Roman Polanski

[Ghost of Electricity]

Hey! I made your signature!

yes, and can I humbly beg your permission to steal that line and use as I see fit in the future? I do believe it's a keeper.

[MattZ]

If you make t-shirts, just give me a cut. That's all I ask.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

I felt the need to decloak and suspend my self-imposed exile.

 

There are few issues that are as heinous as adult child sexual interaction. It is the most gross violation of the social contract...in my mind ranking just below murder.

 

Having been a firsthand witness to the devastation that follows this kind of behavior, I cannot fathom how any clear thinking human individual can condone such activity, much less engage in this behavior.

 

It has nothing to do with any religious or political dogma...IT IS WRONG. The ultimate result of unbridled narcissism and hedonism. The ultimate betrayal of trust. The ultimate violation of the social contract.

 

I have almost had my head explode reading some of the posts in this thread and the John Phillips/McKenzie Phillips thread. What is wrong with us? Is fame such an overarching goal/reward that it allows one to be totally excused from acting within societal guidelines?

 

WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?! "Consensual" Incest? Mitigating circumstances for an adult 'seducing'/raping a child? Are you KIDDING me? The world seems unconcerned with the sexual exploitation of young females. Right now, there are thousands of Eurpoean and American men on sex tours looking for young female victims in Asia. These abusers should be ostracized, penalized and scorned...not held up as heroes or (at the most disgusting apologetic extremes) victims of their urges.

 

Incarceration will not repair the devastation that this activity delivers onto the innocent.

But, sometimes society needs to take punative measures to PUNISH.

 

I wish I had had the strength to avoid this board. Right now I am so angry my hands are shaking and my head feels like an artery is about to let go.

 

I'm outta here.

 

Peace.

[ih8music]

I felt the need to decloak and suspend my self-imposed exile.

 

There are few issues that are as heinous as adult child sexual interaction. It is the most gross violation of the social contract...in my mind ranking just below murder.

 

Having been a firsthand witness to the devastation that follows this kind of behavior, I cannot fathom how any clear thinking human individual can condone such activity, much less engage in this behavior.

 

It has nothing to do with any religious or political dogma...IT IS WRONG. The ultimate result of unbridled narcissism and hedonism. The ultimate betrayal of trust. The ultimate violation of the social contract.

 

I have almost had my head explode reading some of the posts in this thread and the John Phillips/McKenzie Phillips thread. What is wrong with us? Is fame such an overarching goal/reward that it allows one to be totally excused from acting within societal guidelines?

 

WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?! "Consensual" Incest? Mitigating circumstances for an adult 'seducing'/raping a child? Are you KIDDING me? The world seems unconcerned with the sexual exploitation of young females. Right now, there are thousands of Eurpoean and American men on sex tours looking for young female victims in Asia. These abusers should be ostracized, penalized and scorned...not held up as heroes or (at the most disgusting apologetic extremes) victims of their urges.

 

Incarceration will not repair the devastation that this activity delivers onto the innocent.

But, sometimes society needs to take punative measures to PUNISH.

 

I wish I had had the strength to avoid this board. Right now I am so angry my hands are shaking and my head feels like an artery is about to let go.

 

I'm outta here.

 

Peace.

 

what he said.

[Oil Can Boyd]

If Polanski had drugged and raped a thirten year old boy this discussion wouldn't be taking place right now because there is no way he would have escaped the country. No plea bargain would ever have been reneged upon because none would ever have been reached. So why is it different because it was a girl?

And similarly, (as Tugmoose asked a couple of pages back) if Polanski was a priest rather than an admired director this discussion probbaly wouldn't be taking place right now.

[Ghost of Electricity]

I felt the need to decloak and suspend my self-imposed exile.

 

There are few issues that are as heinous as adult child sexual interaction. It is the most gross violation of the social contract...in my mind ranking just below murder.

 

Having been a firsthand witness to the devastation that follows this kind of behavior, I cannot fathom how any clear thinking human individual can condone such activity, much less engage in this behavior.

 

It has nothing to do with any religious or political dogma...IT IS WRONG. The ultimate result of unbridled narcissism and hedonism. The ultimate betrayal of trust. The ultimate violation of the social contract.

 

I have almost had my head explode reading some of the posts in this thread and the John Phillips/McKenzie Phillips thread. What is wrong with us? Is fame such an overarching goal/reward that it allows one to be totally excused from acting within societal guidelines?

 

WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?! "Consensual" Incest? Mitigating circumstances for an adult 'seducing'/raping a child? Are you KIDDING me? The world seems unconcerned with the sexual exploitation of young females. Right now, there are thousands of Eurpoean and American men on sex tours looking for young female victims in Asia. These abusers should be ostracized, penalized and scorned...not held up as heroes or (at the most disgusting apologetic extremes) victims of their urges.

 

Incarceration will not repair the devastation that this activity delivers onto the innocent.

 

For once, Crow, I agree with you.

But, sometimes society needs to take punative measures to PUNISH.

 

 

 

...for the most part.

 

There is some logic to the argument that punishment serves as a deterrent, however the statistics (as far as I know) don't back it up. The fact is that stiffer punishments have no bearing upon the frequency at which a given crime occurrs. If Polanski were to be punished as a deterrent or example, therefore , it would seem logical but would not actually be an effective measure to achieve that goal.

 

So we have to ask ourselves, then "why punish?" Is it eye-for-an-eye? Is it simply vengeance? If it is the former, then the logical punishment is illegal because it would fall under the catergory of "cruel and unusual." If it is the latter is justice really being served?

 

I agree wholeheartedly that he should be brought to justice. The difficult question for me is "what is justice?"

 

Peace

 

peace to you too.

[Winston Legthigh]

 

The fact is that stiffer punishments have no bearing upon the frequency at which a given crime occurrs.

 

You've never been to Singapore, have you?

 

Caning is a pretty effective deterrent to vandalism.

[Edie]

I would like to argue that he has already been punished -- 30 years of avoidance and self-imposed exile. Is it the same as additional incarceration? No, definitely not. Sleepless nights? I'll bet. Changing plans/avoiding countries because he feared being extradited? Definitely.

[bleedorange]

I would like to argue that he has already been punished -- 30 years of avoidance and self-imposed exile. Is it the same as additional incarceration? No, definitely not. Sleepless nights? I'll bet. Changing plans/avoiding countries because he feared being extradited? Definitely.

 

So being a fugitive and "hiding out" in France while directing movies and winning Oscars is punishment. If I ever commit a crime, sign me up for that sentence.

[Winston Legthigh]

I would like to argue that he has already been punished -- 30 years of avoidance and self-imposed exile. Is it the same as additional incarceration? No, definitely not. Sleepless nights? I'll bet. Changing plans/avoiding countries because he feared being extradited? Definitely.

Being on the lam is punishment???

 

If someone buys your argument, you should definitely be a litigator.

[caliber66]

I would like to argue that he has already been punished -- 30 years of avoidance and self-imposed exile. Is it the same as additional incarceration? No, definitely not. Sleepless nights? I'll bet. Changing plans/avoiding countries because he feared being extradited? Definitely.

Do criminals get to choose their method of punishment now? And 30 years in Europe directing award-winning movies and with more money than you'll ever need doesn't sound like much of a punishment.

[MattZ]

Edie, you are on the mat, and the referee is counting, and he just got to 9.

[Ghost of Electricity]

You've never been to Singapore, have you?

 

Caning is a pretty effective deterrent to vandalism.

No, I haven't. I would like to go, though.

 

However, I am aware of research that shows a drop in capital crime when capital punishment is abolished.

 

There are other reasons than what I mentioned above for punishment, such as rehabilitation, or to protect the public from that particular individual commiting the rime again. As Polanski is in his mid seventies, doesn't live in the country, and hadn't committed this crime before this incident and hasn't committed it since, neither of these applies in this case.

[Guest Speed Racer]

I would like to argue that he has already been punished -- 30 years of avoidance and self-imposed exile. Is it the same as additional incarceration? No, definitely not. Sleepless nights? I'll bet. Changing plans/avoiding countries because he feared being extradited? Definitely.

 

And to think - he has gone over 30 years without American coffee, and I'll bet he's never even had a McDonald's latte!

[Guest Speed Racer]

As Polanski is in his mid seventies, doesn't live in the country, and hadn't committed this crime before this incident and hasn't committed it since, neither of these applies in this case.

 

Justice should not be overtly retributive, but it should also not be applied with the benefit of hindsight. In 1977, no one knew whether he would offend again. As M. Chris so excellently pointed out, the man is a fugitive with unfinished legal business - that is what he needs to answer for in this case, not some ethereal "justice" or "punishment."

[Ghost of Electricity]

And to think - he has gone over 30 years without American coffee, and I'll bet he's never even had a McDonald's latte!

Whenever anyone visits me i request hazelnut. Since when does McDonanld's have lattes? Are they any good?

[Ghost of Electricity]

Justice should not be overtly retributive, but it should also not be applied with the benefit of hindsight. In 1977, no one knew whether he would offend again.

Good point.

As M. Chris so excellently pointed out, the man is a fugitive with unfinished legal business - that is what he needs to answer for in this case

No, he needs to answer for drugging and raping a thirteen year old girl. After he answers for that, he should also answer for being a fugitive. But the former is a far more heinous crime than the latter.

[Good Old Neon]

I felt the need to decloak and suspend my self-imposed exile.

 

There are few issues that are as heinous as adult child sexual interaction. It is the most gross violation of the social contract...in my mind ranking just below murder.

 

Having been a firsthand witness to the devastation that follows this kind of behavior, I cannot fathom how any clear thinking human individual can condone such activity, much less engage in this behavior.

 

It has nothing to do with any religious or political dogma...IT IS WRONG. The ultimate result of unbridled narcissism and hedonism. The ultimate betrayal of trust. The ultimate violation of the social contract.

 

I have almost had my head explode reading some of the posts in this thread and the John Phillips/McKenzie Phillips thread. What is wrong with us? Is fame such an overarching goal/reward that it allows one to be totally excused from acting within societal guidelines?

 

WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?! "Consensual" Incest? Mitigating circumstances for an adult 'seducing'/raping a child? Are you KIDDING me? The world seems unconcerned with the sexual exploitation of young females. Right now, there are thousands of Eurpoean and American men on sex tours looking for young female victims in Asia. These abusers should be ostracized, penalized and scorned...not held up as heroes or (at the most disgusting apologetic extremes) victims of their urges.

 

Incarceration will not repair the devastation that this activity delivers onto the innocent.

But, sometimes society needs to take punative measures to PUNISH.

 

I wish I had had the strength to avoid this board. Right now I am so angry my hands are shaking and my head feels like an artery is about to let go.

 

I'm outta here.

 

Peace.

 

This should not be construed as a defense of Polanski, because it’s not – what he did is indefensible – however, it should be noted, barring the rape aspect, if we were to go back a hundred or so years, in this country, we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation, and it would have nothing to do with the fact that the internet was not invented yet, and more to do with the fact that is was not uncommon for men of Polanski’s age to have relations, up to and including marital, with girls as young as thirteen. Though it is no longer considered acceptable in this country, outside of certain religions, it is still not uncommon in others.

 

The fact that is considered taboo in this country, among a growing list of others, to me, suggests the opposite of what you’ve stated – that now, more than ever, we are interested in protecting minors from adult exploitation. Until relatively recently in our history, relationships between adult males and under-age females were considered “normal”- in some cases, encouraged by the subjects parents.

[Atticus]

will someone help me out here (because I just don't care enough or have the time to research it myself): did the judge in Polanski's case simply not accept the plea bargain or did he accept it and then change his mind? there is a significant difference between the two.

[bjorn_skurj]

And to think - he has gone over 30 years without American coffee, and I'll bet he's never even had a McDonald's latte!

Well, now we know what to serve him with his bread and water.

[Guest Speed Racer]

No, he needs to answer for drugging and raping a thirteen year old girl. After he answers for that, he should also answer for being a fugitive. But the former is a far more heinous crime than the latter.

 

No, he did already, with the plea bargain - essentially, he simply needs to be present in order for someone to give it the stamp of approval. Most legal experts agree that they will note his sentence for the rape as time served. I'm not arguing about the severity of the crime (because, let's face it, that one's a cakewalk), just the present legal issues at hand.

 

will someone help me out here (because I just don't care enough or have the time to research it myself): did the judge in Polanski's case simply not accept the plea bargain or did he accept it and then change his mind? there is a significant difference between the two.

 

My understanding is that the judge accepted it and changed his mind, after significant pressure to do so from the prosecution.

[Atticus]

My understanding is that the judge accepted it and changed his mind, after significant pressure to do so from the prosecution.

 

well now I'm even more confused, because the prosecution would have been the party recommending the plea to the court.

[Winston Legthigh]

My understanding is that the judge accepted it and changed his mind, after significant pressure to do so from the prosecution.

There's no hard evidence that the judge intended to change the plea bargain. Polanski fled based on a rumor.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

This should not be construed as a defense of Polanski, because it’s not – what he did is indefensible – however, it should be noted, barring the rape aspect, if we were to go back a hundred or so years, in this country, we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation, and it would have nothing to do with the fact that the internet was not invented yet, and more to do with the fact that is was not uncommon for men of Polanski’s age to have relations, up to and including marital, with girls as young as thirteen. Though it is no longer considered acceptable in this country, outside of certain religions, it is still not uncommon in others.

 

The fact that is considered taboo in this country, among a growing list of others, to me, suggests the opposite of what you’ve stated – that now, more than ever, we are interested in protecting minors from adult exploitation. Until relatively recently in our history, relationships between adult males and under-age females was considered “normal”- in some cases, encouraged by the subjects parents.

 

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.

 

I fully understand and accept you argument.

 

However, 144 years ago it was legal in America for a human being to own another human being.

Societies evolve. People evolve.

 

But sometimes...you just have to bring the heavy hand of righteous retribution down on the head of those who commit the most heinous of acts on the most innocent and vulnerable in socity.

 

Period.

[Atticus]

surely coverage of the OJ trial made it to france. doesn't he know by now that he could just come back here and buy his way out of this mess?

 

I think he just doesn't want to have to watch american television while he's here.