3 of 9
3
Defend Roman Polanski!
Posted: 29 September 2009 08:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11
Jules - 29 September 2009 08:13 PM

Yes Mriana, it is so very sad what abuse can do to a child’s young mind. I believe some never fully recover. They must live with the pain their entire life.

Yes, abused by the very people they naively assume will look after their best interests.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 September 2009 09:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  339
Joined  2008-02-27

Chris,  I would add one other consideration, Polanski’s flight is in and of itself a crime.  I didn’t address that earlier but the victim’s forgiveness doesn’t enter into this crime.  Polanski was released on bond.  Part of the terms were undoubtedly that he would return for sentencing which he obviously failed to do.  The press is focused on the sentence for rape.  I found the statute in the California Penal Code for failure to appear at a felony hearing after being released (S 1320(b))and it’s a felony in and of itself with a sentence ranging from 16 to 36 months.  That may not be the exact statute, but it’s pretty close.

Balak, judging from your answer I guess you don’t think it’s a crime for a 44 year old man to force himself on a 13 year old.  It’s safe to say your views are inconsistent with those of just about everyone in the free and not so free world as was ably pointed out by Chris.  As has been pointed out here by Jules, Asanta and Mriana, rape is devastating to the victim, they are usually never the same afterwards and it affects their relationships and even daily lives. 

The victimless crime comment is one of the most ignorant things I have read on this site. 

I can’t believe anyone would cite the Holocaust as a defense.  Anyone who suffered through that crime against humanity should have a heightened sense of how power can be used to abuse the weak and innocent. 

Asanta, you are the voice of reason and common sense as usual.

[ Edited: 29 September 2009 09:46 PM by JRM5001 ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 September 2009 09:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11
JRM5001 - 29 September 2009 09:35 PM

Chris,  I would add one other consideration, Polanski’s flight is in and of itself a crime.  I didn’t address that earlier but the victim’s forgiveness doesn’t enter into this crime.  Polanski was released on bond.  Part of the terms were undoubtedly that he would return for sentencing which he obviously failed to do.  The press is focused on the sentence for rape.  I found the statute in the California Penal Code for failure to appear at a felony hearing after being released (S 1320(b))and it’s a felony in and of itself with a sentence ranging from 16 to 36 months.  That may not be the exact statute, but it’s pretty close.

Balak, judging from your answer I guess you don’t think it’s a crime for a 44 year old man to force himself on a 13 year old.  It’s safe to say your views are inconsistent with those of just about everyone in the free and not so free world as was ably pointed out by Chris.  As has been pointed out here by Jules, Asanta and Mriana, rape is devastating to the victim, they are usually never the same afterwards and it affects their relationships and even daily lives. 

The victimless crime comment is one of the most ignorant things I have read on this site. 

I can’t believe anyone would cite the Holocaust as a defense.  Anyone who suffered through that crime against humanity should have a heightened sense of how power can be used to abuse the weak and innocent. 

Asanta, you are the voice of reason and common sense as usual.

It would seem to me that everyone posting on this thread appears reasonable excepting (unfortunately) Balak.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 September 2009 10:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11

As a newcomer to the US in the 70s I was the victim of an attempted kidnapping (probable sexual assault or more) and beating by a stranger. I had been walking down the street past a park with a girlfriend at the time, and we were on our way home. The perpetrator drove by and attempted to start a conversation with us, and we politely rebuffed him. He surprised us and was able to grab me. My girlfriend managed to escape and run hysterically home for help. I turned out to be more trouble than my assailant anticipated as he attempted to drag me into his car. He just ended up giving me a severe beating before abandoning an effort that was surely taking a lot longer than he thought it would. Despite the fact that I was a young girl (almost 15) and had been beaten and was obviously traumatized, the police refused to take a report. The insinuated that I’d somehow enticed the assailant by my behavior (I was wearing a miniskirt, like every other girl of my age). I was an intellegent and articulate teen, as were my parents, but while I was too traumatized to give a description, my girlfriend could. They would not take her statement, because SHE was not attacked. The case ended there. That was being twice victimized, when the police who were supposed to protect me treated me as if I were a prostitute having a spat with a john.
  The reason I am talking about this, is to give you an idea of what the common reaction at the time was to rape or an attack of this sort. My experience was rather the rule and not (unfortunately) the exception. You cannot imagine how things have changed since then. We have seen all of the celebrities getting a pass on heinous behavior (I believe you defended OJ and Scott Peterson as well), the evidence was obviously too compelling to allow them to sweep it under the rug and ignore as they did MY assailant, who probably continued to victimize others.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 September 2009 10:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1995
Joined  2008-09-18

Good point, JRM5001; I had overlooked the fact that jumping bail is itself a crime. But yes, even if the victim had forgiven him (which she has not done), his jumping bail constitutes a flouting of the justice system that is itself punishable. I have been wavering on the overall issue, but reading interviews with the victim and now this point you make have swung me hard over to the “hang ‘em high” position.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 September 2009 05:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  342
Joined  2008-01-11

Assanta, I’m very sorry to hear of your horrible experience. I hope that the perpetrator was eventually caught and dealt with (in a rational and humane manner).

As to the model of rational discussion on display here - I now understand the underlying principle. Anyone who defends a ‘witch’ must him/herself be… A WITCH!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 September 2009 06:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

Balak, this guy is most likely going to Walk anyways. This is 95% of the reason I want to see him answer now. Many of us would never have the resources to defend ourselves against charges such as these.
He’ll walk, and you’ll be able to tell yourself that “Justice” was served. As for his current temporary confinement, perhaps it will be fodder for a New Movie Idea.
If on the other hand he gets bagged, then I’ll be waiting for the UBS connection to come out in the papers. Just like the Lockerbie Bomber Release for Oil Contracts came out.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 September 2009 07:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11
Balak - 30 September 2009 05:07 AM

Assanta, I’m very sorry to hear of your horrible experience. I hope that the perpetrator was eventually caught and dealt with (in a rational and humane manner).

As to the model of rational discussion on display here - I now understand the underlying principle. Anyone who defends a ‘witch’ must him/herself be… A WITCH!

I don’t need your sympathy. That was NOT the point of the post. The point YOU missed was the description of the treatment of VICTIMS in the 1970s.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 September 2009 12:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  324
Joined  2009-04-23
Balak - 28 September 2009 06:12 PM

MVD’s faith in the goodwill of state authorities is truly touching. Kind of like a kid that still believes in santa… 

Plea bargaining is a standard feature of the “justice” system. Completely innocent people plead ‘guilty’ to false charges all the time. This in itself tells you nothing whatsoever about what actually happened.

Another news flash girls and boys! Prosecutors and judges use hot-button cases and issues to build political careers. These were the same dirty tricks they used against the late Michael Jackson, but - possibly thanks to Polanski’s case - he went into the shite-storm a bit wiser as to the workings of the state witch-hunters.

The ceaseless cowering and grovelling of liberals before the right-wing culture warriors - as expressed in their willingness to throw people like Polanski under the bus - is no small indicator of their political impotence on the ‘important issues’ (!) as well.

Perspective, perspective, perspective.  It is easy to get on a rant about, “oh, you don’t know what is really going on.”  Here’s an example:  Balak, you are so naive to think that a big-shot hollywood type doesn’t just spin the DA around his fingers and duck 14 counts and mush it down to one little, sex with a minor charge.  To think that you could look at this case any other way just shows that you are completely fooled by the rich and wealthy and fall into their trap that they are better than the average person.  Just look at OJ if he wasn’t rich and famous he would have served a life sentence for killing his wife.

See how easy that was, of course mine was not representative of what I think and it was much less volatile than yours, but you get the point.  The truth is WHO KNOWS what the D.A’s, Polanski’s, the judge’s, Switzerland’s, any of these people’s motives are because none of us can read minds.  You may THINK you know what is “really going on” but that is just conspiracy 101 horse poopy.  There is only one fact that is relevant, regardless if the prosecutor or judge or Polanski have other motives, he raped a 13 year old girl.  Period, end of story.  He should have went to jail, and anybody else would have.  We wouldn’t even be discussing this case if it were any other person.  All those people in hollywood that are behind Polanski remind me of a family in denial about their creepy, pedophile relative.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 September 2009 12:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  324
Joined  2009-04-23
Balak - 29 September 2009 01:33 PM

The loaded, hot-button words ‘apply’ because you, the prosecutors, the media, and rest of the moral panic brigade keep applying them - evidently in order to whip yourselves into self-righteous hysteria (the actual charge was not ‘rape’ but something like ‘unlawful sex with a person under age.’).

You have some nerve with all of your attacks and ridiculous rhetoric.  HE RAPED THE GIRL!!!  Period, end of story.  The fact that the charge was sex with a minor doesn’t change what he did.  What are you running a support group for pedophiles???  Give me a break!

As I pointed out, neither you nor I know what happened between Polanski and Gailey 30 years ago.

You are deluded!  Polanski said they had sex.  Sex with a 13 year old girl IS rape!  Get a grip, stop with your political correctness, it doesn’t match the derisive tone that you have taken throughout the thread.  I don’t care if Gailey was on her knees begging for the sex.  Having sex with a 13 year old girl is rape.  END OF STORY!

Your posts are beyond ridiculous, if you believe that 40 year olds should have sex with preteens you are not only perverse, but you should also be locked up.  Parents have enough problems keeping their kids safe without disturbed people justifying pedophilia.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 September 2009 01:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  324
Joined  2009-04-23
Balak - 29 September 2009 06:34 PM

Again, I cannot speak to the specifics of this case, and neither can you. Why exactly is it impossible for a 13-year-old to consent to or actively desire sexual activity?  But the entire premise of ‘age of consent laws’ is based on an ideological fantasy: i.e. that children are non-sexual beings until midnight on their 18th (or whichever arbitrarily selected) birthday. This supposition not only flies in the face of everything we know about human development, evolution, the sexual practices of human beings (probably other primates as well), but also denies the real personal experience of the overwhelming majority of people.

OHHHH, now I understand.  You are completely ignorant about being 13.  Either you skipped that age, or you blocked it out.  At 13 you do not have the emotional capacity to enter into sexual relationships or even make sense of your sexual wants or desires, because the quick shift in hormones that is taking place is rapid and foreign.  Sexual encounters at young ages lead to very troubling mental and emotional problems.  Here is some information for you.  Maybe after you do a little research then you can have a discussion.

http://www.4parents.gov/sexrisky/emotional/emotional.html

Armour conducted the study with Dana Haynie, associate professor of sociology at Ohio State . Their results appear in the February 2007 issue of the Journal of Youth and Adolescence.

“The findings point out the importance of acting within normal bounds for your age group,” Haynie said. “Those who start having sex too young may not be prepared to deal with the potential emotional, social and behavioral consequences of their actions.” ( http://www.physorg.com/news91723968.html )

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 September 2009 04:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11

Chicken, I believe he has also defended OJ Simpson and Scott Peterson in previous threads. I think he only defends those who perpetrate violence against women. mad

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 September 2009 08:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  339
Joined  2008-02-27

Asanta,

I thought of your comparison to priests with this comment in an LA Times blog:

David Clohessy, national director of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, said he hears echos of “Polanski’s apologists” in the scandal over child abuse in the Roman Catholic priests.

“In both cases we have the public and secular authorities giving every benefit of the doubt to clear wrongdoers just by virtue of their exalted positions. You could easily say if Polanski was a priest, he would be easily jailed,” Clohessy said. “Somehow if you can make movies, dance well, shoot a basketball, essentially accumulate wealth or power and then you are somehow exempt from the basic societal laws and expectations. By not pursuing Polanski, we send a very disturbing message to criminals. Make yourself popular, get good lawyers, flee the country and you are home free.”

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/roman-polanski-backers-sending-wrong-message-about-rape-minimizing-directors-crimes-critics-say.html

Chicken, I think you will appreciate this article in Salon;

http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/09/28/polanski_arrest/index.html

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 September 2009 08:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11

JRM5001, thanks for the links! smile

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 October 2009 12:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2007-08-31

OK, let’s mingle in too a little.

Roman Polanski gets Oscar support from unlikely source

That is one.

Second: a lot of crimes, much worse (yes, please, there are deeds that are even more terrible than terrible) which have a period of prescription of 30 years. This is especially interesting in Switzerland, where except some very special cases (war crimes, crimes against humanity) crimes also have a period of prescription of 30 years. Now the most interesting part: it is only since last year that in a ‘referendum’ the Swiss choose in favour of an unlimited period of description for child abuse. The present minister (secretary of state, a legal practitioner) for justice pleaded very strong against it, just because the above: the balance between crimes with and without period of prescription would be lost. Normally, a state (CH in this case) does not deliver citizens of any country to another country (USA) when the crime is not a crime in the country where the supposed criminal resides. This is the whole legal background of the tax quarrels between CH and the USA. But now, the secretary of state defends the arrest of Polanski, referring to the fact that child abuse has an unlimited period of prescription. Add to it that Polanski has a holiday home in CH and please add 1 and 1 (and 1) together: the tax quarrel ending in a new ‘friendship between CH and USA’, a minister defending the arrest on ground she herself does not agree with, and endless possibilities to have hime arrested before.

Third: a comparison was made with priests committing child abuse. This is thought provoking, and this one comes to mind: these priests were supposed to care for the children. So in my opinion there is a difference.

Fourth: there is some personal irritation between the US prosecutor and Polanski. Polanski may be guilty of that too, but a prosecutor should be neutral as a prosecutor. Interestingly, Polanski’s lawyers wanted to shift the case to another court, but it was refused. Why? I have my thoughts.

Fifth: (and this is really the last one, bungling a little behind the previous points). Polanski really did something for culture that counts. Did you see the Pianist? By educating people with this film he surely did some good (at least I got some more insights in the psychological background of Nazis, how it can be based on daily personal traits that most people have). It should at least count for some punishment reduction… But I agree that justice must be blind for the person it is punishing. The ‘deeder of the crime’ is punished, whatever his social or cultural status is.

So putting everything together: I hope he does get away with it. If you agree yourself with a period of prescription of 30 years for child abuse, also compared to other crimes, is a special question, but I am inclined to agree with this.

It is a stinking case, and it might not feel quite good that Polanski comes away with it, but the present circumstances, in my opinion, do not justify his arrest.

GdB

PS Never wrote about legal stuff in english before. I hope that at least it is clear what I mean. If I use some words or concepts wrong, feel free to correct me. As a lot of forum members already said, it is great to learn from this forum!

[ Edited: 01 October 2009 12:11 AM by GdB ]
 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 9
3