Well, I am not sure what very rich are. I am quite not sure of the definition of rich. Let's say privileged people.
For instance, if you want to have degree in order to practice accountability or being a pharmacist, or being notaire, or being a lawyer then you need a practical internship. Since there is a limited amount of position offered, then being a «son of a» de facto gives you some priviledges that will translate in real money.
Since the state regulates these liberal professions there income are guaranteed to be above the average (given some conditions that are too long to detail, but noticeable).
So it is very tough to distinguish privileges and wealth.
I cannot measure if I am right so it is pure speculation of me. I can actually say I experienced these situations at first and second order. However I cannot say if it is that important in both frequency and impact as I claim it to be.
I am very close to hasty generalisation fallacy because it is hard to be objective when you measure the system in which you are. My point of view is not neutral at all, all the more I feel emotionally involved as an actor in what I describe. I chose to run away instead of being either the victim or the bullier (I came sadly to be both at some point but not enough to feel sad for anyone).
However, I am totally fine with my biases. Although sometimes when I tell these stories, I wonder if I am suffering of delusion because it is not my actual reality at all and it feels so impossible.
The main question is: How do cops perceive difference between "rich and influental" kids and just "well off" kids.
Because latter are much more frequent, and you may mess with them. And it's not like the difference is apparent.
Is the scare of running into an influental kid so strong that they avoid all well off kids entirely? Because, you know, influental kids may look like anyone. You never know.
They do different crimes, but not all crimes are not sanctionned the same.
For all day life crime, if you are kid from a «famous person» you can try to get off the hook by invoking your relationships. (Jean Pierre Pernaud's kid (a famous TV anchor) tried it while speeding on an highway at 190km/h where it was limited at 90km/h. (that was what a local police guy said while sharing a beer. He may have lied, but this story even if it false is so close to what people feel that I can accept it as true enough)).
For free loading in transport you can get annoyed (a 5$ crime). For forgetting to pay wages or bills, not enforcing the basics of security in your activity or even forgetting to pay social charges(count in k$), even if you are caught on the spots you will be hardly annoyed and humilated.
They are poor's crimes and rich's crimes (that cost more to the collectivity).
A white business man not respecting the law using like being a proven spammer (artprice) and exploiting his salarymen is an exemple to the society. An arab business man providing good weed and exploiting his «cousins» is a criminal.
Drug dealers at the bottom of the hierarchy are paid like at the minimum rate regarding the risks taken.
Since the pushers are coloured and there is quite a discrimination, thus the society makes it easier for the kingpin to have cheap dedicated workforce. Business is business, not a charitative association. And the rules of business applies all alike. You cant get rich without capital and Income < outcome.
And fiscal evasion is not sanctionned on the long run if you accept to finally pay your due: fiscal administration will consent to close their eyes on some points.
Fiscal inequality is at its top. VAT makes it hard for people not to be taxed, and this is the biggest origin of taxes. On the other hand fiscal laws makes it easier for the richer to evade the taxes on income and patrimonial.
The poor get poorer and more subject to social violence, while rich get richer and more subject to physical violence. In a closed system if you compress a part, the compression has to propagate somewhere.
Btw, the system is truly meritocratic. To get to be a journalist you have very fair selection after highschool.
But oddly enough «sectorisation of the school maps» make it harder for poor kids to reach the good high schools that are statistically bound to be able to reach the «entry level» of the honestly fairly selective meritocratic system.
I don't say you can't be successful. I just say a system is unfair when some kids begins life with a 10 kg loaded bag, and others none and you are being required to first do 42km under a chrono before beginning to compete a fair competition.
That may explain why the journalists that are scared of going beyond the «périphérique» (the border of Paris) often (not always) makes it look like this place is another planet when they write articles. It is quite tragically comic to read their papers.
And they show the positive side of our place: creativity, openness, intiative.
And it is cool. They just don't have any audience.
When something happens, google news never index their point of view as relevant for you, nor do the journalists ask them to publish except some confidential alterweb media (like rue89/mediapart/indimedia).
It is fun that the social fracture also affects google algorithms.
The rich kids don't have to mess with cops. The cops know not to mess with them.