LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
As much as I admire Polanski's filmography, I do sincerely hope they castrate him alive.*
*And yes I do mean that literally.
After about 30 years on the lam, during which he continued to make award-winning movies, the famous director was finally apprehended and may be extradited to the United States to face his sentence for drugging and having sex with a 13-year-old girl.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...rage-girl.html
I know there are a lot of people who defend him because, well I guess it's because he makes really good movies and had a hard life so people are willing to overlooking things like raping children, but I feel like he should have had the courage to face the music three decades ago and glad that he finally will. He may not even serve any time, there's a possibility the conviction will be thrown out because of judicial misconduct but Polanski was never brave enough to come to the US and chance having that fight.
And stay out of Riverdale!
Oh, hello?
As much as I admire Polanski's filmography, I do sincerely hope they castrate him alive.*
*And yes I do mean that literally.
Save Yourselves!
It always really bothered me that he was allowed to get away with that.
Justice is finally served
"This is just like High School Graduation...Nobody's Going Anywhere!"
Senior Member
No, not yet. The US still has to decide if they're going to have him extradited, and then there's the small matter of the trial itself, before anyone can decide if justice has been served.Originally Posted by CaptainHero
It always really bothered me that he was allowed to get away with that.
Justice is finally served
Banned
The reason people defend him is because the judge was a publicity w-word. Polanski turned himself in, pleaded guilty, and was sent to a 90-day psychiatric evaluation at Chino State Prison so they could decide what to do with him. Then, both lawyers (meaning the prosecution and defense lawyer) realized that the judge wasn't gonna give Polanski a fair sentence based on his psychiatric evalution but rather on public opinion for the sake of his own personal publicity. That's why Polanski left. Since then, both Polanski and the victim have asked for the overturn of the judge's sentence and to start a new fair case. So, right there it tells you how messed up the judge was. Even the victim didn't agree with him.
You mean he ran when he realized he wasn't going to get a slap on the wrist because he's famous. You might have seen Wanted and Desired and I'd really caution you against taking that as the gospel truth.
No, this is just an example of how we have two justice systems in the US, one for the rich and one for the poor. Some guy from the ghetto who raped a 13-year-old girl would never have been allowed to skip out on his sentence because he didn't like what he might get and hide out in plain sight for 30 years. If they felt the judge was not being fair there were lots of legal actions they could have taken before "run away to Europe." If a publicity whore judge imposed too harsh a sentence on him at worst it would have been overturned on appeal. But as a rich and famous director apparently he felt the rules didn't apply to him.
And let's not get it in our heads that this was purely consensual sex with a girl that happened to be under 13. There's some good information about what went on here, pretty sleazy stuff. You can even read her grand jury statement.
http://www.vachss.com/mission/roman_polanski.html
And the victim might have forgiven him, might want this to go away and might want a new trial, but the legal system can't, or at least shouldn't, pick and chose who should and should not be punished like that.
And stay out of Riverdale!
Unfair or not, he still had sex with a child. That's just wrong on every level.
Banned
I don't remember the exact details, but he wasn't seeking a slap on the wrist. He knew he was gonna get prison and accepted that, hence why he turned himself in and pleaded guilty! The problem layed on the specifics of the sentence. Polanski is a holocaust survivor whose pregnant wife was murdered by Charles Manson's posse. Dude wasn't right in the head. Everyone knew that. Hence the 90-day psychiatric evaluation at Chino State Prison. The results of the evaluation, if I recall correctly, were gonna suggest a serving at a low-security prison with required thearpy. But the judge, who paid more attention at public opinion and his publicity, wanted to throw the book at him. Something even the victim disagreed with! So, that's why he fled. I'm not saying it was right for him to do that. I'm just explaining why people defend him. It has nothing to do with his movies and fame. They just understand it wasn't a fair trial. Even his psychiatric evaluation was a mess if I recall correctly. They were supposed to keep him seperate from the rest of the population, something that is common in all rape cases not just the ones involving famous people and they didn't do that.
Stop kidding yourself. It has everything to do with his fame and his wealth. People worship fame and wealth and enough of it can buy a pass for anything, or at least reduce the consequences of your actions. And his talent, too, binds the Hollywood elite and others to his actions and makes them believe he should receive special treatment. I saw someone on another board who said "I would sacrifice 1,000 13-year-old girls for Chinatown." I doubt a hack like Uwe Boll would get such support.
He pleaded guilty to the least of several charges against him because he expected little jail time. Then he heard that the judge might give him a lot despite his being famous director Roman Polanski, so he ran. I think he should serve his original sentence and an additional sentence for being a fugitive.
And I know he had problems, but that doesn't excuse what he did. I've had a hard life, too, but I bet it wouldn't get a judge to go easy on me for a rape conviction. At any rate he wasn't found insane, that would be the only legal defense that would mean he was not guilty.
At any rate all of these issues will now work themselves out in the courts, as they should have decades ago. It was the running away that shows a disrespect for and an attitude that he is above the laws that others have to live with.
Last edited by Shawn Hopkins; 09-27-2009 at 05:20 PM.
And stay out of Riverdale!
Banned
At the time, the public did not defend Polanski. So, in this case, it doesn't.
But is it as rough as being a Holocaust survivor whose pregnant wife was murdered by serial killers?I had a hard life, too
He pleaded guilty. The psychological evaluation was just to determine the type of sentence. The judge wasn't gonna turn around and say, "oh, nevermind. I guess you're not guilty." He pleaded guilty and was gonna be sentenced as a guilty person. The controversy revolves around the details of that sentence. Everyone, including the victim, was seeking a low prison sentence with psychological help. The judge was gonna do the opposite as a result of public outcry.he wasn't found insane, that would be the only legal defense that would mean he was not guilty.
Lots of people defend Polanski. Most of Hollywood does. You're doing it right now.
You're not seriously suggesting that there's a point where your life can be hard enough to excuse rape, are you? It's not a matter of degree, I'm saying it shouldn't be a factor.
I don't think we disagree about that the issue was what kind of sentence he was going to get. I hope we also agree that the response to not liking the sentence you're going to get shouldn't be, "become a fugitive," because that's what this coward did. It might not have been what was being asked for but judges have the final say in these cases no matter what plea agreements have been struck. If he felt the judge acted inappropriately there's a whole appeals court system set up for him to use.
And stay out of Riverdale!
Retired.
I doubt this is going to go anywhere. Hell, the girl he raped has been trying to get the case dropped for years for personal reasons.
Still... Switzerland... you'd think they'd have done it sooner.
He slipped up and traveled to a country with an extradition treaty with the US and this time they were on the ball and caught him.
They've tried to arrest him this way at least twice before, according to the Los Angeles Times article below, but he got wind of it and was able to dodge them or they just missed him.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...rape-case.html
And stay out of Riverdale!
Chill. It's only an opinion.
If his reason for fleeing was solely because he wasn't going to get a fair trial, then the reasonable thing to do once he had immunity would be to negotiate a guarantee to a fair trial. Instead, he's been living it up without worry and keeping away from any possibility of being arrested. That right there says there is no understandable, justifiable or forgivable decent side to this story, he's simply a despicable human being.
Unfortunately, any sentence he gets will be fall far short of what he actually deserves.
"But I, being poor, have only my dreams. I have spread my dreams under your feet; tread softly, because you tread on my dreams." - William Butler Yeats
"You can't find the world's perspective in reflection, but you can find yourself."
"We came, we saw, we conquered, we... woke up!"
Banned
He did do that. Even the victim requested that. Yet, the U.S. never agreed on it.
To be clear, there was no trial. He pleaded guilty to the least of about half a dozen serious charges against him but feared that he might get a stiffer sentence so he fled. He has asked recently that the charges be dismissed because of misconduct, but he refused to come to the US to argue his case because he knew he would be arrested. There was also a negotiation for him to surrender in 1997 but it fell apart. The documentary about Polanski mentioned earlier in the thread claims something about there being an insistence there be TV cameras in the courtroom, but court officials claim that was a fabrication and asked for a retraction. Old Guy is mischaracterizing it a bit by saying, "The US never agreed to it." The prosecution wanted to resolve it, they just didn't agree to give Polanski special treatment and do things on his terms.
And stay out of Riverdale!
Save Yourselves!
Why the hell are people defending this sick individual?
I don't care what you've been through in life or what amazing films you may have made, if you rape a 13 year old girl, you deserve to rot in prison.
Mod note: Refrain from usage of profanity.
Last edited by Antiyonder; 09-27-2009 at 11:59 PM. Reason: Mod warning.
"This is just like High School Graduation...Nobody's Going Anywhere!"
Well, I think in large part it's the influence of that HBO documentary. Under the pretense of being balanced by showing some of Polanski's flaws, it generally paints him a positive light on this issue and as a man under attack by a corrupt judge.
But that's not necessarily the truth. Here's an article that provides some rebuttal:
http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/200...i_documentary/
And stay out of Riverdale!
Banned
The documentary doesn't defend Polanski. And no one defends Polanski per say. People just attack the Judge and why not? Court corruption is a crime like any other. This is how innocent people end up in jail and how guilty people escape jail. You can't attack Polanski but defend the judge. Both were wrong.
What Shawn doesn't understand is that Polanski's charge was sex with a minor. He wasn't charged as rape. Yes, sex with a minor is considered statutory rape but that charge gives you a different sentence than a regular rape charge. Originally, Polanski was charged as rape but that charge was changed because the girl's claim was kinda fishy. See, the girl was a model that Polanski hired for a two-day magazine shoot. On the first day, the girl claimed that Polanski asked for her to undress in front of him. That right there gave off Polanski's intention. Yet, not only did she not tell anyone but she showed up for the second shoot which is when the sex happened. Had the case gone to trial she would have had to taken the stand and explained why she showed up for the second day. She didn't want to do that. So, since rape couldn't actually be proven they changed the charge to sex with a minor. And Polanski pleaded guilty to that and no trial occurred. His sentence was gonna be the standard for that charge but the judge changed his mind at the last minute and warned lawyers that he was gonna go harsher than usual and that's why Polanski fled. Now, yes, he could have gone to appeal but that doesn't happen over night. He still would have had to start serving the judge's sentence. Now, like I said, I'm not defending Polanski's actions for fleeding. I'm just saying that the judge shouldn't be given slap on the wrist either.
I think you misunderstand important elements of this, Old Guy. The plea agreement was more likely made and agreed to by the girl and her family to spare the girl and her family the public humiliation of a lengthy public trial, not because the charges against Polanski were "fishy."
She wasn't a model he hired through some agency, she was just a kid who wanted to be famous who had an older man tell her he could get her in French Vogue. Yeah, she went back after he took topless photos of her, but kids do stupid things. When it comes right down to it he still initiated the sex with her and even though there was a plea agreement she still says it was nonconsensual, Polanski is the only one at fault here.
She did take the stand and explain why she went to the second shoot and why the sex happened, by the way, in her grand jury deposition. I linked to it earlier in the thread if you want to read it. She might not have wanted to do give this account in a public trial, but it wasn't because she would have had to admit she was a dirty 13-year-old whore in some Perry Mason moment.
The gist seems to be inexperience, she thought the first topless shots were "for, you know, the shots that you got where you don't have anything on your shoulders," and coercion by Polanski starting with him showing up in a hurry to go shoot more pictures and refusing to let her take a friend along, following through to plying her with drugs and drink, encouraging her to take off her clothes and finally having nonconsensual oral, vaginal and anal sex with her.
Maybe the judge did go too far in trying to make sure Polanski didn't beat the system through his wealth and fame, but even if he did it could have been overturned on appeal. But we don't even know that he would have given Polanski an unfair sentence because Polanski ran away.
And don't pull out the argument that any sentence other than the plea agreement would be unfair, judges aren't bound by plea agreements at all, they're just requests from the prosecution that they can consider. Typically they do accept them but not always. And the judge not accepting the plea agreement or changing his mind is not misconduct of any kind, that's his prerogative.
And Polanski might have had to start serving the harsher sentence while he waited on the appeal, but if the sentence were overturned and a lesser sentence were applied he would have gotten credit for time served. In some cases people are even allowed to remain free pending appeal outcomes, but I admit it was highly unlikely that the judge in this case would have allowed that.
The alleged judicial misconduct, as I understand it, was that a prosecutor not connected to the case showed the judge a picture of Polanski having a fine old time at some Oktoberfest in Europe after the mean old judge let him go to finish a project before sentencing and suggested something along the lines that Polanski was making a fool out of him. But that wasn't a secret, the reason it came out was that prosecutor said it in the documentary as if it were no big deal. Anyway, it wasn't justification for Polanski's flight and it's a matter for the courts to decide, which hopefully will happen now.
And stay out of Riverdale!
Posting Permissions
| toonzone quick jump |
Bookmarks