[Reuters]Roman Polanski arrested in Switzerland 31 years after fleeing trial

I put it in quotations for a reason. Why do you think men in this thread have offered up justifications for how he got the plea deal he got? My co-worker today tried to justify it by saying that girls often pass themselves off as older and it's easy to be seduced.

The quotations were there because even though I know that a child can't consent, people don't see stat rape as evil as other crimes because in the mind's of lot of men this is what they say "Yeah it's not good, but it isn't like she didn't want it. In fact, she probably came on to him."

 

I don't care how mature she looked or acted, there's no mistaking a 13 year old as an adult. If he admitted having sex with her, and even worse drugging her first, this dude should be locked up for a very long time.

I don't know what the laws in California were at the time or how they changed over the years. I also don't know what transpired between the lawyers and judge, but this is no travesty of justice.

 

Don't see anyone hounding Baretta do you?
Why is that?

Rocket River

 

Yea cause MJ, Baretta and OJ were caught on Tape

Rocket River


BTW - the Day in court thing . .that is PGabriel . .. not me . . .
I know . . I know. . we all type th . . . .

 

I don't know about this statement. Some of them dress like total sluts.

Kids get it to easy. 13-18 year olds are cruel evil people. I don't understand why they get so much leniency.

The international community is up in arms about this. I can't believe a guy who raped a 13 year old is getting so much love.

 

yes I would

Rocket River

 

Thank you for your account.
However it kind of proves my point . .. it was MADE into something more
primarily because of the Race component.

and the last part of your list
what because primarily . . . . folx refuse to 'take the loss'
[while expecting black folx to 'get over' the repeated miscarriages of justice that happen on a constant]
They lost . . and they hounded him . . 'until they got him'
Now he will be sentences not on his crime but what they feel he SHOULD have gotten for the 'crime' he supposedly 'got away with'

[quote[
Judge Jackie Glass pronounced the sentence — 33 years behind bars with eligibility for parole after less than a third of that. [/quote]

Really?? Seriously???
Nothing more than a 'Make up Sentence' because they didn't 'get him' the 1st time
Meanwhile . . . I'm suppose to have sympathy for someone who did not
even show up for his trial.


It is simple. RACE MATTERS
In sentencing
In perception of the 'criminal'
In almost everything concerning the criminal justice System

Rocket River

 

I worked in the civil rights division of several state agencies over the course of my career investigating and training. One of the sad things that I learned is that some people ascribe racial bias and discrimination to everything. Everything. Even when it does not exist.

It taints their entire perception of the world to their own detriment to such a degree that we spent a lot of time investigating spurious allegations. It actually makes investigating and prosecuting real racism and discrimination much more difficult.

 

there are just too many suppositions in this account.......that outright rape could not be proved, that the judge was going to renege, that the judge was planning to act on his own personal interests....

i want to also believe that the guy is a good person, considering he has a created many masterpiece films including one of the best portrayals of survival during the holocaust.....

but the facts remain that he's admitted to having a sex with a 13 year old child who has since claimed it was in no way consensual, and that he fled the country as a fugitive and avoided due process of the law for more than 3 decades.....his background or accomplishments can't sugarcoat or cover all this up...

 

Roman Polanski: Wanted & Desired provides a pretty thorough argument for the above claims, including interviewing bailiffs & prosecutors not associated with the case who said on tape they were called in to shoot the breeze with the judge in question, and offer their opinions/guidelines on how much time Polanski should be sentenced to, and how the public would perceive it. This, for a judge who ordered a bailiff to maintain a scrapbook of all press mentions of himself.

In the end, Polanski choosing to stay to receive the favorable deal he worked out with the prosecutor and the judge relied upon him being able to trust the judge's word, at a time when both the defense attorney and prosecutor are on record that the judge repeatedly lied to both them and the public. Polanski chose not to trust the judge's word, figuring that his time served was sufficient punishment according to the agreed-upon deal, and instead fled.

Again, because of the girl's sexual history / drug use and possible motive for seducing Polanski, the government would have had a hard time proving the nonconsensual aspect of their claims. That's why they agreed to a plea bargain concerning only the age-related "unlawful" claim. This sort of thing is not uncommon. People plea down to lesser charges all the time. Often, people are willing to plead guilty to lesser charges if they know they will not serve much jail time even if they believe themselves to be innocent; the stakes are too high with the coin flip of a jury trial.

None of this sugarcoats what Polanski did; clearly, even if he did not forcibly rape the child, because a child cannot give consent, he raped the child. But the judicial system seriously screwed up the case, after-the-fact. If one wishes to ignore what most other statutory rapists got in similar cases, and believes that Polanski deserved to spend the rest of his life in jail, that's one thing. But that's not what happened; the judicial system did not produce this outcome. Polanski was essentially tricked into pleading guilty, promised a lenient sentence, and then was about to have the rug pulled out from under him. To those saying he could have appealed, it would have been highly doubtful he could have won an appeal because he pled guilty.

I don't believe that punishment fit the crime. Possibly I am discounting the charges against him because he is a great artist, true. Justice was certainly not served when Polanski fled. But it would likewise not have been served had he stayed. (Either he would have gotten off with time served, or he would have faced life in prison. How is that fair?)

 

I dunno....Magneto turned out to be a pretty mean b*stard.

 

A 13 year old girl's sexual history. Drug Use? Seducing Polanski?

WOW!

Rocket River
can someone remind me .. . Who was the adult in the room?

 

What difference does that make so long as the judge was acting within the law? It's not like the judge wanted to hang the guy. And I don't know when it became illegal to have an ego, either. And he asks someone's opinion of the public's perception? Imagine that....

So Roman Polanski figures the time he served was enough. Well that's just great. Next time I get a speeding ticket, I'm going to make them pay me, because I'll figure I need some money.

There is no such thing as consensual sex with a minor! Why is this so hard to grasp?? (I see you contradicted yourself below....in bold)

And see below:

What RR said.

I don't know what CA law says, but admitting to drugging a 13yo with booze and ludes is a lot closer to forcible rape than not.

I'm always willing to hear all sides of any argument, and consider them each in kind. But if you rape a 13yo, and use booze and pills to do it to further your end, odds are I'm throwing the effing book at you if I'm the judge, I don't care who the f***k you are.

 

You're not reading me correctly. He wasn't.

 

What proof do you have that he was not?