board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Roman Polanski arrested

Post Reply   Page 1 of 2  [ 27 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 »
Author Message
Nin
Post subject: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Mon 28 Sep , 2009 9:11 pm
Per aspera ad astra
Offline
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Thu 28 Oct , 2004 6:53 am
Location: Zu Hause
 
Cross-posted with HoF

This week-end the famous Franco-Polish film director Roman Polanski has been arrested in Switzerland in order to be extraded towards the US for a vice affair about having sex with an 13 year old girl in 1977.

Back then, Polanski fled the US and never came back there, not even to get his oscar for "The Pianist". He is, among others, the author of movies like Rosemary's Baby, Oliver Twist or Chinatown. His life history is a movie per se. But I don't want to talk about it as it has no direct interference with this case.

Anyway, I was quite shocked, because it is not the first time that Mr. Polanski came to Switzerland since 1977, he has not ever been implied in any other pedophile act ever since, the girl in question has never pressed charges and has publicly asked to leave Mr. Polanski in peace (she is now 45 and lives as a married woman with children in Hawai) - so I mainly think that the reason to arrest Mr. Polanski now was to be in good terms with the US about the Swiss bank and tax issues.

While I do not claim that having sex with a 13-year old is or should be legal - but then so what about the many countries where women are married at this age - I think that poursuit of Mr. Polanski is also harrassment because of his celebrity and is vain after so many years without any recidive and when the victim herself has forgiven him - and led a normal life.

But I expect several of you to think otherwise.

_________________

Nichts Schöneres unter der Sonne als unter der Sonne zu sein.
(Ingeborg Bachmann)


Top
Profile Quote
Nienor SharkAttack
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Mon 28 Sep , 2009 11:13 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 1858
Joined: Thu 28 Oct , 2004 2:34 pm
Location: Norway
 
Harrassment because of his celebrity? Maybe from the authorities, but I feel he is getting much sympathy from almost everyone else. I read for the first time today what he actually did to that girl:
Quote:
[He] plied the girl with multiple glasses of Champagne and a portion of a Quaalude pill, and then proceeded to orally copulate this child, have sexual intercourse with this child, and sodomize this child.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/movies/07pola.html

Would anyone have any sympathy for a man who had done such a thing, and not want him to be found and punished after he had run away to avoid punishment, had he not been a celebrity?

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Lidless
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Tue 29 Sep , 2009 6:27 am
Als u het leven te ernstig neemt, mist u de betekenis.
Offline
 
Posts: 8261
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 8:21 pm
Location: London
 
No sympathy here. Even if the original judge reneged on a plea bargain, 45 days would never be enough jail time.

And for countries where 13 is OK to be married, they need to get into the 20th, never mind the 21st, century.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Estel
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Tue 29 Sep , 2009 12:41 pm
Pure Kitsch Flavor
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5159
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:47 pm
Location: London
 
I had done this post, and had posted another post, but then I realized that I just don't care - well, I kinda do, but not enough to debate about it - so I have deleted both.

:shrug:

Last edited by Estel on Tue 29 Sep , 2009 3:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
Profile Quote
Ara-anna
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Tue 29 Sep , 2009 12:48 pm
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
I often wonder how much sympathy he has garnered becuase of Sharon and the baby. I don't think he should recieve any, but part of me thinks he has people who do still feel sorry for him and thus look over his own crimes.

_________________

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

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile Quote
Nin
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Tue 29 Sep , 2009 1:26 pm
Per aspera ad astra
Offline
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Thu 28 Oct , 2004 6:53 am
Location: Zu Hause
 
Estel wrote:
You wouldn't say that someone who murdered someone in 1977, fled, led a normal life, never murdered anyone again and was forgiven by the family of the victim should be able to avoid the law, even this many years later.
On the contrary, I would say so. I would The only crime I would want to protect from prescription is crime against humanity. I don't believe in vengeance and not even in punishment, The only reason is the risk of recidive. And I think in this case the risk is non-existent - because of the celebrity.


Anyway, for me many things in this arrestation are wrong: Polanski did not flee to escape a judgement. He had plead guilty A plea bargain was agreed to by his lawyer, the victim's lawyer and the district attorney, and it was approved by the judge. But to the amazement of all, including the victim, at the last minute the judge went back on his word and refused to honor the deal. Apparently the judge was more preoccupied with the benefits the affair could have on her own career than with settling it. Worried that he was going to have to spend 50 years in prison -- rather than just time already served -- Mr. Polanski fled the country. He has been often in Switzerland in the last years, owns a house here and came to Zurich to a festival where he was supposed to receive a distinctions. If this is about law and justice: why did the Swiss not arrest him before? Oh, but then they had no trouble about the Swiss Bank secret with the US... It is hypocrit.

_________________

Nichts Schöneres unter der Sonne als unter der Sonne zu sein.
(Ingeborg Bachmann)


Top
Profile Quote
sauronsfinger
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Tue 29 Sep , 2009 1:45 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 4336
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Location: The real world
 
This article was discussed on Air America this morning and it caused me to rethink much of my position on this issue

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/09/29 ... her-roman/
Quote:
Roman Polanski: What if He Were 'Father Polanski'?
Perhaps my sensitivity to the Roman Polanksi fiasco can be traced to having covered the clerical sexual abuse scandals in the Catholic Church for so many years -- even before 2002, in fact, when it became a "scandal," which basically means the media pays attention.

Or perhaps my irritation at the emerging empathy for the award-winning director stems from a basic sense of justice.

Sure, the French and Polish governments are protesting the arrest of the 76-year-old Polanksi on Saturday in Switzerland, where he had gone to attend a film festival. Polanksi was raised in Poland and he lives in France, and you know the French and their artistes. Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand issued a statement saying he "profoundly regrets that a new ordeal is being inflicted on someone who has already known so many during his life." Polanksi is Jewish and barely escaped death in a concentration camp; his mother was killed at Auschwitz. Mitterrand also charged that with Saturday's arrest, Polanski was "thrown to the lions."

"In the same way that there is a generous America that we like, there is also a scary America that has just shown its face," he said.

Yada yada yada. Which is also what I say to the similar, and similarly unsurprising comments coming from Hollywood:

"I think it's absolutely ridiculous," Bill Flicker, a film editor who once worked with Polanski in France, tells the Washington Post. "It's stupid and a waste of resources. I don't understand why they are doing it." (I'll tell him why in a moment.)

But what's up with the likes of Los Angeles Times writer Patrick Goldstein?

In a passionate and rambling defense of the director, he says the LA District Attorney has better things to do than hunt down poor Polanksi, and he compares the fugitive director to Jean Valjean, the hero of Victor Hugo's "Les Misérables," chased by the evil inspector Javert. Goldstein refers to the "op-ed moralists, excitable bloggers and the Glenn Becks of the world noisily weighing in on the propriety of his possible prosecution" and says Polanski "has already paid a horrible, soul-wrenching price for the infamy surrounding his actions."

"The real tragedy is that he will always, till his death, be snubbed and stalked and confronted by people who think the price he has already paid isn't enough." (Actually, that's not the real tragedy. And last time I looked, I wasn't Glenn Beck.)

Then there's Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum.

She titles her verdict "The Outrageous Arrest of Roman Polanski" -- and continues in that vein. First, Applebaum questions why the secretive Swiss are suddenly so intent on pursuing criminals -- interesting, perhaps, but way beside the point when you are talking about the drugging and raping of a 13-year-old girl by a man who was then 43 years old.
In 1977 Polanksi (who in the 1970s won deserved acclaim with films including "Rosemary's Baby" and the superb "Chinatown"), hired Samantha Geimer, a high school freshman who wanted to be an actress, for a "photo shoot" at the Los Angeles house of his friend and "Chinatown" star, Jack Nicholson. Polanski plied Geimer with champagne and Quaaludes, took her to the hot tub, and then forced her into various sex acts. Polanksi pled guilty to one of the six counts against him -- having sex with a minor -- and was sentenced to 42 days of psychiatric evaluation in a state prison.

Polanksi fled the country, however, because he feared that the judge in the case, Laurence Rittenband, was going to undo that plea deal and sentence him to 50 years behind bars. Rittenband died in 1993, and there are doubts as to whether Polanski's fears were justified, and even bigger doubts as to whether such a stiff sentence would have held up on appeal.

In any case, life in Europe certainly seems preferable to what Polanski's victim endured. Speaking to Larry King a few years ago, Geimer -- now 45 and living in Hawaii with her husband and four children -- said this about the events:
King: "Did he forcibly rape you?"

Geimer: "You know, I said no. I didn't fight him off. I said, like, 'No, no, I don't want to go in there, no. I don't want to do this, no.' And then I didn't know what else to do. We were alone. And I didn't want to -- I didn't know what would happen if I made a scene. I was just scared and after giving some resistance, figured, well, I guess I'll get to go home after this."
Elements like that would seem to be more relevant than whether the Swiss are being cheesy. Yes, Geimer has said she does not want Polanksi to go to jail, and she wants to get on with her life. That's understandable, but does not mean Polanksi shouldn't be called to account for his crimes, or that justice should be ignored.

There is the obvious parallel to the cases in the Catholic Church, which have rightly scandalized the public and the media. Prosecutors and plaintiffs' attorneys have been dogged in pursuing these cases -- whether out of concern for their careers or for justice -- and the outrage was so widespread that the State of California created a one-year window in 2003 during which the statute of limitations on abuse crimes by Catholic priests (and others) was lifted. That meant the victims of men who were often long dead could finally get their day in court, or find some sense of justice and closure -- and for cases that were no more egregious than Polanski's abuse of Geimer. Polanski is alive, at least.

Comparisons are by their nature invidious. But what if Roman Polanksi were wearing a Roman collar? Would "Monsignor Polanksi" receive the same considerations? As Father Thomas Reese, a Jesuit, writes at the Post's "On Faith" site, "Imagine if the Knights of Columbus decided to give an award to a pedophile priest who had fled the country to avoid prison. The outcry would be universal." And rightly so, as Reese says. But Polanski gets an Oscar in absentia in 2003 and earns sympathy because he can't receive it in person.

Yes, Polanski himself suffered terribly in his early life, and that, combined with his age and his post-conviction life on the lam, would certainly have figured into any sentence or other arrangement should he have returned to face the music. And the truth is, few abusers can simply be dismissed as "monsters." That is the easy way out for society. Most abusers, in fact, were themselves likely abused, and many have awful stories of personal sorrow.

Yet Applebaum seems to gloss over Geimer's suffering while highlighting that of Polanski: she says Polanski's crime was "statutory rape," adding that "there is evidence that Polanski did not know her real age." Huh? (Maybe Applebaum is thinking of a line from another Jack Nicholson movie, "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest," in which R.P. McMurphy protested to the asylum doc that the redhead who got him in trouble was "15 going on 35.")

Applebaum also protests that the crime was committed so long ago, and that there is evidence of judicial misconduct in the original case, and that Polanski "panicked" and fled out of an "understandable fear of irrational punishment" due to his past traumas. Besides, the guy has suffered enough, no?

"He did commit a crime, but he has paid for the crime in many, many ways: In notoriety, in lawyers' fees, in professional stigma. He could not return to Los Angeles to receive his recent Oscar. He cannot visit Hollywood to direct or cast a film."

"If he weren't famous, I bet no one would bother with him at all," Applebaum concludes.

Well, I'll take that bet. But why should the famous escape justice, anyway?

Applebaum's apologia echoes once again the unsettling sense of special pleading that has always surrounded Polanski's case.

At the time of the crime, Nicholson's girlfriend in those days, actress Anjelica Huston, said she saw Geimer on the day of the atack and described her as "sullen." (Nicholson was not at the house at the time, but Huston was.)

"She appeared to be one of those kind of little chicks between -- could be any age up to 25," Huston said in court papers. "She did not look like a 13-year-old scared little thing," Huston said.

Of Polanski, Huston added: "I don't think he's a bad man. I think he's an unhappy man."

Polanski also complained at the time that he was "some kind of mouse" played with by "an abominable cat" -- meaning the judge in the case, which, as the Post's William Booth noted, "foreshadows the carnival trials to follow, those of Phil Spector, Robert Blake, Michael Jackson, O.J. Simpson." Those examples don't do much to exonerate Polanksi, of course; while not all those gentlemen were convicted criminally, it's hard to argue they were blameless in their various misdeeds.

Booth's comparison is in an article about a 2008 HBO documentary, "Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired," that also sought to deconstruct the case and show that Polanski got something of a raw deal, even if he did in fact do the raw things he originally pleaded guilty to doing. (Polanksi had recently been citing the documentary as an argument to have his longstanding arrest warrant dismissed by a Los Angeles court.)

Yes, the tradition of the "casting couch" can -- for whatever reason -- evoke nostalgia for the good old days of naughty Hollywood and studio moguls. But how can you get dewey-eyed over drugging and raping a 13-year-old child?

I can't. And especially not during the High Holy Days, when Polanksi was arrested; arguing for pardon without atonement is not what Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement that ended Monday at sunset, is about.

But what's most important in all this is the opinion of victims. Which is why I am reproducing in full an email sent to me this morning by David Clohessy, head of SNAP, the main organization for victims of clerical abuse, and himself a survivor of childhood sexual abuse by a priest:
We as a society must clearly show, by our actions, that child sex abuse is wrong and that child molesters will be pursued, whether they are rich or poor, prominent or unknown, whether they 'face the music' or flee the country. It's a grave disservice to crime victims and an irresponsible risk to children if we let child sex offenders walk free because they've delayed justice or fled overseas.

Is it possible that there was some prosecutorial misconduct in Polanski's case? Of course. Does that mean he gets to unilaterally decide to 'opt out' of the justice system and walk free? Of course not.

No one seems to even consider the possibility that Polanski may have abused others, even recently. That's yet another reason he should be extradited.

Finally, he did not 'have sex with a girl.' He abused her. He molested her. He's pled guilty to this. And, according to several media reports, he plied her with drugs and booze. 'Having sex with' is a phrase that implies consent. And we've all agreed, as a society, for years, that a vulnerable teenager simply can't consent to sex with an adult, especially a powerful and charismatic one.

If Polanski is NOT extradited, the message child molesters will get is 'If you get smart lawyers, hang tough, and move elsewhere, you'll get away scot-free, especially if you've got some kind of talent.' That's a terrible message.

It's sad that California has a budget crisis and that Polanski has suffered pain in his adult life. It's wonderful that his victim has forgiven him. None of this, however, means he's not still a risk to kids. Nor does it somehow give a convicted child molester any kind of 'free pass.'

The church's on-going child sex abuse and cover up scandal should have taught us that when authorities give excessive deference and favoritism to some predators, because of their occupation, more children end up being devastated and more adults stop trusting and cooperating with law enforcement.
All good points, all hard to refute.

_________________

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
Profile Quote
LalaithUrwen
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Tue 29 Sep , 2009 2:06 pm
The Grey Amaretto as Supermega-awesome Proud Heretic Girl
Offline
 
Posts: 21756
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 3:46 pm
 
Nin wrote:


Anyway, for me many things in this arrestation are wrong: Polanski did not flee to escape a judgement. He had plead guilty A plea bargain was agreed to by his lawyer, the victim's lawyer and the district attorney, and it was approved by the judge. But to the amazement of all, including the victim, at the last minute the judge went back on his word and refused to honor the deal. Apparently the judge was more preoccupied with the benefits the affair could have on her own career than with settling it. Worried that he was going to have to spend 50 years in prison -- rather than just time already served -- Mr. Polanski fled the country. He has been often in Switzerland in the last years, owns a house here and came to Zurich to a festival where he was supposed to receive a distinctions. If this is about law and justice: why did the Swiss not arrest him before? Oh, but then they had no trouble about the Swiss Bank secret with the US... It is hypocrit.
I agree that there are a lot of things that seem rotten about this situation (his prosecution, his arrest, his plea bargain, his protection from facing the courts here, etc.). It seems like a mess, with many people (and possibly governments?) acting in less than honorable ways.

However, I don't have sympathy for him for his original crime, and I do think he should've been punished many, many years ago for it.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Nin
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Tue 29 Sep , 2009 3:11 pm
Per aspera ad astra
Offline
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Thu 28 Oct , 2004 6:53 am
Location: Zu Hause
 
sauronsfinger, I see a big difference between this case and the case of catholic priests: it has been known quickly. Polanski got arrested quickly after the rape. You say for the victims of abuse by priests: "They could finally get their day in court", make it known that they had been abused. In this case, nothing comparable.

Also, Polanski has since then been ever under close watch from the media. I remember also that his wife was asked in interviews if she was not scared of him, or cared for her children, the question arose many times, also around the turning of Oliver Twist with several very young actors. (I follow the French media and his wife is a well-known actress) There has been no other incident and no other complaint. Neither before or after. This is why I conclude that there is no risk of recidive.

I would see things very differently if the victim wanted to pursue Polanski or if the Swiss had acted alike the very first time he set foot on their soil. But like this - it is simply hypocrit.

France by the way always refuses to extrade its nationals, they have no extraction agreement with the States. So the snarky remark: "and you know the French and their artistes" what does it serve? They acted according to their laws. Switzerland on the other hand has such an agreement - but they have conviently overlooked it mayn times in the the last 32 years when it comes to Mr. Polanski.

_________________

Nichts Schöneres unter der Sonne als unter der Sonne zu sein.
(Ingeborg Bachmann)


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Tue 29 Sep , 2009 4:42 pm
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
If the judge and prosecutors can renege on plea deals, what does that do to the faith we place in our legal system? Would you, as someone who was offered a deal to testify against someone, trust that that deal would remain in place after you potentially betray someone who could harm you?

I'm not against Polanski's extradition, though. Commit the crime, gotta pay the time. But, I think the reneged plea deal is important to the future stability of our legal strictures.

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
vison
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Tue 29 Sep , 2009 5:02 pm
Best friends forever
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6546
Joined: Fri 04 Feb , 2005 4:49 am
 
I recall that there was strong evidence that the girl's mother was complicit in this crime and that Mr. Polanski did not know the girl was only 13. It struck me then that it was probably true - since there was never any indication before (or since) that he had a taste for very young girls. He had been led to believe she was 16 or 17, I think. Not very "nice" but not 13, either. She certainly looked older. The mother thought she could advance her daughter's "career" by this ploy.

_________________

Living on Earth is expensive,
but it does include a free trip
around the sun every year.


Top
Profile Quote
Nienor SharkAttack
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Tue 29 Sep , 2009 6:34 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 1858
Joined: Thu 28 Oct , 2004 2:34 pm
Location: Norway
 
But he still raped someone. It's not as if what he did is okay even if he got her age wrong. He gave her lots of Champagne, and a Quaalude pill, and had sex with her even though she said no (according to sf's article). That's rape, and it doesn't matter if the victim is 13 or 130.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
vison
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Wed 30 Sep , 2009 12:13 am
Best friends forever
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6546
Joined: Fri 04 Feb , 2005 4:49 am
 
Nienor SharkAttack wrote:
But he still raped someone. It's not as if what he did is okay even if he got her age wrong. He gave her lots of Champagne, and a Quaalude pill, and had sex with her even though she said no (according to sf's article). That's rape, and it doesn't matter if the victim is 13 or 130.
You're right. But I don't see much point in putting him in prison now. I don't think he should "get away with it", but I'm not sure bringing him to the US and putting him in jail is worth the time and trouble and money this is going to take. As it is now, he can't come to the US and hasn't been able to for over 30 years, and that might be viewed as a kind of punishment in itself, for someone in his business.

_________________

Living on Earth is expensive,
but it does include a free trip
around the sun every year.


Top
Profile Quote
Ara-anna
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Wed 30 Sep , 2009 2:16 am
Daydream Believer
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5780
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Location: Pac Northwest
 
I don't know if it's actually stopped him in his business much at all. He has made several movies, and won an oscar while not living in the US.

_________________

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

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
Profile Quote
Lidless
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Wed 30 Sep , 2009 6:34 am
Als u het leven te ernstig neemt, mist u de betekenis.
Offline
 
Posts: 8261
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 8:21 pm
Location: London
 
Nin, I doubt if someone drugs and sodomises one of your sons when he's 13 you'll be equally forgiving if the guy skips the country - unless of course he's a gifted French writer / artist / singer / actor.

Rape with drugs and anal sex, Nin. Listen to yourself. Rape isn't a crime against humanity?

And anyone who thinks 42 days is sufficient punishment has never had kids.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Lord_Morningstar
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Wed 30 Sep , 2009 1:45 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 2420
Joined: Thu 03 Mar , 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia
 
I'm with the 'arrest him' crowd too. Whether he needs further punishment or not and whether there has been judicial miscounduct are both questions for a court, so he must be bought before one first.

_________________

[Space for Rent]


Top
Profile Quote
TheEllipticalDisillusion
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Wed 30 Sep , 2009 2:36 pm
Insolent Pup
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 5381
Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Location: Many Places
 
When they bring him in, they are going to need a new trial which may yield him more jail, but his lawyers aren't going to let prosecutorial misconduct stand. His original verdict is tainted. Even rapists have rights. How much time sounds reasonable for his crime?

_________________

The 11/3 Project


Top
Profile Quote
Lidless
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Wed 30 Sep , 2009 4:26 pm
Als u het leven te ernstig neemt, mist u de betekenis.
Offline
 
Posts: 8261
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 8:21 pm
Location: London
 
The whole idea of recidive (a tendency to relapse / commit again) is st00pfid. Does this mean everyone is allowed to commit one crime so long as no one thinks they'll repeat.

"Well you stole USD 2bn from a hedge fund and placed it in a country where we can't touch it. Given the amount of money you now have, it's unlikely you'll do it again. Fair enough, you naughty, naughty boy."

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Nin
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Wed 30 Sep , 2009 8:49 pm
Per aspera ad astra
Offline
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Thu 28 Oct , 2004 6:53 am
Location: Zu Hause
 
Lidless wrote:
Nin, I doubt if someone drugs and sodomises one of your sons when he's 13 you'll be equally forgiving if the guy skips the country - unless of course he's a gifted French writer / artist / singer / actor.

Rape with drugs and anal sex, Nin. Listen to yourself. Rape isn't a crime against humanity?

And anyone who thinks 42 days is sufficient punishment has never had kids.
Most obviously, I have kids, Lidless, but with these words you seem to agree with my ex about my maternel qualification. Thank you so far. It is really quite an allegation to say this. I raise my kids daily and live with them daily, but no, I don't have children, and you have the right to judge it, sorry that I forgot this.

Anyway, I would not allow my 13 year old son to a Vogue photo session alone. I would be with him, if ever. And even then... He is 11 now, so not so far from that and does not even know what Vogue is.

No, rape is not a crime against humanity in this context, sorry. It is very well defined what is a crime against humanity and rape can be when committed within a war conflit, massively and with the intent to wipe out the next generation or to socially exclude the victim.

It is a hideous crime and nobody says anything else. But many years have passed and the victim has forgiven.
Anyway, Lidless, you don't believe that everything can be forgiven whereas I do. So I fear the argument is void. As said, I expected people to think otherwise than me, I was curious for their arguments and I ahd what I asked for- but I also see that although I understand all arguments, I still don't think this arrestation has been right for the human reasons I mentionned (time gone by and forgiveness) and the legal reasons (Swiss so conviently remember their treaty with the US whereas they have closed their eyes many times).

For me, in this particular case the risk of recidive or not is a major argument. If you stole a huge amount of money, you ruin inderectly several dozens of people's lifes. Now, if they all say at some point: I don't want that money back - why should I claim it in their name? I could claim it in the name of futur victims... and so the most convincing argument is the signal sent to other rapists. But then, the shere fact of upholding a persecution for so many years publicly is a clear warning.

But I just see things differently. If everybody goes for eye for eye, everybody ends up blind.

_________________

Nichts Schöneres unter der Sonne als unter der Sonne zu sein.
(Ingeborg Bachmann)


Top
Profile Quote
Lidless
Post subject: Re: Roman Polanski arrested
Posted: Wed 30 Sep , 2009 10:28 pm
Als u het leven te ernstig neemt, mist u de betekenis.
Offline
 
Posts: 8261
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 8:21 pm
Location: London
 
So much for punishment and the law being a deterrent in the first place...

"I guess you had to use those pills and have anal sex because the 13 year old was just too small for you. Well, it was 30 years ago. Water under the bridge, eh, you wonderful celebrity."

And never mind Vogue and you being there. What if your kid was raped in the park, with or without your 'permission'?

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 2  [ 27 posts ]
Return to “The Symposium” | Jump to page 1 2 »
Jump to: