Roman Polanski arrested in Switzerland at U.S. request

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
You think that the upper caste should be able to rape and pillage the lower castes of society as you have officially deemed them.

No you just keep deluding yourself into such nonsense on your own.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Your secret is out, you fiend.

 

[kylebisme]

Again, If what you claimed were true, you would be able to quote some obvious examples, but they only exist in your imagination. On the other hand, I can an did quote your envious bile, as your comments are rupturing with it.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I can easily quote your obvious disdain for the 'peons'. One needs to barely read between the lines of your posts to fully understand your disgusting support for some sort of caste system.

You have a hatred for the common man, plain and simple.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Meh, just abandon this thread to the loons, it's not worth it....

It is rather enjoyable to watch Polanski squirm though

Hell, I'd be happy if he was extradited, given 30 days, and then deported

 

[extra]

Originally posted by: JS80
lol why am i not surprised the leftys here are defending this guy

Did we read the same thread? There's a couple who are but most sure aren't...the guy fled the country to avoid the law back in the day....don't whine if the law eventually catches up to you.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I can easily quote your obvious disdain for the 'peons'. One needs to barely read between the lines...

That is your imagination acting up between the lines, and you can't quote that.

In fact, my disdain is for the ruling elite, as they are the ones who have people like yourself all worked up over Polanski and other frivolous nonsense while they continue to ass rape all of us.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I can easily quote your obvious disdain for the 'peons'. One needs to barely read between the lines...

That is your imagination acting up between the lines, and you can't quote that.

In fact, my disdain is for the ruling elite, as they are the ones who have people like yourself all worked up over Polanski and other frivolous nonsense while they continue to ass rape all of us.

That's interesting because the people seeking Polanski's extradition are public employees who are relatively underpaid compared to their peers and those protecting Polanski are the French and Polish political and artistic aristocracy.

 

[kylebisme]

Yeah, the ruling elite likes to keep it interesting so you are less likely to notice them drilling you up the ass.

 

[Druidx]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
If your daughter/sister/mother insisted on dropping the charges, sure. Add to that the fact that this 13 year old was no stranger to alcohol, Quaaludes, or anal sex.

So it's the 13 year old girls fault that an Adult pedophile raped her??
Stupid me didn't think you could sink any lower. You should send your personal insight to Polanski's defense team, I'm sure it will do wonders for his defense. "But judge, see was practically begging for it"

 

[Skitzer]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I can easily quote your obvious disdain for the 'peons'. One needs to barely read between the lines...

That is your imagination acting up between the lines, and you can't quote that.

In fact, my disdain is for the ruling elite, as they are the ones who have people like yourself all worked up over Polanski and other frivolous nonsense while they continue to ass rape all of us.

So let me get this straight ...... this Polasnski situation is frivolous nonsense?
Ok ..... much clearer picture of you now, thanks.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: extra

Originally posted by: JS80
lol why am i not surprised the leftys here are defending this guy

Did we read the same thread? There's a couple who are but most sure aren't...the guy fled the country to avoid the law back in the day....don't whine if the law eventually catches up to you.

yeap. most are not defending him. only a few idiots are defending him and one big idiot blaming the girl.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: JS80
lol why am i not surprised the leftys here are defending this guy

I am a lefty but i think he should be brought to justice.

 

[Pneumothorax]

This piece of human excrement should be locked up in Charles Manson's cell... Who knows they might even become friends lol.

 

[HomerJS]

Can someone explain to me why all the outrage for Roman Polanski when Elvis Presley at 25 had sex with a 14 yr old? I don't recall any calls for his condemnation.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: HomerJS
Can someone explain to me why all the outrage for Roman Polanski when Elvis Presley at 25 had sex with a 14 yr old? I don't recall any calls for his condemnation.

elvis didn't drug her and then flee the country after being found guilty of rape?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: HomerJS
Can someone explain to me why all the outrage for Roman Polanski when Elvis Presley at 25 had sex with a 14 yr old? I don't recall any calls for his condemnation.

elvis didn't drug her and then flee the country after being found guilty of rape?

Yea but besides that it's exactly the same.

Edit - It must have been on the front page of foxnews.com and HomerJS is just looking for an excuse to call them hypocrites.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
If your daughter/sister/mother insisted on dropping the charges, sure. Add to that the fact that this 13 year old was no stranger to alcohol, Quaaludes, or anal sex.

I'm sure she dressed provocatively and flirted too. Bitch had it coming.

You are a complete and utter douchebag... bar none, you're tops.

edit: damn spellcheck..

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Fern
Meh, I'd prefer the status quo - let him remain in exile and not re-hash a 30 yr old story.

Fern

If he would have raped your daughter, sister, mother, 30 years ago would you still say that?

I don't know.

I won't go into the whole "we don't let victims etc pick out the punishment because that's just revenge" thingy.

But I've read all the comments here, the woman and family don't seem to want to prosecute and that carries some weight with me. Also looks like his sentence was changed to 90 days from 40 something. Not a big sentence IMO. Around here he'd have been sentenced to decades for that crime.

But anyway, the woman doesn't care, the case is 30 yrs old, he's banned from the USA for, well, forever and that seems worse to me than a 90 day sentence. And I somehow suspect that what's gonna happen is he get's zip but can than come back to the US with a clean record (whether the case is thrown out for judicial misconduct or he gets a pardon etc.).

In this case I say "let sleeping dogs lie".

Fern

The man shoved his cock into a 13 year old girls arse and she protested again and again.

She's been haunted by the press ever since, SHE got the punishment for it and she wants it to be over.

In reality, where you might want to spend some time once in a while, a crime was committed, comparable to torture of a 13 year old, if you actually want to let it slip then you are a sick fuck.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: HomerJS
Can someone explain to me why all the outrage for Roman Polanski when Elvis Presley at 25 had sex with a 14 yr old? I don't recall any calls for his condemnation.

elvis didn't drug her and then flee the country after being found guilty of rape?

Yea but besides that it's exactly the same.

Edit - It must have been on the front page of foxnews.com and HomerJS is just looking for an excuse to call them hypocrites.

Exactly and the only reason between me and whoever shot JFK is that i didn't shoot him.

Makes perfect sense in a deranged mind like yours perhaps but the rest of us don't think that someone who raped a 13 year old in the arse after getting her so drugged that she could hardly put up a resistance and yet continued to say NO is the same thing as a 14 year old sober girl willingly agreeing to having sex.

Don't tell me you can't see the difference.

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose

People here have a truly bizarre sense of the law. Do you really think that people should be free to run away and disregard the legal system just because they don't like what may happen to them?

Actually, I think the answer to your question is less clear-cut than you seem to think:

Suppose I'm about to make a decision as to whether aggressively fight a charge or plead guilty.

To aggressively fight the charge might mean dragging this young girl through the gutter to "prove" that she was blameworthy and/or that the facts are not as she has presented them. I realize that if I follow this route, I have a good chance of winning, but at the cost of really making this young girl's life miserable and of bringing down unpredictable bad publicity on myself.

Alternatively, the prosecutor represents that there's a guaranteed "softer" route, where I can serve a small sentence, avoid attacking the girl, and - with the court records sealed - keep the matter completely secret. The judge indicates he'll go along with this.

So, the second alternative sounds very attractive. I plead guilty to the lesser charge. I go to jail for the 42-day evaluation period, and there's an agreed-upon minor sentence of 60 days (or whatever) to follow.

Unfortunately, as the date for the follow-up sentencing approaches, word leaks out that the judge has changed his mind, and will pronounce a much longer sentence. "But he can't do that!" you and your attorney cry. And the prosecuting attorney shrugs his shoulders and says, "I didn't think so, either, but apparently he can."

So, you've been MISLED by the court system. If you'd been CORRECTLY informed, you would have made a very different decision (the aggressive track), and likely would face no jail time at all.

Given the acknowledged misconduct of the presiding judge in the actual case, and given that we CANNOT possibly know would have happened if Polanski had followed a different route if the system has played straight with him (informing him from the start, for example, that the judge would be free to pronounce a long sentence even with a plea bargain), I think the ethics of his fleeing the country is very much subject to debate.

Ah, I understand. Just because a single judge has possibly misled you, then that means you can abandon the whole legal system.

I've got a crazy idea. He could have, you know, properly and legally faced his alleged crime. Instead, he decided to forgo the ENTIRE legal process and run away.

Apparently the rule of law doesn't matter if you get tired of it.

Not at all.

The fact is, the judge's misconduct may have doomed any chance Polanski had to receive due process. Obviously, if Polanski returned to the U.S., he would be allowed to retract his guilty plea (otherwise, the actions of the court would invalidate the entire concept of plea bargaining). But no subsequent jury could possibly "ignore" the fact that there was an earlier guilty plea, even if instructed by a judge to do so. So a defense motion to dismiss on the basis that Polanski could not now receive a fair trial would be compelling.

I think the current L.A. prosecutor should recognize the above, and move to dismiss.

Edit: Note that dismissing this case is NOT saying that Polanski's actions were not execrable - they were. But when a defendant is irreconcilably deprived a due process, the court has no choice but to dismiss. All of you who claim that the rule of law must be followed should recognize that the rule of law in THIS case points to dismissal.

 

[Pliablemoose]

I think a lot of protracted legal wrangling is in order, with citizen Polanski in custody the entire time....... He's a proven flight risk.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Skitzer
...this Polasnski situation is frivolous nonsense?

Dragging him back to the US is frivolous nonsense. If he would have turned up on our soil on his own will, I would be all for throwing him in jail and putting him though the courts for his crimes. However, this is just a media circus to keep people distracted from anything that could do some real good for the world, and a waste of our tax dollars to boot.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Skitzer
...this Polasnski situation is frivolous nonsense?

Dragging him back to the US is frivolous nonsense. If he would have turned up on our soil on his own will, I would be all for throwing him in jail and putting him though the courts for his crimes. However, this is just a media circus to keep people distracted from anything that could do some real good for the world, and a waste of our tax dollars to boot.

so should we just not bother pursuing anyone who flees criminal sentencing for another country?

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Skitzer
...this Polasnski situation is frivolous nonsense?

Dragging him back to the US is frivolous nonsense. If he would have turned up on our soil on his own will, I would be all for throwing him in jail and putting him though the courts for his crimes. However, this is just a media circus to keep people distracted from anything that could do some real good for the world, and a waste of our tax dollars to boot.

so should we just not bother pursuing anyone who flees criminal sentencing for another country?

Youre making a generalization from a very specific case. If the prosecutor believes the original charges IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE would be dismissed on appeal (see my post above), it IS frivolous to continue to pursue him.