Roman Polanski's bid to drop sex case delayed

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Poulsonator
Sigh. Does anyone here even know (or care) what Roman was charged with? Of course not, because that would require folks to look it up. I'll save you the trouble:

"Polanski was initially charged[43] 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"

Folks, differentiate the law from your emotion, and differentiate what he allegedly did from what he was actually charged with.

That doesn't change the fact that HE WAS CHARGED WITH A MUCH LESSER OFFENSE.

You underlined the wrong part.

"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"

Ya following? He was "actualy charged" with rape, a violent sexual act. That charge was only dismissed because he pled to a lesser charge. Claiming that such a legal fiction translates to him somehow not having actually committed the violent sex act is nonsensical. But it's good you're the only one here who wiki'd this (you weren't) and the only one here who is using their Vulcan non-emotional state to reveal the historical truth while the rest of us are flailing around blindly in our righteous rage (you aren't.)

Originally posted by: Poulsonator
Polanski's crime was a non-violent sex offense (no kidnapping, battery, intent to kill, etc.), which typically carries a much lighter sentence, especially back in 1978. His 'sweet deal' was more part of the norm for the time than, well, a sweet deal.

No, his "sweet deal" was the dropping of the rape charge for the unlawful intercourse charge. Despite what you assert, the crime for which he was originally charged was a violent sexual rape and would not have carried a light sentence. Which is why he pled.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Poulsonator
Sigh. Does anyone here even know (or care) what Roman was charged with? Of course not, because that would require folks to look it up. I'll save you the trouble:

"Polanski was initially charged[43] 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"

Wiki

I haven't found a thing in CA law that says 'Unlawful Sexual Intercourse with a Minor' is a violent sex offense. Case in point:

[edit] California

The age of consent is 18, with a misdemeanor if the minor has 3 or fewer years of difference with the major. Penalties increase if the minor is under 14 and the major is above 21.

Texts :

* California Penal Code - Part 1. of crimes and punishments -
o Title 9. of crimes against the person involving sexual assault, and crimes against public decency and good morals
+ Chapter 1. Rape, abduction, carnal abuse of children, and seduction. - Section 261.5.
# (a) Unlawful sexual intercourse is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person who is not the spouse of the perpetrator, if the person is a minor. For the purposes of this section, a "minor" is a person under the age of 18 years and an "adult" is a person who is at least 18 years of age and older.
# (b) Any person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is not more than three years older or three years younger than the perpetrator, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
# (c) Any person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than three years younger than the perpetrator is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison.
# (d) Any person 21 years of age or older who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is under 16 years of age is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.

WikiAnswers

And this is 2009 (or so). Laws and the ways laws were enforced were different in CA 32 years ago.


Folks, differentiate the law from your emotion, and differentiate what he allegedly did from what he was actually charged with. A high-profile case like this, with a celebrity (who was unjustly vilified after his wife, Sharon Tate, was murdered) defendant, and a judge out to make a name for himself, nothing is as it seems.

Again, I am AGAINST what he did, and I am AGAINST rape. Roman is a piece if shit and it's unfortunate that he wasn't able to pay for his crimes when he should have. That doesn't change the fact that HE WAS CHARGED WITH A MUCH LESSER OFFENSE.

As jonks pointed out, you should try reading your own link. He was charged with raping a minor, he plead to a lesser offense.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Poulsonator
Sigh. Does anyone here even know (or care) what Roman was charged with? Of course not, because that would require folks to look it up. I'll save you the trouble:

"Polanski was initially charged[43] 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"

Wiki

I haven't found a thing in CA law that says 'Unlawful Sexual Intercourse with a Minor' is a violent sex offense. Case in point:

[edit] California

The age of consent is 18, with a misdemeanor if the minor has 3 or fewer years of difference with the major. Penalties increase if the minor is under 14 and the major is above 21.

Texts :

* California Penal Code - Part 1. of crimes and punishments -
o Title 9. of crimes against the person involving sexual assault, and crimes against public decency and good morals
+ Chapter 1. Rape, abduction, carnal abuse of children, and seduction. - Section 261.5.
# (a) Unlawful sexual intercourse is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person who is not the spouse of the perpetrator, if the person is a minor. For the purposes of this section, a "minor" is a person under the age of 18 years and an "adult" is a person who is at least 18 years of age and older.
# (b) Any person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is not more than three years older or three years younger than the perpetrator, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
# (c) Any person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is more than three years younger than the perpetrator is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison.
# (d) Any person 21 years of age or older who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is under 16 years of age is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.

WikiAnswers

And this is 2009 (or so). Laws and the ways laws were enforced were different in CA 32 years ago.


Folks, differentiate the law from your emotion, and differentiate what he allegedly did from what he was actually charged with. A high-profile case like this, with a celebrity (who was unjustly vilified after his wife, Sharon Tate, was murdered) defendant, and a judge out to make a name for himself, nothing is as it seems.

Again, I am AGAINST what he did, and I am AGAINST rape. Roman is a piece if shit and it's unfortunate that he wasn't able to pay for his crimes when he should have. That doesn't change the fact that HE WAS CHARGED WITH A MUCH LESSER OFFENSE.

dee dee dee!


did you read waht you just posted?


"Polanski was initially charged[43] with rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14"

ok this means he was CHARGED with rape of a child under 14.

"he pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor"

wich is the charge eh PLEAD GUILTY to.

 

[Argo]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Argo
Can somebody explain something one thing to me. He's in France now - don't we have an extradition agreement with France?

Yes and no. Part of it is we can not extradit a French citizen. He has polish and french citizenship.

So I or any other american, without french citizenship, can not hide in france.

So that means a french citizen can come to US, commit a crime go back to France and he's golden? Or is that before France doesn't recognize that specific crime?

 

[Queasy]

Polanski interview from 1979

Having blogged about Roman Polanski?s arrest, I reread an extraordinary interview Polanski gave to the novelist Martin Amis in 1979, the year after Polanski went on the run.

The interview originally appeared in Tatler and is collected in Amis?s excellent book Visiting Mrs Nabokov.

Here?s a section of the first quote it contains from Polanski.

?If I had killed somebody, it wouldn?t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But? f?ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f? young girls. Juries want to f? young girls. Everyone wants to f? young girls!?

Thirty years have passed since Polanski said those words, so he?s had time to reconsider them. Whether he?s actually done so, we don?t yet know. Perhaps he still thinks it?s true that everyone fancies little girls, and that the press was exaggerating the enormity of his crime, and that all this somehow excuses his behaviour.

Later in the interview, Polanski says he likes Paris, to which he?d fled, because it?s ?very grown-up?.

Unlike the 13-year-old girl with whom he admitted having unlawful sex.

Yeah, let's keep making excuses for this guy.

 

[Zim Hosein]

The filmmakers objected to his being arrested en route to the film festival, which held a tribute to him this year.

Filmmakers demand Polanski's release.

:roll:

 

[between]

...

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: between
it's so absurd to think it is justice to punish a 76 year old man for a crime committed by an earlier version of himself more than 30 years ago. hopefully the Swiss will come to their senses, & let this elderly gentleman out on bail, and he can slip over the border and get back to France. The idea that this talented artist and distinguished elderly citizen could end up languishing in a shitty American jail - just to satisfy America's lust for revenge, not to mention its desire for prurient sensation - is just too absurd and barbaric to comtemplate.

Also: I'm amazed at how people in this thread seem to delight in recounting the sordid details of Polanksi's 30 year old crime. It's almost like they are getting off on it. Especially when you consider the victim herself has asked people not to keep raising the issue again & again. People don't give a shit about the actual victim, regardless of what they say.

Are you a parent?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: between
it's so absurd to think it is justice to punish a 76 year old man for a crime committed by an earlier version of himself more than 30 years ago. hopefully the Swiss will come to their senses, & let this elderly gentleman out on bail, and he can slip over the border and get back to France. The idea that this talented artist and distinguished elderly citizen could end up languishing in a shitty American jail - just to satisfy America's lust for revenge, not to mention its desire for prurient sensation - is just too absurd and barbaric to comtemplate.

Also: I'm amazed at how people in this thread seem to delight in recounting the sordid details of Polanksi's 30 year old crime. It's almost like they are getting off on it. Especially when you consider the victim herself has asked people not to keep raising the issue again & again. People don't give a shit about the actual victim, regardless of what they say.

It's absurd to think that someone can have so much passion for a man that drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. Yes, clearly those of us calling for justice are the barbarians, not this gentle, lovable, upstanding, ass raping elderly old man.

There are some things that cannot be forgiven, drugging and raping a child is one of them. I don't care if you spend the rest of your life wiping the popes ass, you still deserve to rot.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: torpid
There's a documentary about his case that aired on HBO a while back. There is pretty damning evidence in it that there was substantial misconduct by the judge in charge of the case, possibly others. They even have interviews with the prosecutor where he openly states that there was misconduct.

Didn't Polanski plead guilty though?

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: senseamp
We got more than enough prisoners to pay for here in CA already, do we really need to go all the way out to Switzerland to get some new ones?
BTW, if Polanski is in CA prison and gets movie royalties, does he have to pay CA taxes on those? Is he considered CA resident? Then it may make some sense.

what if someone drugged your 13 y/o daughter and then raped her. would you just excuse him because the prison system is burdened?

I have a funny feeling that he would be excused from breathing if it happened to an ATOTer...

/ethug.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: Queasy
Sounds like Polanski's lawyers provoked the LA District Attorney's office into arresting him.

Remind me that if I ever need lawyers not to ask them for help...

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Queasy
Link - Man who took naked pictures of common-law marriage teenage daughter and later married signs petition to free man who drugged and anally raped a 13-year old girl.

Go figure

the fuck is wrong with people? christ. What's their case? that it "happened a long time ago?" It surely isn't that he's innocent. They should all be ashamed. Rallying around someone because he made movies they liked? Know who else was a fan of movies? Goebbels. That's right, I said it. 🙂

Godwin's Law has been invoked!

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: between
it's so absurd to think it is justice to punish a 76 year old man for a crime committed by an earlier version of himself more than 30 years ago. hopefully the Swiss will come to their senses, & let this elderly gentleman out on bail

Let this "gentleman" out on bail? Since when does the term "gentlemen" cover child rapists??

The idea that this talented artist and distinguished elderly citizen could end up languishing in a shitty American jail - just to satisfy America's lust for revenge, not to mention its desire for prurient sensation - is just too absurd and barbaric to comtemplate.

Who cares if he's a talented artist or not? It doesn't matter one damn bit if he's a worthless loser or a wonderful artist -- he should be punished exactly the same. By that idiotic reasoning, if Payton Manning rapes a 13 year old girl, he should be let go because he's a great QB. :roll:

Especially when you consider the victim herself has asked people not to keep raising the issue again & again.

So the media is supposed to not report on the case? That's stupid. The victim should be given privacy and left alone by the media, but that doesn't mean that pedo rapist should be let go.

 

[alrocky]

Originally posted by: Argo

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Argo
Can somebody explain something one thing to me. He's in France now - don't we have an extradition agreement with France?

Yes and no. Part of it is we can not extradit a French citizen. He has polish and french citizenship. So I or any other american, without french citizenship, can not hide in france.

So that means a french citizen can come to US, commit a crime go back to France and he's golden? Or is that before France doesn't recognize that specific crime?

Switzerland

 

[Chunkee]

Geezer Getaway

 

[Oceandevi]

wow.

 

[SpanishFry]

Originally posted by: between
it's so absurd to think it is justice to punish a 76 year old man for a crime committed by an earlier version of himself more than 30 years ago. hopefully the Swiss will come to their senses, & let this elderly gentleman out on bail, and he can slip over the border and get back to France. The idea that this talented artist and distinguished elderly citizen could end up languishing in a shitty American jail - just to satisfy America's lust for revenge, not to mention its desire for prurient sensation - is just too absurd and barbaric to comtemplate.

Also: I'm amazed at how people in this thread seem to delight in recounting the sordid details of Polanksi's 30 year old crime. It's almost like they are getting off on it. Especially when you consider the victim herself has asked people not to keep raising the issue again & again. People don't give a shit about the actual victim, regardless of what they say.

wow.

 

[FoBoT]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iRnW_PP9RtYpGgoc5KZiwY84hjrQD9C9U86G2

GSTAAD, Switzerland — Workers plowed snow away from Roman Polanski's Alpine chalet on Monday, as Swiss authorities worked with the director's lawyers to meet the conditions of his $4.5 million bail and house arrest.
The Swiss Justice Ministry wouldn't say when Polanski would be released from jail. Spokesman Folco Galli said there were still outstanding requirements from last week's court decision that granted Polanski permission to live in the luxury resort of Gstaad if he wears an electronic monitoring bracelet.
"If the conditions were met, he would be in Gstaad," Galli said, refusing to elaborate.
It was not clear if Polanski was struggling to meet the large bail required. Polanski's Paris lawyer Herve Temime declined to comment.
The 76-year-old filmmaker was still believed to be held in Winterthur, near Zurich. His Swiss attorney Lorenz Erni entered the Winterthur jail early Monday, then left several hours later — alone — and didn't answer any questions.
In the central resort town of Gstaad, however, workers were seen clearing heavy snow from the road leading up to Polanski's property, a three-story stucco and wood home with its own garden. The chalet is where he will be confined as Switzerland decides whether to extradite him to the U.S. for having sex in 1977 with a 13-year-old girl.

 

[*kjm]

wow.

x100000000000000000000000