22
   

Why Did Roman Polanski Run Away?

 
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 11:52 am
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Quote:
And this was no ordinary child so knock off milking that udder. She was working, no doubt with a pushy Mum behind her, for a model agency in Hollywood.


Quote:
You're aparently as sick as Shorteyes. The victim was a 13 year old child, and your slandering of the victim is disgusting.
This is a child, Spendy:


Why was I slandering the girl? Isn't what I said about her a known fact.
No, it isn't a known fact. It is a bogus assertion. In truth, she was was not working, rather she was manipulated into believing she had a shot at being a cover girl by a shorteyed sicko, and was excited by the prospect. Her mom was unaware that the pervert had even taken topless shots let alone raped her, and I suspect you just made up the nonsense about "working for a modeling agency in Hollywoood. None of that is known fact; it's slander. What motivates you to slander this victim?

spendius wrote:
She wasn't an ordinary child. And there is no rape proved yet and you continually equating this incident with a pervert grabbing a young girl and forcing her is another blatant sophistry. Your statements are prejudicing a fair trial as well.
Yes, she was an ordinary child. Polanski manipulated her into thinking she might be something special to get her clothes off in front of his personal camera, with no crew, at a private residence. The only reason you can even pretend "no rape was proved yet" is because he plead guilty to facts that amount to rape, under a softer title. This plea deal read in the more serious charges and morally it makes no difference what the charge is; the piece of **** admitted guilt by pleaing guilty.
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 11:54 am
Bill wrote:
In large part, the quality of justice is indeed for sale.

And I'm not happy with that..


and wrote:
the law is what the law is.

And the enforcement of the law is quite another matter, subject to too many external constraints..

and wrote:
That provides no basis to exasperate the problem by giving the rich and powerful further means to exploit their advantages.

Nor basis to not treat them as the usual suspect, precisely because they are rich and famous..
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 12:11 pm
@Francis,
Francis wrote:

Bill wrote:
In large part, the quality of justice is indeed for sale.

And I'm not happy with that..


and wrote:
the law is what the law is.

And the enforcement of the law is quite another matter, subject to too many external constraints..

and wrote:
That provides no basis to exasperate the problem by giving the rich and powerful further means to exploit their advantages.

Nor basis to not treat them as the usual suspect, precisely because they are rich and famous..
The "usual suspect" would have been talked into a plea deal, by his too busy attorney, and plead guilty to a worse charge with a longer sentence and he'd have been remanded the entire time. He would not have gotten the sweetheart deal in the first place, let alone had the means to flea and cower in France.

No one would consider dropping the charges on the “usual suspect”, simply because he was good at his job or successfully absconded to another country. The “usual suspect” would be almost universally despised by all but fellow sickos.
0 Replies
 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 12:17 pm
Bill wrote:
The “usual suspect” would be almost universally despised by all but fellow sickos.


You are good in attributing such devilish qualities to your opponents, Bill.

Your "universality" seems to be not so universally shared..

Anyway, thanks for the "sickos"...
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 12:21 pm
What was she doing at the photo shoot with a known Bohemian unchaperoned?

That alone makes her not ordinary.

I notice we have arrived at "facts amounting rape". Rape has a wide spectrum. I hold no brief for Polanski but I'm sure he is at the milder end of the spectrum of facts amounting to rape.

Germaine Greer said that all men are rapists based on the idea that women are manipulated by the economic system which, it is alleged, men created for that very reason. The use of the word "rape" in this case is part of the feminist agenda and men should beware of falling for it lest we all end up in jail if fat compensations are manipulated into existence on the morning after to provide lawyers with an endless supply of profitable and juicy cases with the associated publicity.

What sentence is proposed for the rapist who way-lays a 13 year old Girl Guide in the woods on her way home from choir practice and forces her at knifepoint and leaves her sobbing and dishevelled to find her own way home.

The equating of Polanski's offence with that is patently ridiculous.

I would go so far as suspecting certain parties make a meal of these cases in order to put the idea into the heads of some people so that there will be more cases and thus more money to be made. Media obviously plays along as juicy copy is not only easy to do but sells well.






OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 12:29 pm
@Francis,
Francis wrote:

Bill wrote:
The “usual suspect” would be almost universally despised by all but fellow sickos.


You are good in attributing such devilish qualities to your opponents, Bill.

Your "universality" seems to be not so universally shared..

Anyway, thanks for the "sickos"...
I was referring to the wagon's being circled around an accused child rapist, in 1977, Francis. The press would have been calling for "the usual suspect's head." This guy got treated with kid gloves precisely because of his stature, not the facts of this case.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 12:37 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
What sentence is proposed for the rapist who way-lays a 13 year old Girl Guide in the woods on her way home from choir practice and forces her at knifepoint and leaves her sobbing and dishevelled to find her own way home.

The equating of Polanski's offence with that is patently ridiculous.

exactly, and if you were polanski and the day before sentencing the judge tells your lawyer that he is going to throw out the deal, throw out the advice given to him in two sentencing recommendations that no jail time was in order, and give you fifty years because he does not want to look bad in the press, and then says that maybe you should "self deport".......what would you do?


Polanski running was wholly rational and justified. Given the set of facts as we know them the 50 year sentence was no where near justice, and polanski had no duty to stand for injustice being done to him.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 12:37 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
The equating of Polanski's offence with that is patently ridiculous.
Which is probably why no one did so. Polanski's offense was disgusting enough without exaggeration. He drug raped a kid Spendi. That's plenty despicable without appealing to extremes.
OmSigDAVID
 
  3  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 12:46 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
What was she doing at the photo shoot with a known Bohemian unchaperoned?
Getting her picture taken?



Spendius wrote:
That alone makes her not ordinary.
HOW ?



Spendius wrote:
I would go so far as suspecting certain parties make a meal of these cases in order to put the idea into the heads of some people so that there will be more cases and thus more money to be made. Media obviously plays along as juicy copy is not only easy to do but sells well.
Paranoid delusion.





hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 12:54 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
Quote:
Which is probably why no one did so. Polanski's offense was disgusting enough without exaggeration. He drug raped a kid Spendi. That's plenty despicable without appealing to extremes

Quote:
KING: Maybe it's because of the years, but neither of you feel particularly angry at Roman Polanski.

GEIMER: No. Not anymore. Not even then. I mean, it just...

KING: No?

GEIMER: Well, yes, I was angry because he was the cause of the publicity and the publicity was the worst thing that ever happened to me.

KING: But not angry that he had sex with you.

GEIMER: The publicity was so terrible, that -- and so immediate that it just overshadowed everything that happened that night.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0302/24/lkl.00.html

She never thought it was that big of a deal, Polanski never so far as we know EVER has had sex with a woman/girl who came away feeling like he is the evil rapist that you paint him as. Your perception is delusional, is speaks to who you are, not to any reality that the rest of us share.
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 01:07 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Which is probably why no one did so. Polanski's offense was disgusting enough without exaggeration. He drug raped a kid Spendi. That's plenty despicable without appealing to extremes

Quote:
KING: Maybe it's because of the years, but neither of you feel particularly angry at Roman Polanski.

GEIMER: No. Not anymore. Not even then. I mean, it just...

KING: No?

GEIMER: Well, yes, I was angry because he was the cause of the publicity and the publicity was the worst thing that ever happened to me.

KING: But not angry that he had sex with you.

GEIMER: The publicity was so terrible, that -- and so immediate that it just overshadowed everything that happened that night.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0302/24/lkl.00.html

She never thought it was that big of a deal, Polanski never so far as we know EVER has had sex with a woman/girl who came away feeling like he is the evil rapist that you paint him as. Your perception is delusional, is speaks to who you are, not to any reality that the rest of us share.
Make up your mind, Shorteyes. You made a big issue yourself about believing what he did was "rape/rape" and how you believed he should have been "rung up."

I'll remind you again, you demented misogynist piece of ****: You don't speak for anyone but your sick twisted self. You don’t belong to any “us.”
spendius
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 01:07 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
David--you last post is too stupid to justify answering.
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 01:17 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
Quote:
Make up your mind, Shorteyes. You made a big issue yourself about believing what he did was "rape/rape" and how you believed he should have been "rung up."


There is no conflict, in my opinion this was criminal sex, and it should have seen a courtroom. I also believe that Polanski seems to be a fairly decent guy, and that his one and only sex victim was not particularly victimized. All of your ravings, and the Judge saying that this case deserved 50 years prison time, are too far from any justification to be taken as anything but delusion at work.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 01:49 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

David--you last post is too stupid to justify answering.
I did not expect to see an answer; the questions were only rhetorical.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 01:55 pm
@hawkeye10,
only sex victim was not particularly victimized
---------------------------------------------------------
And how do you know this is his only sexual victim?

Seem unlikely as a matter of fact that this is his only victim, therefore the only known sexual victim would be a more correct statement.
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 01:58 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

only sex victim was not particularly victimized
---------------------------------------------------------
And how do you know this is his only sexual victim?

Seem unlikely as a matter of fact that this is his only victim,
therefore the only known sexual victim would be a more correct statement.
According to U,
we shoud presume that he had more victims ?
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 02:14 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
According to U,
we shoud presume that he had more victims ?


considering how well known he is, the publicity of this case for 30 years, and that he has money to be taken away in civil litigation, if there were other victims they would have come forward. He likes them young, so he very well may have been sexual with under aged girls, but if so they have kept their mouths shut so as to keep polanski out of trouble. If this is the case then these underaged girls are not victims though.

Maybe not though, Polanski had reason to keep his age play kink as fantasy for the rest of his life, maybe he found a woman who was willing to play the daddy/little girl thing in the bedroom.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 02:33 pm
@hawkeye10,
He was not under the US courts system civil or otherwise for those thirty years and I had no information that civil suites for sexual attacks are as common in France.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 02:35 pm
There's a lot about this case that I don't know and that I suspect others commenting here (on both sides of the various disputes) don't know either. Moreover nearly all of the contending allegations concerning Polanski, the Judge and the girl that have never been objectively tested in a judicial process.

If I'm not mistaken Polanski fled to France just before a negotiated sentencing following a limited plea of guilt, and did so allegedly because he had reason to believe the Judge would not limit himself to the "agreed" terms. He fled initially to France, which, for reasons of its own, refused to extradite him back to the jurisdiction from which he fled, and in which he committed the crimes to which he plead guilty and possibly others. I understand that the U.S. did indeed long ago file an international arrest warrant for Polanski, but I don't really know (and I doubt others here do either) how hard and forcefully U.S. law enforcement worked (or failed to work) to get custody of him during the intervening decades. Polanski notably never returned to the U.S.

Neither do I know the specific terms of our extradition treaties with France , Switzerland or any other nations that may be involved. However, I generally assume that personal crimes, such as the one involved , are nearly universally extraditable - except in cases in which the country to which the accused fled determines through judicial process that some basic human rights of the accused will probably be violated if he is returned. Why Switzerland finally arrested Polanski during his recent visit, while ignoring previous ones is an at least interesting question to which I doubt that any of us knows the answer. We also see news reports that the Government of France privately influenced the recent Swiss decision to release Polanski from custody, pending the resolution of his appeals. What might be the motives for this (if it is trre) is also something I don't know, but about which I am curious.

My concern is that justice has not been done in this case and that -it at least appears that nations with treaty obligations to return him have for many years have simply refused to do so - and for reasons that have never, to my knowledge, been clearly stated.

My suspicion is that what we ahave seen these last several decades is simply unilateral nullification of explicit treaty obligations on the part of some European nations based on some (unknown to me ) elements of sympathy for the accused and/or prejudgement of the merits of the legal processes in this country.

We get a lot of hectoring from Europeans about violating various "laws" they presume to exist based on treaties (many unsigned or never ratified by our legislature) - and many of which they don't live up to themselves (Koyoto is a prominent example). This is what annoys me.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sat 28 Nov, 2009 02:39 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
He was not under the US courts system civil or otherwise for those thirty years and I had no information that civil suites for sexual attacks are as common in France.


Maybe this will come as news to you, but they do have courts in Europe. They also do consider some sex criminal, to include forced sex and sex with under aged girls.

If Polanski was either a rape/rape perp or even a rape perp it is likely that his victim would have come forward so as to take his money.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/27/2022 at 02:47:02