told it was a luxury in-flight snack! This is not the way the system ought to treat a man such as him when accused of a crime. Where is the deference he has been led to expect he would receive from the system? I would like to speak to a manager, please. This is a man who deserves to be handled with more than usual care, like a package with a special label.

What is the point of having privilege if you cannot expect to be arrested as described above? Do not tell me Roger Stone is without privilege. This is a man who owns a top hat and has repeatedly appeared on Fox with an umbrella that, if memory serves, he can also use as a weapon.

AD

AD

No, I am not saying that as a whole, this sort of arrest is bad. I had no objections when children were injured by flash grenades! Or when arresting officers went to the wrong apartment and just . . . shot someone! But we can all agree not that this sort of thing ought not to happen, but that it ought not to happen to a Roger Stone. Surely he ought to receive the best sort of service. If he is not safe, then what are we paying for?

Sincerely,

A Concerned Senator