Roman Polanski

[Stratego]

Your thoughts and opinions on the recent news of his arrest, if you care to share any.

Link to the news article here (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

[RBM]

I browsed the link - but seemed mostly posturing by either side. Is there an LA prosecutor involved who has political aspirations ?

[Cincinnatus]

I wondered if this would ever be rekindled. Thirty-one years is a long time. This will have to be one of those to watch just to see how it is handled. I'll let others make up their mind on the rest.

[Nemesis]

I watched a few documentaries about Roman P. a while back. The details of the incident that spawned this mess seem pretty shaky as is. None of that matters because this will just turn into another media/celebrity circus. I love how the actors and actresses cited in the article use "he's a good director" as a reason to call the arrest awful. Expect to see the media and the Hollywood shit-heads line up to dry hump this fiasco for publicity. Kick back and enjoy the dog and pony show.

[Holiman]

The facts of the case were pretty cut and dry; He gave a 13 year old girl drugs, he had sex with a 13 year old girl.


He was guilty he fled....

[darynthe]

Pedophilia and rape, plus escaping from justice. Where is the dillema here? He just has to serve his time like any other child rapist. No?

[Mogura]

He pled guilty as part of a plea bargain. Served time as per the plea bargain. The judge reneged on the bargain. He fled. Probably not the smartest thing to do, but an unethical judge tampered with the system. What would you do if the system failed you because it was unethically engineered against you, as was the situation?

Case should be thrown out. Even the victim has called for it to be dismissed.

He should have served time for the crime. But the court fucked that up, and the court should be held accountable (removal from the bench, disbarment, etc.) for not being able to serve justice.

The media's trumping up the child sex part, no doubt to sell more tabloids due to sensationalism...

[Profit]

The facts of the case were pretty cut and dry; He gave a 13 year old girl drugs, he had sex with a 13 year old girl.


He was guilty he fled....

Short and sweet Holiman.....

As an amateur movie buff I've always found the international film communities embrace of Polanski as well, disgusting. Has he made some good films, of course, is he a talented director, absolutely, is he a child rapists, probably. I just don't understand how you can put the man on a pedestal for his art and simply ignore a crime because it happened 30 years ago. What is odd about his arrest though is why now? If you were going to issue the international arrest warrant why wait so long? That being said he should have to answer for his actions.

[rickster]

Pedophilia and rape, plus escaping from justice. Where is the dillema here? He just has to serve his time like any other child rapist. No?

Get your facts straight. He didn't rape her. When you confuse the rarely-used term "statutory rape" with rape you do all rape victims a disservice, and wrongly vilify the man.

He pled guilty as part of a plea bargain. Served time as per the plea bargain. The judge reneged on the bargain. He fled. Probably not the smartest thing to do, but an unethical judge tampered with the system. What would you do if the system failed you because it was unethically engineered against you, as was the situation?

Case should be thrown out. Even the victim has called for it to be dismissed.

He should have served time for the crime. But the court fucked that up, and the court should be held accountable (removal from the bench, disbarment, etc.) for not being able to serve justice.

The media's trumping up the child sex part, no doubt to sell more tabloids due to sensationalism...

That's about it. What's particularly scary is US law fucked up, but yet other countries aren't nearly as hesitant as they should be when it comes to assisting American extradition demands.

And since I'm becoming sick of Americans and their obsession with sex crimes I'd say all countries need to take a stand against the US, and tell them to shove it when it comes to extraditing cases like this.

[Profit]

Get your facts straight. He didn't rape her. When you confuse the rarely-used term "statutory rape" with rape you do all rape victims a disservice, and wrongly vilify the man.

From West's Encyclopedia of American Law:

Most legislatures include statutory rape provisions in statutes that punish a number of different types of sexual assault. Statutory rape is different from other types of rape in that force and lack of consent are not necessary for conviction. A defendant may be convicted of statutory rape even if the complainant explicitly consented to the sexual contact and no force was used by the actor. By contrast, other rape generally occurs when a person overcomes another person by force and without the person's consent.

Samantha Geimer's Account of the sexual assault:

According to Geimer, Polanski asked Geimer's mother if he could photograph the girl for the French edition of Vogue, which Polanski had been invited to guest-edit. Her mother allowed a private photo shoot. According to Geimer in a 2003 interview, "Everything was going fine; then he asked me to change, well, in front of him." She added, "It didn't feel right, and I didn't want to go back to the second shoot."
Geimer later agreed to a second session, which took place on March 10, 1977 at the Mulholland area home of actor Jack Nicholson in Los Angeles. "We did photos with me drinking champagne," Geimer says. "Toward the end it got a little scary, and I realized he had other intentions and I knew I was not where I should be. I just didn't quite know how to get myself out of there." She recalled in a 2003 interview that she began to feel uncomfortable after he asked her to lie down on a bed, and how she attempted to resist. "I said, 'No, no. I don't want to go in there. No, I don't want to do this. No!', and then I didn't know what else to do," she stated, adding: "We were alone and I didn’t know what else would happen if I made a scene. So I was just scared, and after giving some resistance, I figured well, I guess I’ll get to come home after this".
Geimer testified that Polanski gave her a combination of champagne and quaaludes, a sedative drug, and "despite her protests, he performed oral sex, intercourse and sodomy on her", each time after being told 'no' and being asked to stop.

[rickster]

Oh so we're going to re prosecute and re-try the case right here on the Forum? She does indeed describe rape but he was not charged with rape. And last time I checked, an unverified transcript from "Larry King Live" 26 years after the fact ain't a court document.

Now while I have a very clear understanding of what rape is, the victim - after 26 years - really needs to have the last word. Her ongoing trauma has been caused by the aftermath - the Second Rape By The System which so many victims complain so bitterly about.

It's a pity you didn't quote her statements regarding his sentence, and her agreement to it:

GEIMER: We were -- every one was comfortable with that. That's what we wanted.

KING: Your mother was happy about that?

GEIMER: Yes. I never even asked for him to be put in jail.

KING: Your father was with it?

GEIMER: Well, I don't know about that, although I didn't talk to him about it.

KING: You didn't think he deserved more time in jail?

GEIMER: No and the publicity was so traumatic and so horrible that, I mean, his punishment was secondary to just getting this whole thing to stop. I mean, it was crazy. There was people outside my house and, you know, it was horrible.

KING: And his life, of course, would never be -- he would always be -- and he will be if he wins these awards, it's always going to say when he passes on in the first paragraph of the obituary, Roman Polanski who...

GEIMER: Right. So, I mean, that's his form of punishment in itself. I think everyone finding out about it when you're a celebrity that's a high price to pay in itself.


And she has continually maintained this stance:

Samantha Geimer, 45, has filed a legal declaration claiming she is being harmed by renewed focus on what happened to her when she was 13.

She believes prosecutors are revealing sexually explicit details to distract attention from allegations of wrongdoing against them and the judge who initially heard the case.

Ms Geimer said she would be willing to appear in court - if Polanski cannot - to urge that the case is dismissed.

It's all very well and good to say we support victims' rights, but apparently in this case the victim has no rights whatsoever to be heard on the matter.

[themuzicman]

Rule #1: If you don't want to go to jail, Obey the law.

If memory serves, fleeing stops any statue of limitations, so he's coming back.

[TemperateSloth]

I browsed the link - but seemed mostly posturing by either side. Is there an LA prosecutor involved who has political aspirations ?There have been rumors, unconfirmed for now, that the current Los Angeles County DA eventually might like to run for governor of California. Though there have not been any rumblings in our local media about the topic from the DA himself. This is his website for the DA's office:

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Another link from a Salon article re: Roman Polanski's current legal situation:

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

As to rape vs. statutory rape, for as long as I can remember, the "age of consent" in California has been 18 years-of-age.

[RBM]

He pled guilty as part of a plea bargain. Served time as per the plea bargain. The judge reneged on the bargain. He fled. Probably not the smartest thing to do, but an unethical judge tampered with the system. What would you do if the system failed you because it was unethically engineered against you, as was the situation?

Case should be thrown out. Even the victim has called for it to be dismissed.

He should have served time for the crime. But the court fucked that up, and the court should be held accountable (removal from the bench, disbarment, etc.) for not being able to serve justice.

The media's trumping up the child sex part, no doubt to sell more tabloids due to sensationalism...

I don't see this being weighed in the discussion at all. Seems most already have there 'facts' selected for their opinion.

[Holiman]

There are plenty of way to handle an 'unethical judge' or failed system problems he had the money and lawyers available to handle this he instead chose to flee the US and hide. The victim was paid well and chooses now to forgive and move on but the system still deserves its payback so to say it as simple as possible..... Screw Roman Polanski I hope he serves life, I have a 13 year old girl and drugging and raping a child is a sick crime, compounded by fleeing jurisdiction these are things he is guilty of, that he does not nor can he deny. So why should we care about anything else brought up about this case ?

[Hamburglar]

There are plenty of way to handle an 'unethical judge' or failed system problems he had the money and lawyers available to handle this he instead chose to flee the US and hide. The victim was paid well and chooses now to forgive and move on but the system still deserves its payback so to say it as simple as possible..... Screw Roman Polanski I hope he serves life, I have a 13 year old girl and drugging and raping a child is a sick crime, compounded by fleeing jurisdiction these are things he is guilty of, that he does not nor can he deny. So why should we care about anything else brought up about this case ?

You're the arbiter of good and bad?

[wardo]

Let's see... Old man has sex with 13 year old girl. Flees. Decades later, he is brought in. How can anyone protest against justice being served, late or not?

I think the courts should slap much harsher than usual penalties on the extravagently rich and famous, instead of the inevitable slap on the wrist.

[Valiyn]

US Sex laws are some of the strangest and unjust laws of concerning sex there are.[source: The Economist] Not to mention, justice is not about revenge but fairness. If both the victim and the guilty think the ruling/punishment is unfair, is justice served? No it is not, because in no way does the sentence address the problem in that case. "We're going to lock you away for life for something your victim doesn't believe you should suffer for anymore" - yea, I would run too because that's not justice.

At the same time, an unethical judge doesn't change the ruling. But the system should uphold it's original word or the faith that citizen's must have in the law for it to be effective would diminish slightly. If the people do no believe the law to be just and truthful with them, they will fight (sometimes violently) with anyone who tries to enforce it on them - making the law ineffective at best.

[darynthe]

Get your facts straight. He didn't rape her. When you confuse the rarely-used term "statutory rape" with rape you do all rape victims a disservice, and wrongly vilify the man..

Listen, you must be a great fan of the guy, but honestly. If drugging a child and forcing all kinds of sex acts on her as she says no no no isn't rape then God is my witness I truly don't know what is a crime. I don't care if they made a bargain and called it a trip in the park.

I don't know what would I do if someone did this to a child of mine.

He paid handsomely, but this kind of crimes should be paid with time, not with cash. The victim may be happy about it now for all I care. Truth is that justice is the same for all and the punishment is due to make example and to regenerate the person so he doesn't commit a crime again.

Why should Mr Polanski be spared this just because he is rich and famous?

[Bobert]

I don't know. Sounds like someone has a bug up their ass about Polanski. Maybe recognition or bonus? IDK.
On the other side, what is the US Statute of Limitations?
As darynthe points out, what if Polanski were Joe Schmo down the street?

Technically, it's rape. Was is forceable rape? IDK, I wasn't there.
But I've known some pretty "active" 13 year olds.

Oh, what would Romeo and Juliet have said?

Anyway, I try to remain neutral with so little knowledge of the facts.

[Profit]

Oh so we're going to re prosecute and re-try the case right here on the Forum? She does indeed describe rape but he was not charged with rape.

He was initially charged with rape by the police. The victims testimony in court makes it clear that she was raped. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

He accepted a plea bargain that dropped the charges to unlawful sex with a minor. You can argue that the judge was going to unfairly renege on the plea bargain deal but it was in his power to send Polanski to jail and have him deported. Was this unjust, perhaps. There are a lot of unjust aspect to US law, crack and cocaine charges are a great example.

I personally have no sympathy for this man though. Seeing how he has won Academy Awards, been elected to the Académie des Beaux-Arts, awarded a lifetime achievement "Golden Icon Award" by the Zurich Film Festival, and won numerous other awards for his films since the crime while living a luxurious life I can't see how his life or career have suffered on the same level as young girl who was the victim of a sex crime.



If you want to debate the nature of US sex laws I'll be happy to take part, we might actually agree on a lot of things. Please don't start this debate by setting up Polanski as some type of victim though.

[rickster]

Listen, you must be a great fan of the guy, but honestly. If drugging a child and forcing all kinds of sex acts on her as she says no no no isn't rape then God is my witness I truly don't know what is a crime. I don't care if they made a bargain and called it a trip in the park.

He was initially charged with rape by the police. The victims testimony in court makes it clear that she was raped. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

He accepted a plea bargain that dropped the charges to unlawful sex with a minor. You can argue that the judge was going to unfairly renege on the plea bargain deal but it was in his power to send Polanski to jail and have him deported. Was this unjust, perhaps. There are a lot of unjust aspect to US law, crack and cocaine charges are a great example.

I'm not a fan of Polanski, nor am I a fan of excusing rapists. I am however a fan of law, and how it serves the victim. Law has failed itself here since the stench of corruption permeates the case.

From its inceptions, common law as we know it was founded on a principle of recompense to a party for damage done by another. Common law wasn't established to serve the bloodthirsty wishes of a braying mob: it was for that very reason that mass public hangings were eventually deemed to be undesirable - and thus the establishment of incarceration.

But the Polanski case is a damned good example of how a victim's satisfaction with compensation and her campaign to have the case dismissed for her own good have become irrelevant to the general mob mentality, as underscored specifically by the mob shrieking of Americans and their current sick obsession with pedophilia and sex crimes.

[Mogura]

But the Polanski case is a damned good example of how a victim's satisfaction with compensation and her campaign to have the case dismissed for her own good have become irrelevant to the general mob mentality, as underscored specifically by the mob shrieking of Americans and their current sick obsession with pedophilia and sex crimes.

Hypocrisy is a passionate fucking business...

[Zombicide]

Poor Roman Polanski, having his pregnant wife murdered by the Manson family really screwed up his head. I don't know what the fuck pedophilia has to do with it but I think that just because he's the great director that he is he should be allowed to rape people and only get a slap on the wrist, I mean he is Roman Polanski after all.

[Solus]

If both the victim and the guilty think the ruling/punishment is unfair, is justice served?

That the victim thinks that the guilty should not be punished is of no importance. This is not a civil but a criminal case. It is the state that prosecutes.

On a more general note, I'd be more interested to find out why the Swiss have decided to arrest Polanski now. He's visited the country on numerous occasions before. In fact, he even has a house in Gstaad. Why then did they act on American arrest warrant now? I wonder if this has anything to do with the USB deal.

[rickster]

That the victim thinks that the guilty should not be punished is of no importance. This is not a civil but a criminal case. It is the state that prosecutes.


A typical legalistic reaction. Is the victim being served? Hell no! It's more like "We're going to have a show trial now about your rape or whatever but we don't give a damn about you or your wishes or your further humiliation because you're just the victim after all so please STFU".

And while the good citizens bray for "justice", we can just hope that they don't have to learn about victimhood the hard way - since so very few ever make the effort to actually listen to the real life stories about how a chauvinistic justice system creates no justice (for the victim) but more often than not exacerbates and perpetuates the effects of the original crime.

There is something very sick and very wrong when a woman who's had thirty years of dealing with the matter is dismissed as "of no importance". She is of most importance, and no state has an intrinsic right to destroy her agency as a human being, and reduce her once again to being a victimized child.

[zibber]

I love how the actors and actresses cited in the article use "he's a good director" as a reason to call the arrest awful.

Exactly. That is a bit asinine.

"Fellow filmmakers, including the directors Costa Gavras and Wong Kar-Wai, along with actresses Monica Bellucci and Fanny Ardant, signed a petition in France that called the arrest "inadmissible." It described Polanski as "one of the greatest contemporary filmmakers." "

It is as if they lay a logical link between his "directorship" and the alleged inadmissibility of his arrest.

Problem is: he's charged with fucking a minor. I don't care if it was in the 1920s, that shouldn't go unpunished.

[Profit]

I'm not a fan of Polanski, nor am I a fan of excusing rapists. I am however a fan of law, and how it serves the victim. Law has failed itself here since the stench of corruption permeates the case.

From its inceptions, common law as we know it was founded on a principle of recompense to a party for damage done by another. Common law wasn't established to serve the bloodthirsty wishes of a braying mob: it was for that very reason that mass public hangings were eventually deemed to be undesirable - and thus the establishment of incarceration.

But the Polanski case is a damned good example of how a victim's satisfaction with compensation and her campaign to have the case dismissed for her own good have become irrelevant to the general mob mentality, as underscored specifically by the mob shrieking of Americans and their current sick obsession with pedophilia and sex crimes.

I don't understand how you can blame the system for drawing out this case and creating more pain for the victim. Polanski took a plea bargain, part of that agreement was that he undergo psychiatric evaluation at a state prison before his sentencing hearing. He did this and was released after 42 days, when it looked like he was actually going to have to serve some jail time, at the most 2-3 years, for the charge of unlawful sex with a minor he fled the country before sentencing could take place. When he took the plea bargain he knew there was a chance he might have to serve time in jail, when it looked like this was going to be the case he ran, thus drawing out the ordeal and forcing the victim to deal with this for the next 30 years. If he had just upheld his part of the plea bargain he would have probably served some time in jail, gotten out and been able to resume his film career and allow himself and the victim to move on.

Wanting someone to serve a few years in jail for drugging and sexually violating a 13 year girl is not mob mentality. Mob mentality would be cutting off his penis or giving him a life sentence, things that some people in the US actually advocate.

As for your insistence that the wishes of the victim, that Polanski should not serve jail time, should be recognized by the court would this apply to domestic violence cases? If a women lives with a man who beats her on a regular basis but doesn't want to press charges against him because she is afraid of the consequences, more beatings/being abandoned/kicked out, should the courts simply ignore the fact that the man is physically and mentally abusing this woman?

You keep talking about Americans and their current sick obsession with pedophilia and sex crimes but never actually explain yourself. Please do.

[rickster]

I don't understand how you can blame the system for drawing out this case and creating more pain for the victim.

If you were to dignify the inherent rights of the victim, perhaps you would understand. She's lodged court papers stating this is so.




As for your insistence that the wishes of the victim, that Polanski should not serve jail time, should be recognized by the court would this apply to domestic violence cases? If a women lives with a man who beats her on a regular basis but doesn't want to press charges against him because she is afraid of the consequences, more beatings/being abandoned/kicked out, should the courts simply ignore the fact that the man is physically and mentally abusing this woman?

I'll call bullshit on that. It's not domestic violence for starters - that's a completely absurd analogy. Are you suggesting that the victim has been living in fear of Polanski for the last 30 years and wants to be with him cos she has nowhere else to go?

You keep talking about Americans and their current sick obsession with pedophilia and sex crimes but never actually explain yourself. Please do.

What part of a "current sick obsession with pedophilia and sex crimes" needs explanation? Are Americans so thick they don't get it that the rest of the world is fast developing a gutful of American "values"?

[Profit]

If you were to dignify the inherent rights of the victim, perhaps you would understand. She's lodged court papers stating this is so.

Yes but the only reason she has had to do this is because Polanski fled in the first place. This all could have been wrapped up if he had simply accepted the punishment for the crime he committed 30 years ago.

Do you think that serving at most 2-3 years in prison is to harsh a punishment for drugging and having sex with a minor?




I'll call bullshit on that. It's not domestic violence for starters - that's a completely absurd analogy. Are you suggesting that the victim has been living in fear of Polanski for the last 30 years and wants to be with him cos she has nowhere else to go?

I was not saying the two cases should be seen in the same light. I was just looking at another instance of a victim not wanting to prosecute and what the state's role should be.



What part of a "current sick obsession with pedophilia and sex crimes" needs explanation? Are Americans so thick they don't get it that the rest of the world is fast developing a gutful of American "values"?

I am trying to have a rational discussion. All I am asking is for you to elaborate on your statement.

[Ray9]

I salute the Swiss for delivering a slap in the face to the French.

[Holiman]

A typical legalistic reaction. Is the victim being served? Hell no! It's more like "We're going to have a show trial now about your rape or whatever but we don't give a damn about you or your wishes or your further humiliation because you're just the victim after all so please STFU".

And while the good citizens bray for "justice", we can just hope that they don't have to learn about victimhood the hard way - since so very few ever make the effort to actually listen to the real life stories about how a chauvinistic justice system creates no justice (for the victim) but more often than not exacerbates and perpetuates the effects of the original crime.

There is something very sick and very wrong when a woman who's had thirty years of dealing with the matter is dismissed as "of no importance". She is of most importance, and no state has an intrinsic right to destroy her agency as a human being, and reduce her once again to being a victimized child.



How utterly overly and sadly dramatic.

Im actually astounded by the responses here I mean cmon seriously this is the example of judicial misconduct you wish to stand up against. There are thousands of solid outstanding examples of it in the US alone and this one doesnt count for much of it honestly.

Victim rights yeah she got a undisclosed cash settlement she is not ignored, is it sad any victim has to have their case strung out over years, sure but its not strange or terrible.

The concept of political aspirations are the driving force behind an arrest warent or in the applying of the law this happens daily how does this make this case all the different.

All of the points of defense brought up in his defense can and SHOULD be solved by his appearing in the court he fled 30 years ago. The victim can then make statements at his new sentencing. He might get a new trial if new facts or court misconduct can be proven.

His being a star recieving awards and strutting around Europe was offense to many so its easy to see why he was targetted. Now to your statement of
What part of a "current sick obsession with pedophilia and sex crimes" needs explanation? Are Americans so thick they don't get it that the rest of the world is fast developing a gutful of American "values"?


Every part needs explaining if you live in a country that finds drugging and rape of minors to be ok please list country to avoid, I personally agree that many of the 'American Values' are over reaching and rude in how we express them overseas but I find this one more than exceptable which country do you live in that doesnt ?

[Ray9]

There may be hope for the French yet:


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[rickster]

How utterly overly and sadly dramatic.

Im actually astounded by the responses here I mean cmon seriously this is the example of judicial misconduct you wish to stand up against. There are thousands of solid outstanding examples of it in the US alone and this one doesnt count for much of it honestly.

Yes this is exactly the example of judicial misconduct I stand up against, and the fact that it's supported by as you say "thousands" of others in the US alone should be enough to focus right-thinking people on the matter. Law - and how it's administered - needs to be completely free of corruption, and with integrity stand above and beyond mob rule.

In principle, wrongdoers walk free when administration of law is perverted. And that's how it should be. The fact that judicial treachery happens "all the time" should be a matter of great concern for all, rather than a good excuse to administer law inconsistently and partially to serve the inflamed masses.

Victim rights yeah she got a undisclosed cash settlement she is not ignored, is it sad any victim has to have their case strung out over years, sure but its not strange or terrible.

The fact that she is one of the very few victims who've been adequately compensated to their satisfaction isn't a good reason to dismiss her ongoing claims of distress caused by a system that screwed her as well as her assailant, inasmuch as the judge reneged on an agreement they were both a party to.

The concept of political aspirations are the driving force behind an arrest warent or in the applying of the law this happens daily how does this make this case all the different.
Politics tainting legal outcomes is as old as law itself, but this case deserves scrutiny because it's yet another example of how this appears to be endemic in Los Angeles.

All of the points of defense brought up in his defense can and SHOULD be solved by his appearing in the court he fled 30 years ago. The victim can then make statements at his new sentencing. He might get a new trial if new facts or court misconduct can be proven.

Judicial misconduct has already been admitted to.

His being a star recieving awards and strutting around Europe was offense to many so its easy to see why he was targetted.

And hopefully his high profile and resources will continue to draw attention to the the offensive way in which law has been apparently perverted to serve political aspirations and mob sentiment.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Yes Ray9 - two examples of mob mentality setting itself up as judge and jury when both the French and Polish governments have strongly opposed the US and the Swiss.

And as the self-righteous bay for blood, I'm quite satisfied in believing that anybody carrying an American passport in either France or Poland (or anywhere else for that matter) would skip town the minute they found out that the judicial system of that country was about to renege on an agreement they'd made.

[SeaCzar]

Feeding champagne and 'ludes to a 13 year old, then raping her? This guy is sick, regardless of who he is. They should toss him in jail, throw away the key, and let him get passed around to the guys with the most cigarettes, and see how he likes it.

[Solus]

A typical legalistic reaction. Is the victim being served? Hell no! It's more like "We're going to have a show trial now about your rape or whatever but we don't give a damn about you or your wishes or your further humiliation because you're just the victim after all so please STFU".

It's how the criminal law operates. Another "problem" is that the law cannot be applied on an ad-hoc basis. The law says you cannot sleep with a 13-year-old irrespective of her giving consent or being sufficiently mature to engage in sexual relations etc. If you're unhappy with the law, change it to allow everybody, film directors, accountants, shop-keepers etc. to have sex with 13-year-olds. But until then it's illegal just as it was illegal at the time when Polanski slept with her. I'm afraid it's as simple as that.

I salute the Swiss for delivering a slap in the face to the French.

I'd like to know why the Swiss have decided to arrest Polanski right now and not on a number of occasions when they had the chance. France might be able to save Polanski by asking for his extradition on some other charge herself. The Swiss would then have to choose between extraditing him to France or to the US.

[Causa Mortis]

Feeding champagne and 'ludes to a 13 year old, then raping her? This guy is sick, regardless of who he is. They should toss him in jail, throw away the key, and let him get passed around to the guys with the most cigarettes, and see how he likes it.

Seconded. I don't know why this is a debated issue. Scumbag raped a 13 year old, scumbag managed to avoid paying for it for a while, now scumbag is going to jail.

[zibber]

Why can't I get this image of Jack Nicholson observing from the shadows out of my head?

[Profit]

Why can't I get this image of Jack Nicholson observing from the shadows out of my head?

I had the same thought yesterday.....disturbing.

Anyway, update on the case. Seems everyone is full of it.....this calls into question some of the claims put forth by the HBO documentary.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Mogura]

Former prosecutor admits to lying in a documentary about the case: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Bluesea]

But the Polanski case is a damned good example of how a victim's satisfaction with compensation and her campaign to have the case dismissed for her own good have become irrelevant to the general mob mentality, as underscored specifically by the mob shrieking of Americans and their current sick obsession with pedophilia and sex crimes.

so true.

He is a great director, but like any of us, is accountable for his choices, in the same ways any of us are - unless the law wants to say, it bends under cases of fame. Unless the law wants to promote itself, as corrupt, and lose faith with the masses, again. The decisions of judges are the ones that people make this call about where the law is at, in any point in time. The media is an ever thirsty beast that makes money on anything it can find an angle on that sells it's story. The failings of the two work so well together.

I think it is a product of hedonism that fame, fortune, accessibility to drugs and the stepping over of ordinary boundaries that naturally evolve from excess that has resulted in the decisions Polanski made at the time, whether he learnt this once more sober and the wake up call has arrived or not and still needs to do penance is as interesting as the discussion of what purpose serves the law - punishment or learning. The victim feels the learning from the experience is sufficient. The media suggests law needs still to reap a punishment suggesting the public still need to see there is some purpose and function to the law - that punishes people - presumably to teach them a lesson presumably because there is no other way to learn that lesson.

He made heinous choices, not sure that money recompenses him from this, but the victim feels it does, so I guess she is the best decision maker about this. It is damaging to her life to replay the drama as it is to his. It is to the media's benefit that it is replayed. the court will probably sigh as it is just another case they need to fit in to the ever bulging caseload.

Do we as public need to restore our faith that the law meets out appropriate justice ... definitely .. do the media raise these issues to highlight this fact ... of course ... does it also benefit them ... yes it does ... but is this their job ... yes it is.

[Solus]

He made heinous choices, not sure that money recompenses him from this, but the victim feels it does, so I guess she is the best decision maker about this. It is damaging to her life to replay the drama as it is to his. It is to the media's benefit that it is replayed. the court will probably sigh as it is just another case they need to fit in to the ever bulging caseload.

Perhaps victims of most crimes would feel that a financial compensation would suffice given the option. Samantha Geimer, for example, claimed for years that she had been a rape victim. But Polanski's offer of a $500,000 compensation seemed to have been enough to open a way for civil settlement in the early 1990s. This may explain the logic behind Geimer's current support for Polanski. Does she want or even need justice? Who knows? Perhaps we should let the rich buy their way out of prison and let the state punish the less well-off offenders.

Also, the Swiss have finally offered an explanation, albeit an unplausible one, as to why they had arrested Polanski. According to this article (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) they would've arrested him on his earlier visits to the country but they had not been aware of his presence in the country (?). The famous film director has a chalet in Gstaad, and Switzerland was outside the Schengen area until 1 Jan this year, but the Swiss say they just didn't know he was in the country. Interesting. I suppose that UBS deal with the US can work magic.

[MartinH]

It's all very well and good to say we support victims' rights, but apparently in this case the victim has no rights whatsoever to be heard on the matter.

But the publicity? And the good feelings of self righteousness?

That the victim thinks that the guilty should not be punished is of no importance.

Spoken as a true J. System first, people second, right?

This is a nasty thread.

[Solus]

Spoken as a true J. System first, people second, right?

Like cases should be treated alike, shouldn't they? If the victim's feelings towards the agressor depend on the compensation that she can get from him, then the less well-off will usually end up being punished, and the rich won't. Is this just or fair? It's certainly not consistent. But NFs are much better placed to answer such questions than us NTs.

What I certainly don't like about this case is that there are reasons to believe that the Swiss authorities have arrested Polanski for reasons that have nothing to the with the case itself.

[rickster]

If the victim's feelings towards the agressor depend on the compensation that she can get from him, then the less well-off will usually end up being punished, and the rich won't. Is this just or fair? It's certainly not consistent. But NFs are much better placed to answer such questions than us NTs.

The victim has consistently made it clear from the outset and long before compensation was settled that she was being further victimized by the system, how miserably it failed in protecting her anonymity, and how it reneged on the sentencing deal she and her mother had agreed to.

[Mader]

Yes, the victim is being victimized again.

But that does not mean we stop prosecuting and, if convicted, punishing the criminal.

We amend the system to give more protection to the victim.

This was not a case of a 15 year old having sex with a 14 year old. Or an 18 year old having sex with a 17 year old. This is a little girl, 13 years old, being drugged and raped and sodomized by a 40+ year old man, in the home of another 40+ year old man.

The little girl said "NO". Give me one reason why this man should not be punished for rape when he proceeded after the girl said "NO". Blue balls is not a defense. The lack of morals exhibited by various European governments and certain hollywood faces should in no way change the course of American justice.

Why would these people and these governments refuse to acknowledge this crime as a crime? Perhaps because then they have to live by the judgement of others, then, there are standards of behavior that they must also abide by. If I refuse to judge others, then I can say they have no right to judge me; I am free to do as I please.

[Conservationist]

The details of the incident that spawned this mess seem pretty shaky as is.

No, they're not -- clear witness statements were taken. Did he or did he not drug, rape and sodomize a thirteen-year-old girl?

YES OR NO PLEASE.

[hubcap]

Punish him to the full extent the law allows.

If the law allowed hanging, I'd be all for it in this case.

[Conservationist]

There is something very sick and very wrong when a woman who's had thirty years of dealing with the matter is dismissed as "of no importance".

Society isn't personal.

You punish offenders to discourage abuse of FUTURE victims.

Durr?

[Profit]

Thought this was interesting....French official who defends Polanski wrote a book that talked about visiting young male prostitutes in Thailand.....thoughts?

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[SeaCzar]

^Do you really find this surprising? These are the French we're talking about.

[Mozzes]

^Do you really find this surprising? These are the French we're talking about.

???

[Mader]

It's a joke....sort of.

[Mogura]

An update on this. The Swiss have rejected the US' extradition request. Polanski is free to go back to France.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Fox]

Average Joe Molest a Child he's a sick twisted monster.

Average Jane Molest a Child and she's a lonely, troubled women in bad marriage.

Famous Director Molest a Child. Hey were cool with that!