Roman Polanski arrested!
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General discussions
Forum Description: Discuss any topic at all that is not music-related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=61572
Printed Date: February 24 2025 at 05:06
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Roman Polanski arrested!
Posted By: Tuzvihar
Subject: Roman Polanski arrested!
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 13:45
|
... ------------- "Music is much like f**king, but some composers can't climax and others climax too often, leaving themselves and the listener jaded and spent." Charles Bukowski |
Replies:
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 14:41
|
I heard something about the country was thinking of having him chemically castrated?? No idea, heard that from a passer by so I don't know if it's true |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 15:07
And high-ups in the Polish government wants to have that done for pedophiles It's f**king barbaric. It could be directed toward a serial rapist and it would still be barbaric. Not to mention one of the most populist, vote-grabbing bullsh*t moves. /rant. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
JJLehto wrote:Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 15:33
|
So it was true. Yeah, its the type of thing where if you disagree people yell "ZOMG YOU WANT PEDOPHILES TO RUN AROUND!!!" |
Posted By: mrcozdude
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 15:41
|
Another showbiz paedophile...... ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/cozfunkel/" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: The Doctor
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 15:52
|
Strangely enough, this happened only two days after Susan Atkins died. And last night, my girlfriend and I watched a history channel docu-drama on Manson. And this morning we read about Polanski's arrest. The guy has had a tragic life, from his mother being murdered in a nazi concentration camp, to his pregnant wife being brutally murdered. While that in no way justifies sex with a minor, whether consensual or rape, that was 30 years ago. There is no evidence that the man currently poses any threat to young girls. The only thing I can think is that this is political in some way. Why can't they let the man live out the last few years of his tragic life in peace? After all, even the victim no longer wants him to be prosecuted, and this will put her in the limelight again. Something I know she would wish to avoid. This serves no one's interest nor the cause of justice or protection of society. Simply ridiculous. ------------- I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you? |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 17:26
|
I do not see how the fact that he has managed to evade arrest for so long makes his arrest any more injust or his crime any less disgusting. Would you be complaining he had been tried six months after he fled the US? If not, why are you complaining now? If anything, he deserves it more because he has had all this time of freedom when he should have been serving his sentence. Maybe it's because I've never watched his movies that I'm not romanticizing a monster.
And I agree that castrating is wrong. If you're so certain a person will commit another crime, you shouldn't let him out of jail...
------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 18:05
|
They arrest people in Switzerland?? ------------- Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect. |
Posted By: The Doctor
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 18:18
 ------------- I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you? |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 18:20
|
I don't know all the facts, but if he raped a girl (forcibly rather than consensual statutory), I'd say roast him. What difference does 30 years make for a forced rape of a 13 year old girl? ------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 18:23
She tried to drop the charges before the arrest because thanks to his cowardice she's had to suffer for a decade. I'm pretty sure she'd rather see him go to jail than go free now that we've finally gotten around to arresting him.
She said it was forcible, they only charged him with statuatory under the plea bargain (or so Wiki tells me). Personally, I don't think it would matter even if it were only statuatory. It is a crime, and escaping justice for 30 years doesn't change that. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 18:26
|
It's about time,the man deserves it.
As a grown man he had sex with a 13 year old girl.I don't care if it was 30 years ago or not,he needs to pay for that crime. -------------  |
Posted By: The Doctor
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 18:29
I give you this in response:
The victim recently filed court papers seeking dismissal of the case against Polanski.
In her declaration, Samantha Geimer said, "I am no longer a 13-year-old child. I have dealt with the difficulties of being a victim, have surmounted and surpassed them with one exception.
"Every time this case is brought to the attention of the Court, great focus is made of me, my family, my mother and others. That attention is not pleasant to experience and is not worth maintaining over some irrelevant legal nicety, the continuation of the case." Full story here: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/12/polanski.case/index.html - http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/12/polanski.case/index.html ------------- I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you? |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 20:34
SHE DID NOT FORGIVE HIM (as the OP incorrectly states). SHE DID NOT SAY HE DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME. She only dropped the case because it constantly being open was causing her too much pain. This is another way to end the case! Even if she did want it dropped, that does not make a difference! The victims are not the judge, jury, and executioner!
I know I'm being a bit over the top here, but the fact that so many people are defending this ghoul because he makes nice films makes me literally want to get violent. At this point, I would not be upset if someone set him on fire, because he would deserve it.
But I have strong opinions. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 20:43
|
Henry, would you please come and be the Police Chief here in Minneapolis? Never mind famous directors, I'm sick of coddling street thugs.
------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 20:45
|
No, I think I'd get drunk with power and start arresting people for wearing Nickelback shirts. I saw someone in class wearing one! I would have said something if I weren't a coward. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 20:48
  ------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: September 27 2009 at 23:51
|
Finally, geezus. Some of my female friends were raped at an even earlier age than that, and it's seriously screwed with them. They have been unable to go throughout the years without thinking about it. I say the guy rot in jail for the rest of his life, 30 years ago or not, but I'm possibly biased since rapist are some of the people I hate most on this earth seeing how they have affected people that are very close to me. |
Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 00:01
| If he goes to jail for the rest of his life then I guess it's his fault in the first place.The easy way to avoid it is to not do something illegal. Thirty years is a long time though, I would think that he would have been arrested a lot sooner than that. |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 02:33
| Ridiculous. Hasn't he suffered enough already? Putting him in jail won't do anything good for anyone. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 02:57
No not a valid argument - his suffering occured before he did the crime - he may be a victim, but that is not an excuse to avoid justice. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 03:23
I don't think justice has anything to do with this. They're just picking on someone famous to scare people and show that no one is safe from the long arm of law. If it's really about that one crime and nothing else, why not let him pay for it by doing something useful and giving us a few more films? |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 10:15
|
How are they picking on him? He is a f**king rapist! Not only did he drug and rape a 13 year old girl, he also flouted the law for 30 years. He probably deserves to be executed for disregarding US law for so long and so openly, but at the very least we all should agree he deserves to spend the rest of his miserable life in jail. If he really has a problem with the way the trial was conducted, he could appeal it from prison. Yes, his movies are the only things that matter. I'm sure that's the same reason why the French are up in arms about it too, and that makes me so incredibly angry I can't even speak. If this were some random guy you would want to string him up, but since you like his movies, you're willing to overlook his monstrous actions. Aileen Wuornos also had a hard life, but we still executed her because we live in a god damn civilized society. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 10:17
Executed? Man thats strict for such a dubious case. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 10:31
|
How is it dubious? Let's briefly review the facts:
He had sex with a 13 year old girl as a 44 year old man.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/1203081roman18.html - He, by his own admission, gave her quaalude , and, you know, she was asking for it, and http://books.google.com/books?id=Vs4DfkTlIicC&lpg=PA172&dq=roman%20polanski%20rape&lr=&pg=PA172#v=onepage&q=roman%20polanski%20rape&f=false - the police found quaalude on his person, which he attempted to swallow.
The victim says it was rape.
He fled the country for 30 years, negating any claims he made about it being consensual.
I don't think he should be executed for the rape, but making her suffer 30 years of media attention while also avoiding the sentence for the crime he pled guilty to deserves the needle in my opinion. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 10:44
First of all, a civilized society would not allow execution. Second, you seem to think that a criminal sentence is a way to revenge for the crime, which it is not or at least should not be. Criminal law is meant to reduce crime and protect citizens, not to get back at those who commit crime by making them suffer as much as possible or getting rid of them altogether by execution. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 10:48
I'm glad you are not my governor. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 10:48
|
Dont think the police is hunting the rich, infact its allways the other way around.
If he had not been a film star, he would just have been trown to jail right away, serving a VERY long time.
(put any poor man on trail for this, or what Michael Jackson or O.J.Simson was accused of an imagine him go free?)
But that prob. wont happen to Polansky, he will get no or very little Jailtime. ------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 10:52
And saying that people should only be punished for their crimes if we think they'll probably commit them again is incredibly short sighted. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 10:54
|
He drugged a 13yo girl to have sex with her??? And then ran??? And then still gets awards???
If you do a crime, the only way you deserve forgiveness is if you face up for your crime and take your justice.
If the law catches up with him, even 30 years later, it's his own doing. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:00
|
Kangaroo Court. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:09
You guys make me puke 
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:22
Why don't we just let Phil Spector off too! ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:28
Well that's vague. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:28
|
I find it difficult to decide which side I agree with more. On the one hand, his punishment now will serve, essentially, no purpose except justice for justice's sake (which is a lousy purpose). On the other, his special treatment is ridiculous, and I can't see why being a good director, suffering or being old should stave off punishment. |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:29
------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:33
|
Let's face it, justice was never good.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:45
OK, I'll be more specific: I've never seen so much pure hate coming from people calling themselves civilized people. |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:55
|
I personally only believe that face the justice system for his action. I'm not sure that's hate. Although as the father of young girls, it is more difficult to find compassion for him. The victim's needs outweight his in this case, and it's a sad case that she continues to have to live through it years later because HE has allowed it to draw out by running. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:57
|
I wonder if those who wish mercy for Polanski would feel the same if it was their daughter that he raped.
------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: The Doctor
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 11:58
Personally, I have a strictly utilitarian view of the criminal justice system. The CJS serves two purposes, the purpose of deterrence through the threat of prosecution and prison time, and the protection of society from those who pose a threat to the safety and well-being of people in general. With this last purpose in mind, I agree with something you said earlier Henry. If they think a person will again commit a violent act, he should never be released from prison. I'm not much for second chances where the safety of innocents is involved.
On the other hand, in this case, I can see no threat that he currently poses to society. As far as I know, there have been no further incidents involving him and young girls in the past thirty years. That means he has reformed, and there is no need to protect society from him. Secondly, I think putting him in prison will have no impact on deterring others from committing similar crimes. Punishment alone is not enough reason to put the victim through more turmoil or waste taxpayer money.
For me, this has nothing to do with the fact that he's a famous director. I don't think there's one movie of his I actually like. ------------- I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you? |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:05
|
There have been other cases like this where the case is quite old, and adjustments have been made in sentencing. But the judge and jury get to take that into account, not the media or the layperson. I highly doubt that the guy would get a huge punishment, but he likely would get some extra for running. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:06
|
So what Doctor if there have been no further incidents with him? Does it really make sense to let someone get off just because of that? Would you really say he should just go free if he had cooperated with the system instead of committing yet another crime by fleeing? It just makes no sense to me that anyone in the entire world would be upset by this. The victim doesn't even need to testify again if there's an appeal!
And I've never seen so many flimsy and stupid excuses to defend a monster coming from people calling themselves civilized.
And I am sustained by nothing but hate, so you shouldn't be surprised. ;-) ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:08
Essentially. I feel that human justice is a pale approximation of real (dare I say, divine?) justice and so unreliable and shambolic (the same deed will not get the same punishment anywhere, the truth is generally just our best guess, and even in the same justice system, I find it hard to believe that any two cases will be judged under identical standards of justice) that unless a utilitarian, within the bounds of reason (i.e. I consider any form of execution or torture morally unacceptable, even were it useful, and I don't think it's particularly useful, anyway), standard of justice is served, the action is one of either pure revenge or, in this case, since the victim no longer desires punishment, moral self-righteousness. Edit: so, at the moment, I find it difficult to believe that punishment for a crime thirty years old, when the victim has called for its dismissal, for a celebrity case, will serve any purpose of protection or real deterrence. That said, I appreciate that he's being given a treatment that any regular case where a thirty year difference was in account wouldn't get (admittedly, it seems fair to say that the US could surely have secured an arrest closer to the time of the event?)... I can't imagine that justice is demonstrably served, in such circumstances, against the same mind that committed the crime. I'm not decided either way, at the moment. Also, throwing something else into the fray:
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:12
A veritable golem of hate. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: TheProgtologist
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:13
Personally,my views radically changed on these kinds of subjects when I had children.If a 44 year old man drugged and raped my daughter when she was 13 I would have killed him outright if I caught up to him. ------------- |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:17
Bingo Jody. And I don't even have kids, but I know what you mean.
I think its hilarious people consider punishment to be "moral self-righteousness" or somehow improper, and not really for punitive reasons. It helps explain a lot about where society is headed. ------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: akamaisondufromage
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:18
Probably, most people would do the same. Which is why we tend not to get the person wronged to pass judgement! ------------- Help me I'm falling! |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:18
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:22
|
What about empathy for his tragic loss of a wife and a child. All pointing to some hippie cult leader that had issues with wealth. There have always been accusations galore for this guy. So he directed a few films regarding the subject matter of the occult. In europe witchcraft had a different environment than the U.S. He was very exacting with his presentations in his films. I'm sure that many people despise him for his style of creative efforts in film. I wouldn't be surprised if certain things of this nature are held against him. I would review his situation and maybe suggest some therapy at best but not confinement to a cell.
Law enforcement officials or who ever the captain is of this crusade, should be more concerned over all the high school shootings in our country or the quick turn over in mental institutions. Parents have to make their daughter aware somehow that dressing up like Hanna Montana is something that a grown woman would do. What the H is wrong with the justice system? Don't they see what's going on? These issues are detrimental to the minds and mentalities of our youth. A lady in the photo department at Wallmart reports pictures of kids in a bathtub to the feds and the parents and children are seperated for a month. Why? That seems completely stupied to me. People have photos of their kids in a the bath and this has been going on for decades. Instead of chasing down Roman Polanski maybe they should examine their priorities. Spend the tax dollar on investigating corruption in the U.S. and do away with the devistaing crimes that we see on the net and Fox 29. I guess Polanski has been sought after too long and there is no statute of limitation for rape? I don't know however I still think they should flush all the media garbage down the toilet. It encourages naive kids to take an interest in crime. Work on that, not Polanski.  |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:23
|
Drugging a minor and forcing her to have sex is not a traffic ticket. It's not even close to an 18 year old having consensual sex with a 15 year old.
------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:25
That's a misinterpretation. Lotsa people consider execution to be improper, but hardly anyone would say punishment of any sort is improper. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:27
2 people just did Stoney. ------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:28
Who dey? Dey sillay. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:30
What in God's name are you even talking about?
The statute of limitations does not apply because he pled guilty and then fled before sentencing.
And as for suggesting therapy, he raped a 13 year old girl. If that doesn't deserve jail time, I don't know what does. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:33
|
All I can say is that I've been thinking about what I'd do if it was my daughter. Then I wonder what I'd do if it was my son who was the perpetrator. I am fairly certain I would not say run and live a high profile life.------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: tamijo
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:39
|
Remember my words - he wont serve mush Jailtime - he is a famous director.
That's why defending him is rather silly. His money and fame will do the trick.
------------- Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 12:43
In all seriousness I wouldn't (and I don't think any other father of daughters would either) - our first thought, or first action, regardless of what blind-rage wants us to do, is to protect our daughters: to not let them from our sight, and to not let anyone else near them. ------------- What? |
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 13:00
I just can't see the point of punishing him now. Given that he's been sued by and reached a settlement with the victim, given that the victim no longer wishes him to be punished, given that he poses no threat to society, given that his guilty plea is questionable, given that the sum of deterrence posed by his imprisonment would probably be only to suggest that anyone skipping the country to avoid prosecution should know a bit more about extradition agreements... I just don't see what it'd serve to punish him other than a sense of moral self-righteousness encompassed in the law itself. I wouldn't neccessarily say it's wrong to punish him... I just can't see the point of doing so, at the rather exorbitant costs I'd imagine an extradition request, trial and combating appeals would entail. |
Posted By: TODDLER
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 13:02
 You are right . True I am wrong about this point and I forgot the history on the case. Of course that was in the thread. He does deserve jail time doesn't he? I have never read or heard a statement from the victim. I am a bit curious to hear her version of the incident. I still can't concieve how if justice in the U.S. is being served to criminals, then why are we saturated with the concept of crime being promoted through advertisments for sex, mainstream music, and overall media coverage. Many young kids feel drawn in and have admiration for crime and this is a fact. Do they focus on this reality enough to change it.? They could if they cared about the corruption of society instead of making a fast buck. But that's another story and not for this thread.
|
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 13:20
|
To be clear, my position does not regard the actual facts but only the various expressions of human nature on this thread. I also believe Polanski should be given a fair trial and offered the chance to repent by serving time in prison. However I find many of the attitudes expressed in this thread as abominable. Maybe it's my Christian background. If somebody slaughtered my family I would be destroyed but I would pray for him, not kill him. And please don't say "I don't know how it is" or other stupid comments. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 13:47
|
Approximately 5000% more offensive: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090928/ap_on_re_us/us_sex_offender_camp - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090928/ap_on_re_us/us_sex_offender_camp ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 14:05
|
Polanski has already “atoned for the sins of his young years,” Jacek Bromski, head of the Polish Filmmakers Association, told The AP. “He has paid for it by not being able to enter the U.S. and in his professional life he has paid for it by not being able to make films in Hollywood.”
Ummm.......atoned for rape by not being able to make films in Hollywood.
BTW, sex offender registries are the stupidest thing ever. If someone is a threat to society, they shouldn't be free in it. If they're not, and have served their sentence, then they should be free citizens. There are also sex crimes that imply predation and some that don't....terrible terrible attempt at a solution to the problem. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 14:08
I can't make a film in Hollywood...I wonder if the anguish of all these years of torment will apply to any future crimes. And with sex registries, I think it's unconstitutional. I mean, do murderers who manage to make it out of prison have to put their name on a list and live 1000 feet away from a school?  ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 14:51
|
The "victim" Samantha Geimer wants the case dropped, and has received settlement from Plolanski.......so it seems that US justice just wants revenge. Also he is not wanted on a charge of rape, but unlawful sex. What about her mother? She apparently was eager for her daughter to have sex witgh him at Jack Nicholsons home? Too many unanswered questions here and the are question aboyt the case at the times if it was conducted properly. We weren't there...we do not know the fukll facts. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 15:04
|
I doubt if what US justice is doing can be properly called justice. To me it seems more like some showing of muscles and digging up an affair which was laid to rest. It's not that I want to say anything in defense of his deed, which is even far more disgusting than the one and only of his films that I've seen (The Tenant (Le Locataire), that was 30 or 31 years ago and enough for the rest of my life).
This whole thing triggers my cynism.
I guess that Jerry Lee Lewis will be the next they're after...
------------- 
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 15:26
|
Well, I think there should be balance here. It's been many years, the guy is old, has a family. He has to pay, but asking for his head or a life sentence is just an overreaction, a "you won't fool the US system you french-lovin' b*****d" reaction to a guy that has eluded punishment like anybody else would try to, with the means to do it (in some countries, fleeing or attempt to flee is not punished, as it's seen as normal and inherent to human nature...) But the guy raped a 13 year old girl and never paid because of that. He should get a sentence, he has to serve time in jail, ... His public humilliation will be devastating, too
And it will be ridiculous when his colleagues stand up and applaud him or his image when, in the next academy awards, somebody mentions him as a hero.... and it will be disgusting... and it WILL happen. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 15:52
|
Maybe just maybe this was a calculated more for someone with exactly that motivation....the guy was getting a lifetime achievement award, and someone said "This has gone just about far enough."
Maybe someone will visit him and say "Play ball or go to jail."
Not justice but unfortunately the way things work sometimes. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 16:00
Play ball? Balling is what got him into trouble in the first place |
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: September 28 2009 at 16:13
|
Ouchhhh. ------------- You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all. |
Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 19:56
f**k Polanski, he deserves every bit of it. It's a horrible crime and he should not go unpunished. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 19:58
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NX_D0Bv9M0 - Well,at least it wasn't rape rape. Would Whoopi be defending him if he weren't famous? No!
I'm going to be controversial, and say that the reason a lot of people are saying that we should let him go is because they don't really care about rape. Would we really be going over this if he had killed someone? 10 people? Robbed a bank? Stolen millions of dollars in an unprecedented ponzi scheme? I really don't think people would be defending him on AP if he had. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 20:02
The only person I trust on The View is the best looking of them. 
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 20:04
+1 ------------- 
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 20:17
|
I agree he should be punished. The whole argument "if it was your daughter" is a bit sickening though. There's a reason fathers/mothers/relatives aren't allowed to pass judgement in these cases. It just wouldn't be reasonable. He's a rapist though, no one can honestly deny that (I hope), and should be treated as one. If not...we're absolutely nowhere... |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 20:44
|
To clarify my position, I wouldn't actually suggest criminals be turned over to family for the purpose of vigilante justice. But I'm saying my only sympathy is with the family, and I can understand the rage of any family. And that I question whether the "let him go" crowd would feel that way if the victim was a member of their family. But I don't seriously advocate vigilante justice--just saying I understand the feelings of those who'd like to have a go at their daughter's rapist--of course it can't be allowed by a civil court. ------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 21:05
|
Of course, as crazy as it seems that after 30 some years the old guy would have to face arrest, he DID do what he did....with a 13 year old girl. I do not know a whole lot about the whole thing...but wasn't he bascially running from the law? It's not like he served any time right? If that is the case, shouldn't he be arrested? |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 21:18
|
I think he fled JJ before sentence was passed.
------------- ...that moment you realize you like "Mob Rules" better than "Heaven and Hell" |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 21:32
|
Hmmmm, it is an interesting situation. Well he arrested in Poland, so he is subject to their laws. Guess we'll see what happens, especially with that "chemical castration" thing I heard about. It's tough. Obviously he should have been/should be punished. What he did is beyond disgusting. But putting a 76 year old person in jail? The "it was so long ago" notion doesn't fly with me. Time does not change what he did. Ah well, he did what he did, and evaded the punishment for 30 years. Can't say I feel too bad for him. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 21:56
Some would say time changes who you are. Is a 70 year old person still the same person he was when he committed a crime at 15 (hypothetical)? For the sake of justice to the aggrieved, he must be, but his experiences in life make him a completely different person, mentally. Most people would say we're defined not by our bodies but our experiences, actions and thoughts. I'm not sure it would ever be fully justified to charge an old man with a crime he committed as a young man. They are two different people. That only means we cannot be completely justified in charging him. But we must, anyway. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 21:57
An alternative: The tendency of the general media (in Britain, at least) in rape cases, and especially sex-with-minors ones is to paint the perpetrator as an absolutely inhuman monster... some sort of beast/fiend/creature that's therefore absolutely divorced from the rest of humanity. The fact that Mr. Polanksi's films have genuinely moved a great number of people really undermines that typical presentation of the pedophile/rapist/statutory rapist or whatever we want to call him. The contrast between the humanity evident in his work, I think, and the common presentation of this sort of crime makes people... erm, not really believe it was the same crime. That's just a bit of amateur psychology at work. No idea that's accurate, but I can't help thinking the news sources on this have simply presented the case differently to every other sex-with-minors article they've run. It's his impact on people rather than his fame, I think, that might save him.
I, personally, thought the hundred-and-fifty year sentence for Madoff was an immoral and injust act of vengeance and anger ('the symbolism is important' has to be the worst explanation for a sentence I've ever heard). Murder and rape aren't, really, in my mind, comparable crimes; not to disparage the seriousness of rape, murder is a crime really beyond all others in terms of its impact. Mainly, it's his age and the distance of the crime. Punishment no longer really seems either relevant or useful. I don't, as I've said, really hold that opinion very strongly.... I think both camps are raising reasonable and valid points. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 21:59
This is why American laws to sex offenders are heinous. It is passive torture and lifelong imprisonment to do what the article I posted says is done to sex offenders. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 22:02
Two remarkably sensible points here. I think, given the victim doesn't actually demand "justice", the neccessity of judging a very-probably-different someone thirty-years-after-the-fact for the sake of blind justice is somewhat reduced. |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 22:07
Gotta be honest, I hear all that...and it does seem wrong to be put such an old man in jail but like I said, I do not feel very bad for him... EDIT: I know it's cliche for any case like this, but I bet having kids would change how many people feel. (I do not even have kids keep in mind) All I know is, people saying he should be released, (behind the safe walls of the internet) I want to see them go to the family of that girl, and say it directly to their face and justify it. OK, I'm done. This thread is officially now nothing more than people debating philosophies vaguely attached to the case and people trying to be more "moral" alternative or edgy than the others. |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 23:12
|
Why does it seem wrong to put an old man in jail? Age has nothing to do with anything!
Rob, there's no use arguing with you further, because if you don't see the point of punishment for the sake of justice there's really nothing I can say. Except that I strongly disagree that the things people have been saying about the case have been acceptable in any way. And while you're right that often the media portrays rapists as inhuman, in this case the European media was calling her a "little lolita" who seduced him and then backed out, so I don't think that's valid in this case. Which is why she was trying to drop the case, she doesn't want people to keep talking about it for no reason since the press are such dicks to her.
------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 23:18
Ugh, and I guess you didn't bother to even read everything after that? Or the comments I made before? Seriously, f*ck this, why do I even bother reading these threads? Roman Polanski is just another example of a celebrity getting special treatment. ANY regular person and I guarantee they would have been hung drawn and quartered if the people could. That is the bottom line. |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 23:22
|
Ugh, and I guess you missed the part where I didn't call you a terrible person? The age argument is a real thing people say, and I am baffled by that opinion in any context whatsoever. ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 23:25
|
Oh it is a real thing people say alright. I have heard it. I can read. And yay, I am not a terrible person in the eyes of Henry..... I love how we are agreeing, ( I think, can never really make heads or tails of your angry ramblings) and you still have mostly personal shots at me. F*ck this. You are wrong with what PA now is Henry. I don't even care what your comeback is, seriously go for it. I won't even read it. And for the record to everyone who thinks Polanski should be released. He raped a 13 year old girl, the punishment for that is jail, he dodged it (for 30 years). Why should he not be in jail? Done |
Posted By: Drew
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 23:36
|
Hope the perv goes to Jail! ------------- |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 23:38
Of course, I suppose you aren't going to read this... :roll: ------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: September 29 2009 at 23:50
Of the 'barrel' variety? Because that's one thing this thread is lacking. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 00:25
------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 03:03
Hope he goes free. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 03:18
|
itis interesting how German media treat this case, which is wrongly. Polanski was sentenced for "statutory rape", the German term for which is "Unzucht mit Minderjährigen". the German media seem to refer to one source of translatiion though and all say he was convicted for rape, German "Vergewaltigung". the difference between the two is that statutory rape is considered to be a consensual act, but the law defines one of the partners not to be of the age to be able to consent to it, hence it is called "statutory rape" it (look up the wikipedia definition if you don't believe me). "rape", however, is by definition non-consensual. statutory rape is, of course, still a crime, but one should give the crime the right name. the German media don''t, probably because of insufficient knowledge of the English language -------------  A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 03:32
"Polanski was initially charged with rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance (methaqualone) to a minor. These charges were dismissed under the terms of his plea bargain, and he pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor" - Wikipedia
What he was charged with and what he was convicted of are two different things - if he were tried in a country that did not have plea-bargainning he would most probably been convicted of the more serious charges, which through the use of drugs as a sedative, would be non-consensual rape regardless of the age of the victim. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Any Colour You Like
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 03:46
The nail just got hit on the head. |
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 03:56
this is speculation; he was convicted of "statutory rape"; that was the final verdict. since none of us have been present at the deed this is what we should settle on, don't you agree? that's what the jurisdiction system is there for, after all ------------- A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 04:06
Every one is innocent until proven guilty - but IMO Plea Bargaining removes that right since the more serious charges are never put to trial they can never be proven or disproven and "copping a plea" is not a conviction, it is an admission to a lesser crime to avoid being found guilty of the more serious ones. ------------- What? |
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 04:16
well, that is a problem of the judicial system then. the final verdict was for "statutory rape". there are only two choices: either one believes in the judicial system, then one has to accept the verdict, no matter how it came to pass. the verdict was not legally challenged, so one has to stick to it. mark that I am not trying to defend Polanski; I have no idea what he really was guilty of (and actually neither do you). but I am defending his right as a person. he was convicted of "statutory rape"; then if one speaks of his criminal record one has to stick to it; anything else would actually be slander. that's how the system works ------------- A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: September 30 2009 at 04:28
I guess my real point is that this verdict could only happen under the USA judicial system and that in any other country in the world the charge of 'statutary rape' would never have been made, so the people (such as myself) who are seeing the term 'statutary rape' are viewing it from the perspective of their own judicial system, not the one he was convicted under. ------------- What? |