[Closed] Polanski

it's 'cos the swiss didn't gie him the same treatment as the French (i.e. pretend it hadn't happened), I think.

French minister saying its unfair. WTF. Hes even admitted to the charge. So.....why is he shocked now that the Swiss have arrested him due to the extradition treaty between Swiss/US? Hes flouted it for years and even has a house in Switzerland. Tough.

Another thing- I read somewhere hes blaming the rape on the 1969 murder of his then wife. So does that make one intentionally drug and ply a minor with alcohol?

Wasn't it something to do with extradition only being valid if the offence was a crime in the country where you are?

NB - I'm not sure of the law in France regarding very young girls

He plead guilty so he won't be facing a trial just jail.

As for why people are reallying round, well he's French (no extradition treaty with the US) and a famous film director and therefore deserving of special treatment, apparently.

Actually from what little reading I've done on the matter there may be some problems with the way the original trial was conducted.

OK, not trial, but face the consequences of sleeping with a 13 year old.

I can understand critism about the nature of the arrest, but the film industry and the French govenrment seem to be acting like he has been done for speeding.

jon1973 he is a 'créateur and a artiste'

he is a 'créateur and a artiste'

He'll fit in just fine with his new room mates in some hard core American Prison then. 🙂

He was 46 when he committed the offence so he was a dirty old man, undeserving of support. Having said that, I think that the views of the victim ought to be taken into account, and she's said that she doesn't want him to go to jail.

People are doing a comparison between the seriousness of what he did and his greatness as an artist, applying a discount for the fact that it happened three decades ago and wondering why the US still care so much, aren't they?

I'm not going to try and trivialise what he is supposed to have done. But the fact of the matter is that the people prosecuting him accepted a plea of guilty on a single charge of intercourse with a minor. If someone was wanted for that crime (not having been convicted and then fled) no-one would be trying to enforce a warrant at all 31 years after the event. They simply wouldn't care.

This is a big issue only because he fled the US and has stayed out of their clutches since. He is going to get clobbered basically for that.

A lot of people reckon that his record as an artist weighs quite heavily against the US desire to prove a point. 😐

Hadn't he agreed a plea bargain for 'time served' [~43 days] anyway?

I think that the views of the victim ought to be taken into account, and she's said that she doesn't want him to go to jail.

Err no. If the justice system worked that way witnesses and victims would be open to threats, inducements (which is what I think happened to her) and violence.

Hadn't he agreed a plea bargain for 'time served' [~43 days] anyway?

Time on remand whilst assessment was being carried out.

I don’t understand all the handwringing – he was in his 40s when he plied a child with drink and drugs, then sodomised her. He admitted to it, was convicted, then fled the country and avoided serving his time for the past 30 years. Yet for some reason, he’s been treated like a victim – I genuinely don’t get it.

Even if she was a willing participant (which she said she wasn’t), she was 13 – I’m sure that society’s values haven’t shifted so much that a middle-aged man providing a child with intoxicating substances then nobbing them isn’t still seen as being a wee bit taboo…

The victim said that she wants the matter dropped, but only because she finds it traumatic and fairly pointless to keep going over.

...

Err no. If the justice system worked that way witnesses and victims would be open to threats, inducements (which is what I think happened to her) and violence.

A rape trial would not go to trial if the victim refused to testify.

It is interesting how we villify paedos but turn a blind eye to famous ones such as Pete Townsend and Polanski.
It is hypocrisy and it stinks.
FFS he drugged and sexually assaulted / sodomised/ raped a minor aged 13 when he was 43. Whatever his artistic merits he deserves to do time. I sound like I am sharpening my pitchfork and getting the burning cross BUT is he REALLY any different from other less well know child rapists?
Does he deserve different treatment?

A rape trial would not go to trial if the victim refused to testify.

Even if they admitted to it? In the US, sleeping with a 13 year old is Statutory Rape.

But ... it seems like some jobsworth in Switzerland saw a chance to make a name for themselves and have him arrested. Now they can't let him go, for the reasons outlined above, but if they send him back to the US, having been quite happily accommodating him for the last decade, then they, as well as the US, look like vindictive idiots, and persecutors of tortured artists. No win.

I'm not on top of this, but it seems to be quite important:

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/28/roman-polanski-arrest-switzerland ]It is precisely in the light of the new evidence revealed by this documentary that Roman Polanski's lawyers asked the US justice department a few months ago for the case to be closed. While recognising the presence of new elements in the dossier and acknowledging the "substantial misconduct " of Judge Rittenband, the Los Angeles court in charge of the dossier declared the case couldn't be closed while Polanski was still technically a fugitive. That decision is still being appealed by Polanski's lawyers[/url]

[i]FFS he drugged and sexually assaulted / sodomised/ raped a minor aged 13 when he was 43. Whatever his artistic merits he deserves to do time. I sound like I am sharpening my pitchfork and getting the burning cross BUT is he REALLY any different from other less well know child rapists?[/i]

I agree in principle, but prosecutors don't agree plea bargains when they are entirely confident of getting convictions. He was not convicted of (actual as opposed to "statutory") rape, sodomy or plying people with drugs. While it clearly wasn't a luminous episode in the history of human morality, I'm not very comfortable with pitchforking as though he had been convicted of everything he was accused of.

I reckon a deal will be done where he goes back to the US to clear up the paperwork & the original plea bargain will be implemented

Even if they admitted to it? In the US, sleeping with a 13 year old is Statutory Rape.

In that case there wouldn't be a trial, only sentencing. All I am saying is that the victim [i]does[/i] have a say in some circumstances.

Basically what BigDummy said, RP agreed to a plea bargin so he would only serve the 41 days he had already done. Then the Judge changed his mind and wanted to impose the maximum (15yr) sentance. RP legs it.
So i can see why some people think RP has been hard done by.
But, RP has paid the girl a undisclosed sum out of court as damages.
So in the same way the prosecutors were happy to do a deal on iffy evidence to convict him. He was happy to settle out of court when the girl sued him.

Sounds like a Guilty man to me, but what this achives is beyond me.

If he has been found guilty of an offence then he should be returned to that country to serve said time of have the case reviewed by that court again.

Can't see why or how it should work another way.

The fact he has had sex with a child just revolts me even more

If he wasn't famous then he'd have been sent back to serve his time long ago - and quite right too.

He admitted raping a 13-year girl and fled justice. Don't see why anyone should be arguing in his favour.

I think Mrs Polanski will need comforting during this difficult period. And I would like to volunteer for the job.

"I think Mrs Polanski will need comforting during this difficult period. And I would like to volunteer for the job."

But could you pick her up a 3pm.

It comes down to this. If you are fashionable or respected for your abilility in making entertainment by a tiny but influencial faction of society you can drug and rape 13yr old girls. "Liberals" the world over will write letters of support, and make reference to your childhood in newspaper articles as mitigation.

"Jack said she was 13....". Oh yes. Jack. Now what was he doing at the time I wonder?

Neil Young lyrics, (revolution blues)

"Well, I hear that Laurel Canyon
is full of famous stars,
But I hate them
worse than lepers
and I'll kill them
in their cars."

Apparently Polanski's original defence was basically the fact that the girl was "up for it" 😕

It is also believed that he was having a relationship with Natasha Kinski when she was 15.

From my perspective, if you're famous but a bit crap at whatever you do, then you'll be vilified if you do something wrong i.e. Gary Glitter

On the flipside, if you're famous and very good at what you do, then hey ho, folk will ignore the fact you like beasting young children i.e. Roman Polanski, Pete Townshend etc

boardinbob is correct

jonathan king - "annoying man off telly" -0 sympathy when he's banged up

Bill Wyman - "that's fine Bill, you just sleep with a 13 year old, the stones are awesome"

To be fair though, she was a bit of a hottie

From that picture, I'd say she looked like a child. Let's see If I get [b]banned[/b] for suggesting that you are a [b]Paedophile[/b] Labrat. I'm only suggesting mind, as I doubt a real paedo would be so open about his tastes. So, I suppose Labrat is a [b]fake paedo attention seeker[/b]. That's sad.

[img] [/img]

😉

Is Labrat a [b]fake paedo attention seeker[/b]

or,

is Labrat [b]a fake paedo attention seeker[/b] who wants to be Chris Morris, but is Labrat?

I doubt a real paedo would be so open about his tastes

Why not ? Maybe that's the attraction ......... like a danger w4nk. Certainly he posted it for a reaction.

.......or maybe it's a case of double bluff ?

In Labrat's world, we are pwned Ernie.

I doubt a real paedo would be so open about his tastes

Clearly you've never heard about NAMBLA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association

As for why people are reallying round, well he's French
He isn't, he's Polish who resides in France.
Sex with a 13y.o. girl - not on, whoever you are.
Sex with Natasha Kinsky - well, well....

 

Clearly you've never heard about NAMBLA

Quality leftfield post of the day!

Edit: Oh. I actually thought NAMBLA was a figment of South Parks imagination. It actually exists. WHAT THE ****.

nonse = hang him

Must admit. When in the world does it make it ok for a 46 yr old to sleep with a school girl?

Damn - I think I just agreed with Hora twice!

It may be legal in some countries. Its neither moral or legal in this country. Again, a grown man drugging and having sex with a minor.

Theres something seriously wrong with a man who needs to incapacitate any female for sex.

Never bought a bottle of wine for the wife then Hora?? 😉

I've been tempted to hit her with one.

[i]When in the world does it make it ok for a 46 yr old to sleep with a school girl?[/i]
When it's for artistic merit.

Ian Munro - Member

When in the world does it make it ok for a 46 yr old to sleep with a school girl?
When it's for artistic merit.

and when a grown man admits to sleeping with children in his bed.....but its Michael Jackson. Hes an eternal child folks!

Remove their celebrity and they would have been arrested/vilified within no time.

What about 'famous rock star' (name removed for potential legal reasons?) who accepted that he was in possession of child porn for 'research purposes'? WTF.

Rumour as it that there's a sex tape of it.

It'll be the only Polanski directed film I've not seen.

Funny. Woody Allen looks like he should be one and isnt.
Polanski looks 'normal' and is

hora - Member
Funny. Woody Allen looks like he should be one and isnt.
Polanski looks 'normal' and is

isn't he? I'm not sure having a relationship with your adopted daughter is really cricket

Junkyard: You might be being libellous in suggesting that Townsend is a paedo. Mods?

From Wiki

As part of the Operation Ore investigations, Townshend was cautioned by the police in 2003 after acknowledging a credit card access in 1999 to the Landslide website alleged to advertise child pornography.[19][20] He stated in the press and on his website that he had been engaged in research for A Different Bomb (a now-abandoned book based on an anti-child pornography essay published on his website in January 2002) and his autobiography, and as part of a campaign against child pornography. The police searched his house and confiscated 14 computers and other materials, and after a four-month forensic investigation confirmed that they had found no evidence of child abuse images. Consequently, the police offered a caution rather than pressing charges, issuing a statement: "After four months of investigation by officers from Scotland Yard's child protection group, it was established that Mr Townshend was not in possession of any downloaded child abuse images." In a statement issued by his solicitor,[21] Townshend said, "I accept that I was wrong to access this site, and that by doing so, I broke the law, and I have accepted the caution that the police have given me." As a statutory consequence of accepting the caution, Townshend was entered on the Violent and Sex Offender Register for five years.

You have a point there so to clarify he is NOT a paedo but he did pay to access a website that advertised child pornography (allegedly). Presumably an easy mistake we could all have done at any time and is/ was on on the sex register.
I incorrectly thought they had found images on his computer and he had been convicted of posessing images of child abuse. I retract the statement as I was wrong about Mr Townsend he is not a Paedo just a cautioned individual on /has been on the sex offender list.

I doubt he is in to MTB but fairpoint Buzz. Apologies Mods/Mtr Townshend

I like the idea that he's now feeling as scared as she was.

She might well have forgiven* him, but I bet her dad hasn't.

*sometimes you have to forgive, just to stop the deed from driving you bitter and insane.

*and in reference to the other thread - why do christians seem to think they've got the monopoly on forgiveness?

*sometimes you have to forgive, just to stop the deed from driving you bitter and insane.

Agree. As I said earlier. The victim can not have a say in sentencing due to cohesion, threats, persuasion and influence. Its the law who decides the punishment for this reason.

Plus, how easy would it be for a rich Felon to pay off the victim or their family to avoid jail in this case?

One or two of you may think this is a bit of an over-reaction, or that I'm being a little overly sensitive, but as an experienced mental health professional currently working within a forensic setting, people posting comments on here describing the victim as a 'hottie' or offering to 'tap that ass' concern me somewhat - are you just trying to be ironic, or are you seriously such a pair of psychopathic ****s?

OP. Is the sex good? Yes. Stay, so-so. move on.

Wrong topic. Thought I'd leave it there though as its bizarre!

Money and fame buy freedom and 'friends'.
Polanski is scum.
One of the papers has published a transcript of what he said to the child at the time. I dont know how anyone thinks that kind of approach to a kid is ever ok or forgiveable.

How the hell do you accidently pay for pedo porn Junkyard? I don't agree with that unless you are Ray Charles 8)

He ran off, they waited, he got caught.

They will have some/susp. evidence to have had arrested him and he will have to do the time/treatment etc.

Serious question mitch. Does being a "mental health professional currently working within a forensic setting" actually involve reading the internet to see whether people are entertaining deviant sexual fantasies?

I ask only for information.

One of the papers has published a transcript of what he said to the child at the time. I dont know how anyone thinks that kind of approach to a kid is ever ok or forgivable.

Society has a understanding that if someone makes it to old age before being caught he (or she) is more than likely allowed leniency on 'grounds of compassion'?

Personally I believe no matter who you are or what you've done..you do the crime you pay.

isn't he? I'm not sure having a relationship with your adopted daughter is really cricket

While his behaviour may have been grossly inappropriate, she was never his adopted daughter.

She was the legal daughter of Previn and Farrow?

surely if it does go to trial again in the usa all his money will ensure he's let off just like oj, mj etc but them he does look like phil spector so maybe he will go down

Bigdummy - can you clarify your question? Obviously, I'm bound by my professional code of conduct, and therefore can't give too much information.

How the hell do you accidently pay for pedo porn Junkyard?

Easy I'd say: Let's say you decide to pay for frot. God knows why you would, given that the Internet is creaking at the seams with free filth, but maybe your tastes are a little "specialist". So you find an advert for "hot lactating Nazi midget porn" (certainly "specialist", but not illegal) and you enter your credit card details.

Unbeknownst to you, the same site has a completely different advert that says they have kiddie fiddler stuff.

Congratulations: you just "accidentally paid for pedo porn" and despite not intending to and not seeing or downloading any of it, you will be placed on the register and your life is forever altered. 😐

"hot lactating Nazi midget porn"

💡

*starts searching*

I read a rambling (and long) editorial in the Telegraph yesterday basically it was very pro-Polanski. It did let slip (one line) that the victim had sued Polanski and he had settled out of court with her. Strange.

[i]I read a rambling [b](and long)[/b] editorial[/i]

I don't believe you. 😉

Well I cant read thats true but I followed the big pictures whilst my gf read to me after putting me to bed 😳

Hi BigDummy: I left a post yesterday asking if you could clarify your question to me - cheers.

It seems a fairly clear question, could you clarify what you find unclear? 🙂

Could you clarify what was the point that required clarification and the clarity to that point?

Sarky get! I was unsure whether BigDummy was asking if it was part of my job role to 'readthe internet to see whether people are entertaining deviant sexual fantasies?', or inferring that I was over-reacting in some way. There were a couple of posts on this thread (now removed) that were seriously worrying - one in particular calling for the age of consent to be lowered. I hear this sort of crap day in day out at work, and whilst I expect this from some of the clients I work with, I feel saddened and concerned when I read it on a chat forum involving supposedly rational people.

I think BD's asking if you're the Paedofinder General

No, just one of the many people involved in trying to minimise the risk presented by paedophiles and other sex offenders.

There were a couple of posts on this thread (now removed) that were seriously worrying - one in particular calling for the age of consent to be lowered.

So, why is the suggestion that the age of consent could be lowered seriously worrying? (no idea what was written in the (presumably deleted) post?
A quick look suggests that the age in this country is one of the higher in Europe.

It wouldn't matter if the girl had been above the age of consent: Polanski drugged and raped her.

So, why is the suggestion that the age of consent could be lowered seriously worrying? (no idea what was written in the (presumably deleted) post?

Because having sex with children (ie below the age of 16) is wrong. Do you seriously need to have that pointed out?

Because having sex with children (ie below the age of 16) is wrong. Do you seriously need to have that pointed out?

Other than legality, why is it wrong at 15, but right at 16? I wouldn't do either, but conceivably might have slept with a 15 year-old when I was 16 myself. That would have been a serious crime.