Has anyone else been following this in the media?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8283707.stm

I can't understand how anyone could even begin to defend him. Being a great director doesn't exempt you from raping thirteen year olds. He's crying about it now because it's 25 years later that he's been arrested - after fleeing the country and being very careful to avoid being picked up for extradition.

If you believe (which some people obviously do) that there was some type of misconduct, then it's easy to defend him. Even the victim thinks that Polanski has been punished enough.

No he hasn't.

He pled guilty to the charges, and then he fled the country to avoid sentencing. At the very least, he should receive legal punishment in the US for that alone. Since the victim is saying to be lenient with regards to his conviction for having sex with a minor, he could stand to do a couple of years for evading justice.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

He pled guilty as part of a plea bargain. He fled because it appeared that the judge was going to accept the plea and forget the bargain.

In the end, I agree with you though. He hasn't been punished enough, hell he hasn't been punished at all.

Unfortunately, this case is bad all the way around with a convict on the run and a judge who violated ethics codes in the case.

The fact that his bargain included something ridiculous like 42 days in prison and dropping of several charges...can you really blame the judge for not wanting to go with that bargain? Seriously? You ply a child with alcohol and Quaaludes, then rape her in multiple ways, and you only serve 42 days? Less than TWO MONTHS?

IIRC, judges are not required to abide by plea bargain deals. They usually do, but they are not legally obligated to do so. And if the judge was harsher than the deal, Polanski could have always appealed.

I also read (somewhere) that a judge offered to review the case if Polanski actually came back to receive sentencing. Polanksi did not.

The fact that people defend this guy is just awful. (and I've actually found a new respect for Kirstie Alley and some other Hollywood types who are going against the grain).

"Polanski was accused of plying a 13-year-old girl with champagne and part of a Quaalude during a modeling shoot in 1977 and raping her. He was initially indicted on six felony counts, including rape by use of drugs, child molesting and sodomy.

The director pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of unlawful sexual intercourse; in exchange, the remaining charges were dropped, and the judge agreed to sentence Polanski to 42 days he served while undergoing a psychological evaluation. "

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... AD9B1U8TG2

_________________

You cannot sentence someone for a crime that they have not been convicted of. Polanski was convicted of statutory rape, not drugging and raping a 13 year old girl. The judge agreed with the punishment to begin with, and only changed his mind after speaking to someone unrelated to the case.

He was not convicted. He pled guilty as part of a plea bargain, which he then broke by failing to appear for sentencing. Whatever his sentence would have been under the plea deal, it would have been much shorter than if he had been convicted under the original charges. And of course now flight is added as well.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

I agree completely with both of you, Sarissa and varanlorax.

I'm not one of the people who think that he should walk, I think he should be held accountable for both the crime he pled guilty to as well as his evasion.

I'm curious/interested in why the parents thought it was ok that their 13 year old go off to Nicholson's house alone with Polanski.

_________________

That's not quite what I meant...

I understand he plead guilty to only one thing. That thing was essentially statutory rape. 42 days in jail for that is laughable. Can you blame the judge for not wanting to follow that deal?

And I was thinking the same thing, Rugen. Those parents must not have been concerned for her safety at all. I don't care how famous someone is, you're not taking my child off for a photoshoot without me there.

_________________

If he had just stayed home with his wife who was 8 1/2 months pregnant he would never have gotten into this trouble.

That is the crime here.

_________________
Jake Rivers - Senex Legio
Get off my Lawn alliance

That wasn't the crime. The crime was rape.

The parents were negligent.

_________________

which is also a crime! </pedantic>

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

They were negligent, irresponsible and horrible parents. In a court of public opinion, they deserved to be strung out, hung by their toes and flogged.

But they weren't criminally negligent.

_________________

they left their daughter with someone who raped her. that's pretty much the definition of criminally negligent.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

You may not have noticed, but rapists don't always have big red signs over their heads that say, "I'm going to rape your daughter" on them.

Yes, but leaving your daughter in the care of someone who you have no idea if you can trust or not, who ends up hurting them, is (or should be) criminally negligent

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

They left her in the care of a person who wanted to photograph her for French Vogue, and had done so once. Of course any parent should watch their child like a hawk if they want them in the modeling business, but still.

All he needs to do is die and then everyone will hail him as a great artist and the rest of his fucked up personal life will be forgotten.

He's a great director.

he's at best an average director with some really good films under his belt, but he also has a lot of stinkers.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

So what? He has at least 2, if not 3, major accomplishments that have enriched the world. To prosecute him for having consensual sex 3 decades ago with a 13 year old lolita is disgraceful. The family and woman were paid off, and he should walk.

I take it you haven't read about the case?

Heh, drugging a 13 year old girl with champagne and quaalude and then ass raping her is now considered consensual sex. GOOD TO KNOW!

Look at how stupid you are.

It's good to know that if I do something good in the world that I get a free pass to rape someone.

How good does it have to be? If I say...cure cancer, do I get to just snatch women and girls off the streeet in broad daylight? Or do I still have to be a little discreet about it? What about just making a tastier form of chocolate milk, what does that get me?

I'm curious. How much good have you done in the world, and what has that granted you?

Orme, a Singing Bard Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski ArrestPosted: Wed Oct 7, 2009 2:32 am

I hope the time had something to do with this response.. but drinking that heavily on a Wednesday?

_________________

Rape is ok after closing time?

I know standards get lower around 1:30am, but I don't think they go that low.

Apparently rape is okay if you're a good director, Slyfinger. I know I'm gonna apply to the SAG tomorrow!

Should there be a way to repay society for your crimes besides sitting alone in a cage for a few years?

I think so.

Do what you do, with profits going to the victims, as a condition of freedom. I see nothing wrong with that.

Hey, it worked for the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages.... oh wait no it didn't.

Easy to say 32 years after the event. The public paedo witchunt hadn't even begun at this point, people were generally more trusting, just look at the case of Albert Fish. Admittedly that's another 50 years earlier but public perception was completely different (and in my opinion healthier) about children then.

999 times out of 1000 you'd be absolutely fine letting your 13 year old go somewhere with a "stranger", those stories never make the news though.

(yes stat pulled out my ass)

unless you know that person is a Republican then if you let your daughter go with them then you are guilty of contributing to rape - as we all know that Republicans are rapists.

makes sense to me.

I guess my sarcasm fails because people are actually making those defenses of him right now.

Fun to see you guys get all worked up.

:shadowstep:

That's not the, "I said something so stupid that I'm going to pretend I was trolling." defense, is it?

I believe it is.

The only defense more silly than the chewbacca defense.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

Lol, OK. Let's take a look at it... "He's a great director". Yeah, that's not sarcasm. Oh, and the part where I said "consensual sex with a 13 year old." You do understand, even with booze, a 30 (or 40) year old can't have consensual sex with a 13 year old... right? I find it hard to believe anyone, even you guys, are that ridiculously blind.

No really. Look how stupid you are.

If you were attempting to troll, you failed miserably.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

It wasn't a troll, it was tongue in cheek, over-the-top. "13 year old lolita". Are you kidding me? That was the point, even Angelica Houston implied the 13 year old seduced him. I think you guys are a tad too desperate for flame bait.

I read the girls testimony, what I want to know is does anybody know if her mother was charged with "child endangerment"? She said she told her mom about it and she did nothing.

Also I am not condoning the "lolita" statement but I was surprised to here that she had sex at least 2 other times before this rape, as a father I find that disturbing.

_________________
Devil

Build a man a fire, and he's warm for the night.
Set a man on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.