Roman Polanski detained in Zurich

[eternitygoddess]

disgusted.

 

[shoesexy]

A victory for child molestors & their supporters everywhere.

 

[Danhat Ward]

A victory for child molestors & their supporters everywhere.

Exactly.

 

[cloudyshambles]

so there are no consequences for him?? that's just stupid, imho there is no statute of limitations for crimes like this...

 

[hedur]

i do know i feel there is more to this story than what we've read and how much of a role polanski did actually play in this. i mean the mother allowing her 13 yr old to be in the presence of a 40 yr old man,alone??

So you're saying you don't believe he drugged, raped, and sodomized a 13 year old girl? And you're also saying that whatever crimes he committed are somehow lessened or excused by the fact that her mom was an idiot?

i don't think he would have never been treated fairly under the circumstances....especially since he left. also they never took the victim's feelings into consideration. instead,they continue to bring this back up,forcing the poor woman to relive what happened to her.

"Fairly"? Is that a joke? How does him fleeing the country entitle him to be treated more fairly? Shouldn't he be paying for that crime as well as the others?

And you may not realize this but justice is not about the victim's "feelings". It's not about anyone's "feelings". It's about protecting the general public from the same fate. We know of one woman who was raped by him in France. You think that's the only one? This is who he is. The French government should be ashamed of themselves for giving him asylum.

The fact that he shows no regret, remorse, or even admits his crimes proves he is a spineless, worthless, shell of a man, capable of committing the same crime again and again.

And yet he finds defenders. Unreal.

 

[m.j.]

hedur who made you a judge?????

decision has bee made, dealt with it.

 

[hedur]

Yes, m.j., when crimes are committed people get "judged" for them. That's what the "law" is all about. Maybe you want to live in a society where thieves, r*pists, and murderers run free but thankfully, that's generally not what happens. But because, in this case, justice hasn't been served I, and other moral people, have a right to get loud about it. Deal with it.

And, btw, my "judgment" means nothing. He will answer for what he's done someday. Count on it.

 

[fashionista-ta]

i dunno if i feel happy or sad about this. probably neither. i do know i feel there is more to this story than what we've read and how much of a role polanski did actually play in this. i mean the mother allowing her 13 yr old to be in the presence of a 40 yr old man,alone??

i don't think he would have never been treated fairly under the circumstances....especially since he left. also they never took the victim's feelings into consideration. instead,they continue to bring this back up,forcing the poor woman to relive what happened to her.

Are you under the impression that a normal 40-year-old straight man rapes underage girls he is left alone with?!?!?!?! I would like to stand up for straight men everywhere and say that the vast majority are not pedophiles and would do no such thing.

 

[fashionista-ta]

Yes, m.j., when crimes are committed people get "judged" for them. That's what the "law" is all about. Maybe you want to live in a society where thieves, r*pists, and murderers run free but thankfully, that's generally not what happens. But because, in this case, justice hasn't been served I, and other moral people, have a right to get loud about it. Deal with it.

And, btw, my "judgment" means nothing. He will answer for what he's done someday. Count on it.

All of France and Switzerland cannot protect him from the karma that's headed his way like a freight train. Prison is a dangerous place for child molesters ... he may escape whatever fate awaited him there, but he won't escape the consequences of his actions ... that I know for sure.

 

[yum_yum]

hedur who made you a judge?????

decision has bee made, dealt with it.

are you serious?

 

[NakedIfIWantTo]

Roman Polanski (and his legion of defenders) disgusts me beyond words.
Double standards, blatant ignorance of facts, persecution of the innocents. This is the world we live in.

 

[Echoes]

However you feel about what did or didn't happen, or whether or not it was consensual or whether or not the mother is culpable, there isn't going to be a trial even if he does come back to the States. The case itself is closed. He pled out to a lesser charge. The victim doesn't want anything more to do with it and won't cooperate. At most he would do a few days in jail unless the court reneges on the supposed plea deal.

The U.S. refused to cooperate and provide requested documents. The Swiss are done. The French are done. He's free for all intents and purposes.

I don't see any reason to tie up any more funds on this 30 year old case.

Right, wrong or indifferent, it's over.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ On the bright side, this story has brought a great deal of attention and light to a whole set of related issues that clearly need examination and understanding.

 

[eternitygoddess]

hedur who made you a judge?????

decision has bee made, dealt with it.

A BAD decision has been made. A WRONG decision has been made.

"Deal with it" is not an appropriate default response to someone whose opinions don't coincide with yours.

The Polanski case has shown (if anything) that there is a disturbing amount of support for child molesters.

 

[Echoes]

The Polanski case has shown (if anything) that there is a disturbing amount of support for child molesters.

I don't see where anyone at all has said that, or even hinted at it.

 

[MyNameIs]

As wrong and offensive his act was/is, this is not 1804. We don't burn people at the stake because they've committed offensive crimes. We have a legal system and regardless of how heinous or disguising the crime is, the law has to apply all the same. The last thing I would want is to be seen as a "child molester supporter" but putting aside the emotional feelings about the case, legally speaking it seems like a logical decision by the Swiss.

From what I understand, back in the 70s when it happened and he was charged initially, the prosecutor had a weak case. The victim wasn't cooperating and they probably would not have been able to convict him because of lack of evidence. That is why they offered him a plea deal. Additionally, it seems he did serve two months somewhere (not in jail I don't think) as a results of that plea. The prosecution then tried to go back on their deal, leading Polanski to run. The reason he was able to leave was because of some mishandling by the judge.

I'm not really familiar with the law on extradition, but I think the country that does the sending back part is not concerned with whether the person is actually guilty of the crime, but rather that the safeguards are in place assuring fair procedure. In this case, the Swiss wanted some documents from the US because of concern that he's already served his sentence (the 2 months in the 70s). California refused to supply those documents (which raises questions of just how messed up the case must have been) so the Swiss had nothing else to go by.

From a legal standpoint, it makes sense. Now I or you may think it's outrageous that two months rehabilitation is all the sentence he got for child molestation, but if that was part of the plea and if he did serve it, it's unconstitutional to prosecute him for the same crime again. That would be double jeopardy.

Again, I haven't done extensive research on this or anything, just going by what I heard/read here and there.

 

[Echoes]

With the way the story has been so sensationalized and convoluted over the years, I'm not even sure if anything happened at all or if the whole thing was a kid making up a story for some reason. They weren't all that big on forensics in the 70s, so I don't know if there was any real evidence of any kind or if they were only going on what the kid said.

Maybe it happened. Maybe it didn't. Maybe something happened other than what most people today now believe.

 

[sonjanicky29]

^ Its not double jeopardy if he didn't serve his full sentence in the first place. He split before he could serve out his sentence, therefore not only making him guilty of the original crime, but also of fleeing.

It disgusts me to see people defend him. I don't care how "wonderful" his art is, he is a monster and anyone who has been molested or knows someone who has can tell you how confusing,hurtful and damaging it is. A 13yr old doesn't cooperate under good circumstances much less under the circumstances the survivor had to deal with. Monsters like him keep going until they are stopped. It is sad that victims rights are second to criminals.

 

[MyNameIs]

^ Its not double jeopardy if he didn't serve his full sentence in the first place. He split before he could serve out his sentence, therefore not only making him guilty of the original crime, but also of fleeing.

It disgusts me to see people defend him. I don't care how "wonderful" his art is, he is a monster and anyone who has been molested or knows someone who has can tell you how confusing,hurtful and damaging it is. A 13yr old doesn't cooperate under good circumstances much less under the circumstances the survivor had to deal with. Monsters like him keep going until they are stopped. It is sad that victims rights are second to criminals.

I thought the 2 months or whatever it was he did was the full sentence, because you're right, if it wasn't then there's no double jeopardy. But that's why the Swiss asked for the documents, to verify exactly.

And I didn't mean to defend him or his actions. Just because he's talented doesn't make him any more criminally liable or deserving of punishment. I was just saying that even in this case legal procedure has to be followed. Otherwise, why not just take 'offensive' criminals out to the yard and shoot them up? Screw due process. Screw constitutional rights.

 

[Echoes]

Double Jeopardy isn't relevant. It has nothing to do with sentencing or time served. And he isn't charged with anything. It's just a fugitive warrant to bring him to jail on the original plea deal. There won't be a trial and the plea deal is in question due to possible misconduct by the Prosecutor's Office and the Judge.

Even if he did come back, he may not face any jail time at all. The whole thing could be thrown out.