Why Did Roman Polanski Run Away?

Obviously, I'm not the one who is upset..

Obviously, I'm not the one who is upset..
--------------------------------------------------------

Well then I guess we can then all be happy that it is now highly likely that a child rapist who had been running away from justice for 30 plus years will end up at last in prison. More then likely for the rest of his life.

Not all, then, as justice as I understand it, will not be dispensed..

Vengeance, yes..

Given your understanding of the crime, what do you feel would be justice?

The engineer have a good question what is justice for someone in his middle years who had raped a child in your opinion?

The case is irremediably messed up, so no justice can ever be rendered.

The power of the US media and the local vox populi (as seen on this forum) will prevent a fair trial taking place.

Mind that I'm talking for the indicted and the victim.

In any event, I think Polanski will be extradited and that there will be a trial..

So no punishment for someone who had plea guilty of child rape in open court and then before sentencing ran for 30 plus years is your idea of justice?

Sorry that is not my idea of justice to say the least.

Are you obtuse on purpose?

Can't you read?

What crap is "so no punishment"? Who said that?

Twisting all the terms used is par with the utmost hypocrisy.

It only confirms that no fair trial can take place..

Don't serve me that crap implying that I'm defending a rapist..

At the time, Polanski entered a plea of guilty in which he recognized "unlawful sexual intercourse".

Then, the law should be enforced..

Don't know what's been said since page 1 of this thread but I'm in agreement with Bill right here. Today, tomorrow and always.

To answer the question "why he ran away", it's relatively clear. He expected a slap on the wrist and was threatened with jail time. So he fled.

When I say that no fair trial is possible, people rush to confirm...

At the time, Polanski entered a plea of guilty in which he recognized "unlawful sexual intercourse".

Then, the law should be enforced..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sad sad part of this for Mr. Polanski is that this was a plea deal that never went through my friend as before the judge could rule one way or another on allowing it he ran like a rabbit.

He can and should be tried for all the charges he was facing at the time as it was his decision to run away and ended the possiblity of getting only a few months time.

No slap on the old wrist for this child rapist is reqiure by any moral code or legal code I am aware of.

You know Francis you thinking I find interesting here we had a child rapist that was set of get only a slap on the wrist assuming the judge did approved the deal and then the child rapist clearly and legally void the plea deal by running.

Yet even those this plea deal was not at the time accepted by the judge and by Polanski own actions he voided the deal you are still of the opinion that we are under some moral obigation to honor it?

He was never sentence for any crime not one he was however charge with a whole long list of felonies and all of them all of them is still pending due to his own actions.

Francis, the trial has already taken place, and the verdict is known.

It was between the verdict and the sentencing that the guilty party skipped.

No, McT.

The judge Paul Breckenridge refused to sentence in absentia..

There was no trial there was a plea deal in the work that the judge needed to approved or not when Polanski ran.

He is still facing a numbers of felonies that are still pending so he and his lawyers need to start all over with a plea deal or he need to go to trail on charges that are likely to put him in prison for a period of time that extrend far beyond his likely lifetime.

What "facts" might those be, Francis? Neither you nor anyone else here has introduced a single "fact" that would do anything but bolster the prosecution's case... or the case for prosecution.

Instead you've bought into the VERY typical "the system is corrupt/irresponsible/unfair" argument that is imminently predictable in virtually every case where a guilty coward flees justice.

You've bought into the absurd conjecture that the system was going to just be overrun by corruption and lock this man up for life without due process. This is absurd. The charge he was generously allowed to plea to carried no such punishment, and neither the judge nor the DA can change the charges at sentencing. Even if they did something this absurd, which they wouldn't, it would be a clear enough "Due Process" violation to merit a Summary dismissal at the first reading of any higher court judge.

More thumbing his nose at the justice system = better? If he'd spent 30 years hiding in a spiderhole, an argument could be made that he's been punished. Your point here serves only to make it clear that he has not.

He didn't, and couldn't have made a deal with the judge. He made one with the State... and there is ZERO evidence that the State was going to renig... and mountains of case law preventing them from doing so after a plea has been entered. This line of argument only works for the layman, because it is essentially, constitutionally, an impossibility.

Look in the damn mirror Francis. On one side of this argument; you have people who want to see justice served on a man who drug-raped a 13 year old kid, and then fled from a sweetheart deal. On the other side we have people who want to see him get a pass for rape and flee... but have yet to offer a single coherent reason the rich man should be allowed to get away with the that which the poor man could not. And you think it’s the law and order, punish rape and flee types, who are ignoring facts in favor of their guts? Really?

You keep repeating this nonsense as if Polanski is being extradited to be tried for rape again. He's not. He need only face sentencing for the lesser charge of having sex and in all likelihood he’ll plea out the flee and allude charges as well in a new deal. I seriously doubt he'll be sentenced to much, but certainly not the crazy wild west **** you seem to fear. Your concerns stem mostly from ignorance of our system, and I suspect you would probably change teams if you realized how irrational your concerns really are. Rapists should be punished and wealth shouldn’t be factored in… let alone be allowed to function as a get out of jail free card.

Your arguments are designed to provide a condemnation by what you name the layman.

What you are just doing is a plain straw man as illustrated in your quoted sentence above.

Where rich and poor came into play? Where did I say that I wanted him free and not punished?

A bit too demagogic for my taste..

Oh, yeah?

Then I'll be glad to tell you that I was wrong.

I'll keep your assertion for further check out...