Might as Well Get to the Polanski Thing
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
The outpouring around Michael Jackson and O.J. reached similar levels of hysteria on both sides, but my main point of puzzlement in this case is around the Polish.
On the day he was arrested the headlines in Reuters read:
1) Anger in France and Poland over Polanski arrest
2) Poland okays forcible castration for paedophiles.
One wonders why Poland is so angry, and whether Roman got off lightly?
On the day he was arrested the headlines in Reuters read:
1) Anger in France and Poland over Polanski arrest
2) Poland okays forcible castration for paedophiles.
One wonders why Poland is so angry, and whether Roman got off lightly?
Not prosecuting him could turn to be a very slippery slope. Pedophiles could easily reach out to this specific case and attempt to go free.
Regardless of the good he's done and the movies he's made, he did something illegal and no amount of time will make it any less illegal. I say sentence him, pedophiles should be hanged.
Regardless of the good he's done and the movies he's made, he did something illegal and no amount of time will make it any less illegal. I say sentence him, pedophiles should be hanged.
Good article. Especially that last bit: Nobody will ever forget what he did in '77, not even his friends and loved ones.
I myself can't hate the guy. I only know him through movies and his movies were fantastic.
I myself can't hate the guy. I only know him through movies and his movies were fantastic.
Yeah, but he could be given mitigating circumstances and a proven 32 years without reoffending - he could be tried and convicted, but the sentence doesn't necessarily have to be as harsh as it could be without giving precedent for other peadophiles to point to and say "HE GOT AWAY WITH IT!".Windexglow said:
I would just like to say that no one in Britain gives a fuck when we have stories like this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/8310776.stm
Why didn't you put "forgive" in quotations as well?HG131 said:
OT: Half agree with the article, but just because he fights the stereotype doesn't excuse what he has done.
He had sex with a 13 year old girl when he was in his 40's, and has escaped punishment for it for 30 years. That's the bare balls of it, his job is irrelevant. He's not mentally impaired in any way; plenty of people suffer horrific things but don't then sleep with kids and whatever.
Great article. Probably the best comment I've read. Thanks
Here's a thought experiment: Would the outcry have been so intense if the whole Garrido/Jaycee story hadn't become known shortly before?
Just reading comments around the internet, it seems like the majority have no sympathy at all and I wonder if they are reacting to the contempt, arrogance and lack of remorse they perceive,(his infamous Vanity Fair comment, the fact that he never came back to take care of this, etc) as by his actual sexual misdeeds.
What's curious to me is how someone with his intelligence, wealth, advantages and presumably good legal advice, could have been so tone deaf and and placed himself in such jeopardy.
Here's a thought experiment: Would the outcry have been so intense if the whole Garrido/Jaycee story hadn't become known shortly before?
Just reading comments around the internet, it seems like the majority have no sympathy at all and I wonder if they are reacting to the contempt, arrogance and lack of remorse they perceive,(his infamous Vanity Fair comment, the fact that he never came back to take care of this, etc) as by his actual sexual misdeeds.
What's curious to me is how someone with his intelligence, wealth, advantages and presumably good legal advice, could have been so tone deaf and and placed himself in such jeopardy.
If his prosecution is thrown out on the basis of a mis-trial due to the shenanigans surrounding the plea bargain, then it is in no way a slippery slope, and no one else, barring a mistrial, could use it as precedent.Windexglow said:
I particularly enjoy the relatively reasonable tone you take with the whole thing, followed by "people should die for having sex with other people that are across the arbitrary age limit". Unless you're only talking about pedophiles that are clinically diagnosed. In which case you would appear to be advocating the death penalty for people with mental problems. Real classy. /sarcasm
Here's my take: if the plea bargain shens are true, and the judge was going to renege on the deal, then his "guilty" plea shouldn't stand. Without a guilty plea, and without a victim bringing charges, if the courts still have a case, let them start it over from scratch.
If the shens are not true, then no matter the mitigating factors, the trial should still happen, and let the legal system do its thang. If he's convicted, and the law allows for adjustments to a guilty sentence (by judge or jury), then let that judge or jury mitigate the punishment as they see fit.
I like to believe that justice means that no matter who you are, you will be held accountable for your actions. If I drug and rape a child, but produce a beautiful film, that should not mean a damn thing. I still belong in jail.
I'll separate the artist from his work when he's dead.
I'll separate the artist from his work when he's dead.
I don't believe in justice, or morality or anything, but I believe in social contract. If you live in a country, you have made a promise to obey its laws and if you brake them, you get punished. Same laws for everyone, same rights for everyone, same punishments for everyone.
Regarding the phrase: "For those keeping track, that takes care of the only people whose opinions actually matter in this circumstance."
The crime was committed also against the people of the state of California. The victim involved, tries their case at the civil level of the court systems. The violation of the law, and the punitive level is handled as a crime against the state; thus the cases being stated as The People of California vs. Roman Polanski.
To say the opinions of the people of California are of no concern, is to ignore the crime committed against them. The state of California has the right to enact laws, prosecute their offenders and pursue the escaped convicted fugitives of such prosecutions.
The crime was committed also against the people of the state of California. The victim involved, tries their case at the civil level of the court systems. The violation of the law, and the punitive level is handled as a crime against the state; thus the cases being stated as The People of California vs. Roman Polanski.
To say the opinions of the people of California are of no concern, is to ignore the crime committed against them. The state of California has the right to enact laws, prosecute their offenders and pursue the escaped convicted fugitives of such prosecutions.
Alright, I'll say the following yet again (from various posts on various subjects):
#1: Ever heard of a writer called Spider Robinson? He wrote things like "Callahan's Crosstime Saloon", and "Callhan's Lady". As a victim of sexual assault as a child (which fortunatly I do not remember, but which actually happened) I sort of agree with him that the only real way to truely "punish" a rapist is for them to be raped themselves.
In the majority of cases everyone is going to have some kind of sexual/erotic contact they find repugnant. As brutal and "cruel and unusual" as it is, I feel that the only way of evening thigns out in most cases is a variation on "Eye For An Eye" let Bubba, or evilly created rape devices/machines mete justice where the regular system cannot.
#2: When I talk about rape, I talk about actually forcing yourself on someone else. Statuatory Rape and so on is definatly WRONG but not quite as evil as the above, thus I feel it deserves far lesser punishment, when it comes down to it it's not the same as an actual ATTACK. It's wrong for societal reasons, having to do with children unable to mentally and emotionally deal with things that they are physically capable of handling.
In the case of Mr. Polanski it seems like he's definatly in catagory #2. Over the years a lot of things have been said about his case. Right now a dominant version of the story says that he drugged her, and so on. On the other hand there has also been money involved in this in the past, and the forgiveness of the victim is generally coming after she realized she wasn't going to get any cash out of him.
When dealing with a case that happened when I was 2 years old, it's a tricky subject, but looking at things retroactively *I* am not entirely convinced that she wasn't a lolita trying to get her hooks into him. Oh sure she was drugged... and all would be forgiven for dumptrucks full of cash delivered to her doorstep.
-
Roman deserves jail time in my opinion, probably to spend the rest of his life behind bars. The amount of time/punishment I would have originally suggested giving him (which would be dependant on details we're unlikely to ever truely sort out) being irrelevent compared to the fact that the guy fled to avoid persecution, and sat there for decades tweaking our noses from behind a non-extradition treaty while producing arthouse cinema.
Despite what others think, we'll never be able to prove the extent of his molestation, but we DO know what he did to avoid capture, and that right there is enough to throw the book at him. He sort of became a poster child for "rich/famous guys laughing at US Law", I can't help but wonder how many crimes he personally has encouraged among the arthouse elite due to his apparent success.
There are of course other issues involved here, like again *FRANCE* and the role it had been playing in this whole thing.
So basically I say toss him in jail with a 20-50 year sentence, and then do what is needed to sieze his finances despite the protests of other nations shielding him. Indeed I think he should be being used as more of an example as to why the US should be playing a lot more hardball with our alleged "allies" like France.... not that I really expect someone like Obama to do anything here where other Presidents have either failed, or effectively engaged in the ritual castration of American power.
I mean frankly, people wonder why France did things like "The Oil For Food" scandal, and then reacted to it the way they did with their domestic media, when we couldn't even get them to hand over a fugitive who was thumbing his nose at us (irregardless of what he did). Truthfully, Polanski doesn't matter much in the overall scheme of things, but if France ever wonders why we hate them, and start kicking the crud out of them one way or another (hopefully) it's one big thing we can point at and go "that's basically why we're making a nation sized pile of frog legs".
#1: Ever heard of a writer called Spider Robinson? He wrote things like "Callahan's Crosstime Saloon", and "Callhan's Lady". As a victim of sexual assault as a child (which fortunatly I do not remember, but which actually happened) I sort of agree with him that the only real way to truely "punish" a rapist is for them to be raped themselves.
In the majority of cases everyone is going to have some kind of sexual/erotic contact they find repugnant. As brutal and "cruel and unusual" as it is, I feel that the only way of evening thigns out in most cases is a variation on "Eye For An Eye" let Bubba, or evilly created rape devices/machines mete justice where the regular system cannot.
#2: When I talk about rape, I talk about actually forcing yourself on someone else. Statuatory Rape and so on is definatly WRONG but not quite as evil as the above, thus I feel it deserves far lesser punishment, when it comes down to it it's not the same as an actual ATTACK. It's wrong for societal reasons, having to do with children unable to mentally and emotionally deal with things that they are physically capable of handling.
In the case of Mr. Polanski it seems like he's definatly in catagory #2. Over the years a lot of things have been said about his case. Right now a dominant version of the story says that he drugged her, and so on. On the other hand there has also been money involved in this in the past, and the forgiveness of the victim is generally coming after she realized she wasn't going to get any cash out of him.
When dealing with a case that happened when I was 2 years old, it's a tricky subject, but looking at things retroactively *I* am not entirely convinced that she wasn't a lolita trying to get her hooks into him. Oh sure she was drugged... and all would be forgiven for dumptrucks full of cash delivered to her doorstep.
-
Roman deserves jail time in my opinion, probably to spend the rest of his life behind bars. The amount of time/punishment I would have originally suggested giving him (which would be dependant on details we're unlikely to ever truely sort out) being irrelevent compared to the fact that the guy fled to avoid persecution, and sat there for decades tweaking our noses from behind a non-extradition treaty while producing arthouse cinema.
Despite what others think, we'll never be able to prove the extent of his molestation, but we DO know what he did to avoid capture, and that right there is enough to throw the book at him. He sort of became a poster child for "rich/famous guys laughing at US Law", I can't help but wonder how many crimes he personally has encouraged among the arthouse elite due to his apparent success.
There are of course other issues involved here, like again *FRANCE* and the role it had been playing in this whole thing.
So basically I say toss him in jail with a 20-50 year sentence, and then do what is needed to sieze his finances despite the protests of other nations shielding him. Indeed I think he should be being used as more of an example as to why the US should be playing a lot more hardball with our alleged "allies" like France.... not that I really expect someone like Obama to do anything here where other Presidents have either failed, or effectively engaged in the ritual castration of American power.
I mean frankly, people wonder why France did things like "The Oil For Food" scandal, and then reacted to it the way they did with their domestic media, when we couldn't even get them to hand over a fugitive who was thumbing his nose at us (irregardless of what he did). Truthfully, Polanski doesn't matter much in the overall scheme of things, but if France ever wonders why we hate them, and start kicking the crud out of them one way or another (hopefully) it's one big thing we can point at and go "that's basically why we're making a nation sized pile of frog legs".
