Reminder: its OK to be a pedo, if your name is Roman Polanski

[Jenne]

Gotcha.

Moral of the story: Nothing ever good goes down at Jack Nicholson's house when you're 13 years old in the 70s.

Yeah, see my comment on the mother.  Part of me wants to believe she really wanted something like this to happen...but that's my evil jaded side I try to rarely listen to.

Makes sense, there is probably a lot of money in it. 

There is.  Very sad.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

"Geimer testified that Polanski performed various sexual acts on her[33][34][35] after giving her a combination of champagne and quaaludes.[36] Specifically, Geimer's testimony was that Polanski kissed her, performed cunnilingus on her, penetrated her vaginally, and then penetrated her anally, each time after being told 'no' and being asked to stop. [37]"
Cant remember where I saw this, and its not on his wiki page, it might have been hers.
It was from her testimony as far as I know. She has asked for the charges to be dropped since, incidentally he paid her a huge sum of money

So this makes for an interesting quandary.

If the person affected by the acct asks for the prosecution to stop... should it? I saw that she made the comment again that she was unhappy that this had happened... at what point does the law go beyond the victims wishes? It seems that there are a couple arguments here:

1. He's a rapist he might do it again.
2. He must pay for his crime.
3. He skipped out on his court hearing.

The first one seems kinda pointless now... Either he HAS done it again over the past 30 years and kept it quiet, or he hasn't. If he hasn't then its unlikely that he would start now. The second one has some legitimacy, but if he gave some form of restitution to the girl, then hasn't he already 'paid' for his crime? The third one seems pretty straightforward, skipping out on the judge is never smart... but then thats a contempt charge, not a rape charge...

In one sense, I like seeing the law applied to everyone, even if it takes time... on the other hand, this feels a bit like someone trying to make a splash/get points/look good or something, perhaps a bit more than Lady Justice cracking him in the skull with her scales.

IMO, they can hang him for all I care, I mean he raped a kid after all!

[Shibboleet The Annihilator]

Perhaps someone should Do Something About This.

[hooplala]

I wonder if Polanski and John Phillips ever partied together?   

[Jenne]

No, John Phillips kept it closer to home.  Wasn't his kid an adult by then?  I've only heard about the part where he had sex with her the day she got married or something like that.  No less creepy, of course.

I forget how much jailtime Polanski did up at Chino...I think it was 6 mos.  I should look that up, I guess.

ETA:  the quote that struck me as lolwut? yesterday from npr's report was one of the lawyers supporting his arrest said something like "Rape isn't a crime against the victim but a crime against the law" or some such weirdness.  I should look that up to, lol.

[Rumckle]

http://www.screenjunkies.com/movienews/roman-polanski-reviews-hannah-montana

[Jenne]

Har, no, he only did 42 days as a psych eval at Chino.  42 days.  Not that long.  But I think the judge was working on longer sentencing when Polanski fled.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

http://www.screenjunkies.com/movienews/roman-polanski-reviews-hannah-montana

Ewww, just ewww....

[Faust]

"Geimer testified that Polanski performed various sexual acts on her[33][34][35] after giving her a combination of champagne and quaaludes.[36] Specifically, Geimer's testimony was that Polanski kissed her, performed cunnilingus on her, penetrated her vaginally, and then penetrated her anally, each time after being told 'no' and being asked to stop. [37]"
Cant remember where I saw this, and its not on his wiki page, it might have been hers.
It was from her testimony as far as I know. She has asked for the charges to be dropped since, incidentally he paid her a huge sum of money

So this makes for an interesting quandary.

If the person affected by the acct asks for the prosecution to stop... should it? I saw that she made the comment again that she was unhappy that this had happened... at what point does the law go beyond the victims wishes? It seems that there are a couple arguments here:

1. He's a rapist he might do it again.
2. He must pay for his crime.
3. He skipped out on his court hearing.

The first one seems kinda pointless now... Either he HAS done it again over the past 30 years and kept it quiet, or he hasn't. If he hasn't then its unlikely that he would start now. The second one has some legitimacy, but if he gave some form of restitution to the girl, then hasn't he already 'paid' for his crime? The third one seems pretty straightforward, skipping out on the judge is never smart... but then thats a contempt charge, not a rape charge...

In one sense, I like seeing the law applied to everyone, even if it takes time... on the other hand, this feels a bit like someone trying to make a splash/get points/look good or something, perhaps a bit more than Lady Justice cracking him in the skull with her scales.

IMO, they can hang him for all I care, I mean he raped a kid after all!

I don't see it as paying for someones crime, there is no such thing as justice, the sentences are carried out as much to set the standard of the community as they do to appease the victim. Its never been about balance, its about regulating the community.
Arguments against the wishes of the victims: stockholm Syndrom and to a lesser extent what happened in Seven Brides for seven brothers.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

"Geimer testified that Polanski performed various sexual acts on her[33][34][35] after giving her a combination of champagne and quaaludes.[36] Specifically, Geimer's testimony was that Polanski kissed her, performed cunnilingus on her, penetrated her vaginally, and then penetrated her anally, each time after being told 'no' and being asked to stop. [37]"
Cant remember where I saw this, and its not on his wiki page, it might have been hers.
It was from her testimony as far as I know. She has asked for the charges to be dropped since, incidentally he paid her a huge sum of money

So this makes for an interesting quandary.

If the person affected by the acct asks for the prosecution to stop... should it? I saw that she made the comment again that she was unhappy that this had happened... at what point does the law go beyond the victims wishes? It seems that there are a couple arguments here:

1. He's a rapist he might do it again.
2. He must pay for his crime.
3. He skipped out on his court hearing.

The first one seems kinda pointless now... Either he HAS done it again over the past 30 years and kept it quiet, or he hasn't. If he hasn't then its unlikely that he would start now. The second one has some legitimacy, but if he gave some form of restitution to the girl, then hasn't he already 'paid' for his crime? The third one seems pretty straightforward, skipping out on the judge is never smart... but then thats a contempt charge, not a rape charge...

In one sense, I like seeing the law applied to everyone, even if it takes time... on the other hand, this feels a bit like someone trying to make a splash/get points/look good or something, perhaps a bit more than Lady Justice cracking him in the skull with her scales.

IMO, they can hang him for all I care, I mean he raped a kid after all!

I don't see it as paying for someones crime, there is no such thing as justice, the sentences are carried out as much to set the standard of the community as they do to appease the victim. Its never been about balance, its about regulating the community.
Arguments against the wishes of the victims: stockholm Syndrom and to a lesser extent what happened in Seven Brides for seven brothers.

Hrmmm... So then we're going after this guy to set the standard for our nation? I dunno, that sounds kind of hokey too. It seems to me that in a case like this, having him pay her large sums of money and making him a publicly identified sex offender would be more useful to everyone than sticking an old man in jail 30 some years after the fact. I mean, at that point we'll just be paying for him until he dies.

But then, with some frightening exceptions, I've never understood why sticking someone in a cell is better than making them pay with money or labor (community service etc) for their crimes. Sure in jail there's the risk of getting sex0rd up the rectum... but I'm not sure that's something we want to promote as a deterrent...

Though, in this case, maybe a visit from Bubba would be better justice than money 

[Jean-Lustine d'Hadamard]

But then, with some frightening exceptions, I've never understood why sticking someone in a cell is better than making them pay with money or labor (community service etc) for their crimes.

I'd like to point out that it's not so much the getting locked in a cell or being buttfucked, it's deprivation of liberty.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

But then, with some frightening exceptions, I've never understood why sticking someone in a cell is better than making them pay with money or labor (community service etc) for their crimes.

I'd like to point out that it's not so much the getting locked in a cell or being buttfucked, it's deprivation of liberty.

Well, that's a good point.

[Jean-Lustine d'Hadamard]

But then, with some frightening exceptions, I've never understood why sticking someone in a cell is better than making them pay with money or labor (community service etc) for their crimes.

I'd like to point out that it's not so much the getting locked in a cell or being buttfucked, it's deprivation of liberty.

Well, that's a good point.

Thanks. 

[Captain Utopia]

Just wanted to say that the sentiment expressed in the subject line has pissed me off for a few years now as I've encountered it every single time someone has brought up some Polanski film they like, and I explain why I won't support him or his work.

Poor woman though - I bet she wishes this would just all go away - it would have been a dead story decades ago if Polanski had served his time and faded into obscurity rather than serving himself via his career. Way to drag out the pain, fuckhead.

[AFK]

What is the difference between rape and rape-rape.  Is rape-rape when he asks pretty please before the assault?  Great insight there Whoopi.  Thumbs up!