Should Roman Polanski be defended?

[Gunner 51]

I'll admit I'm all for jailing him. If someone goes around drugging and raping little girls, I'd want that swine put in jail for his crimes. Famous or not, everyone is equal and the punishment must fit the crimes.

Treat him like any other paedophile and coward and jail him accordingly.

 

[Superbeast]

He's probably raped other children since then, so no, he shouldn't be.

There is utterly no truth to this. I know many people don't like the French, but they've been keeping an eye on him too. They'd know if he had raped anyone in the last 30 years.

It's like if I accused everyone supporting ripping his balls off and letting him rot in jail of being rapists themselves projecting their own fears. It wouldn't be very nice, nor truthful (and would get me banned most likely) but it's a similar situation - making something up with no evidence to play on the emotions of the fellow website users.

Man, he all ready plead to the guilty. What the fuck is with you people? He raped, sodomized and drugged a teen girl. Then he skipped bail and bailed from the country. You people are simply insane.

You want to know about a double standard? If this guy was just a normal joe he would have been all ready serving his 15-20 years. That is the double standard. But no, Polanski is just like every other fucking rich *****. Just like OJ. They get high priced lawyers to get them off even when it is painfully obvious that they are guilty as hell.

Clearly you missed all the times when I have said

"He deserves to be brought to justice for his crime"

I am not advocating letting him off, I am just suggesting that there is something very fishy about America's handling of the whole situation (and not nabbing him like 20-25 years ago when he was in Switzerland, the place they just arrested him now, nor every other time he visited a country with extradition to the USA); and that he's unlikely to receive "justice" because of the amount of emotion involved in the case (look at the amount of people on here clamouring for him to be raped himself etc) and that American law may seek to make an example of him to prove that they are "superior" and to deter other offenders through fear (a righteous goal but defies the very point of "justice").

He should do time, I'm in total agreement - he broke the law, pleaded guilty (to sex with a minor, even if we see it as rape that's not what he was charged with/admitted to). How much time to serve is up for debate (especially if the "sex with a minor"/ "statutory rape" charge is upheld in place of a "rape" charge).

He's not a repeat offender, he was never violent. Be broke the law and needs punishment, but I fear "justice" will be done, as the USA has a track-record that isn't quite so squeaky-clean.

 

[Sindaine]

I'm not attempting to 'play on' anything. Pedophiles tend to reoffend whenever they get the chance, so it's likely there are other victims he's hurt. It's disgusting but it's just how it is.

 

[Krunkcity3000]

I think that I have been vague with my initial question.

I did not mean that Polanski doesn't deserve a trial or a defense attorney. I was just amazed that there are sooo many people showing sympathy to a guy who plead guilty of a crime and exited the country.

Sad as it is, whether the victim wants the publicity or not, Polanski broke the law and has to answer for it.

And losing your wife is NOT an excuse for having sex with a blitzed 13 yr old.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Yes, he should be defended.

First, because a basic assumption of western legal systems is the idea that someone will defend you, even if you're indefensible.

Second, the victim - the person on whom's behalf legal repercussion is being sought, has publicly stated they don't think charges should be pressed and that they have moved on. Therefore, the law is seeking retribution on behalf of society at large, not on behalf of the victim - clearly defense is required here just the same.

 

[initialdelay]

When somebody ascends to 'stardom' they essentially split into two beings - the shining talented idealised star on one side, and the 'dirty grimy human being' on the other. People seem to blur the two a lot when something like this happens. The fact is that I believe Polanski should stand trial. This doesn't detract from his artistic achievements, which will last forever, or make them any less great.

EDIT: I meant Polanski should serve out a sentence, not stand trial... But be as entitled to defend himself legally as any other human being

 

[Shaoken]

Second, the victim - the person on whom's behalf legal repercussion is being sought, has publicly stated they don't think charges should be pressed and that they have moved on. Therefore, the law is seeking retribution on behalf of society at large, not on behalf of the victim - clearly defense is required here just the same.

Why is it so hard for you guys to understand that he already plead guilty. His trial is over, so the fact that his victim doesn't want charges to be pressed is irrelevant because they've already been pressed and resolved.

The only thing she could do is request that he be pardoned, but he kinda has to be in prison to do that. Kinda like how he's been trying to appeal his decision but it's gone nowhere because he has to be in the US in order to do so.

 

[G1eet]

You have to look at this guys personal life. I personally feel sorry for him. Previously to this incident his wife was murdered by Manson followers and he gave up all his worldly possessions to relieve his pain. But I believe that in these types of cases if the victim doesn't wish to press charges, then they shouldn't be forced to.

There are cases where the victim doesn't want to press charges, but the state has the right to prosecute if they so choose. It's like if I went out and shot someone in the leg, but they didn't want to press charges, I'd still be charged with a crime anyways. That's just the way the judicial system works in America.

But in all due respect to the situation, he may have lost his wife, but that doesn't give him the right to commit a crime. Two wrongs don't make a right as the old addage goes.

Yes, but two rights make an airplane, and three rights make a left.

Erm... the former sounds a lot better when spoken...

OT- prosecute him. I personally hold pedophiles as one of the lowest form of criminal out there. So I say go ahead and strangle him with the long arm of the law :]

 

[thiosk]

its not like it was rape rape or something

--whoopie goldberg

 

[Chipperz]

He's probably raped other children since then, so no, he shouldn't be.

You see, this is where you bring out sources, or proof, or something. Anything really to make it seem like you aren't talking out of your arse.

Don't get me wrong, I know you are, but at least try to seem level-headed?

 

[Superbeast]

I'm not attempting to 'play on' anything. Pedophiles tend to reoffend whenever they get the chance, so it's likely there are other victims he's hurt. It's disgusting but it's just how it is.

Stereotypes, much?

He's not a paedophile in the common sense of the word. He had sex (possibly raped, the transcript of the girls interview sounded like rape but he wasn't charged with it at the time IIRC) a minor, which would be a charge of paedophilia. But he doesn't hang around outside school gates, doesn't groom children on the internet, doesn't drive round in a van abducting kids of the streets or snatching kids from the back garden.

He's been living in a civilised, modern country for the last 30 years. A country with a good police force and justice system, and a highly moral society. Had he molested any more children he would have been caught by French authorities.

You are basically pulling a fact out of your arse. There is not even the *suggestion* of any misconduct or law-breaking in his last 3 decades in Europe - which there certainly would be at the least rumours had he approached any more under-age girls.

I think your quote shows why people feel the need to offend him - because otherwise comments like that become rumours, which become facts, which colour peoples' opinions. You don't want a judge or other prison inmates thinking "he's probably raped several other kids too" when there isn't even the faintest hint of that taking place.

 

[Shaoken]

its not like it was rape rape or something

--whoopie goldberg

Again, people have this notion that if it's not violent stranger rape then it's not really rape. It's a stupid and unbelievably flawed reasoning, but then again down here in Australia we've had someone get off of rape because the judge reasoned that because the victim's was wearing jean's the rapist wouldn't have been able to pull them off, so she must have helped him do it. I am not kidding.

 

[murphy7801]

Also wasn't rape it sex with a minor.

He drugged her. He molested her. She constantly said no. He sodomised her. There is no. Fucking. Way. That this is anything but rape.

I was talking about the charge he hasn't been prosecuted for.

 

[-Orgasmatron-]

For one who gives a crap about his personal life. If someone rapes you mom/sister/daughter are you going to give a crap about the rapists personal life? Really now, get logical. He drugged and sodomized a teen girl. That is not just one felony, that is two or three.

Oh, and then there is the little crime of JUMPING BAIL and RUNNING FROM THE LAW. Why does no one think of this? Those are felonies in and of themselves. You people simply amaze me and I glad that people like you are not in charge of the justice system in America.

Fuck Roman Polanski. He is a rapist scumbag and needs to serve his damn time in prison.

Also, fuck all his Hollywood friends who think he should get off on rape charges. Especially the women like Monica Belluci and Whoopi Goldberg. In fact, I hope that all the women that are defending him never get drugged and raped. Because then they should just let the rapist go otherwise they a fucking hypocrites.

You mad.

Just reading this thread, it's quite odd how angry and passionate alot of you are getting about this, when you don't even know anyone involved. Not defending him or what he did in the slightest. Just saying, you're an odd bunch.

 

[Shaoken]

You mad.

Just reading this thread, it's quite odd how angry and passionate alot of you are getting about this, when you don't even know anyone involved. Not defending him or what he did in the slightest. Just saying, you're an odd bunch.

People just don't like hypocrites and they don't like people trying to defend or excuse such a serious crime. And is it odd to get worked up over injustice? I don't know anybody whose a victim of the holocaust, but that doesn't stop me from being appalled by it. I don't know any victims of human rights abuses personally but that doesn't stop me getting pissed off that these abuses are happening. etc. etc.

 

[-Orgasmatron-]

People just don't like hypocrites and they don't like people trying to defend or excuse such a serious crime. And is it odd to get worked up over injustice? I don't know anybody whose a victim of the holocaust, but that doesn't stop me from being appalled by it. I don't know any victims of human rights abuses personally but that doesn't stop me getting pissed off that these abuses are happening. etc. etc.

I think it's a pretty odd thing to get this worked up over really, it's not like you've got anything to gain from it that warrants spending time getting angry about it, specially when even the victim wants to drop the case, it's not as if you're fighting to make the world a better place.

Yea, it sucks what happened and maybe he should go down for it, but I don't see any reason to go ape shit on an internet forum about how you want him to rot in jail and what not (that's not directed specifically at you, just generally the people in this thread).

By all means carry on though, I wasn't saying you're all bad people for doing it, just saying it seems abit odd to me.

Also, don't compare this to the holocaust.

 

[Shaoken]

Also, don't compare this to the holocaust.

I'm not comparing the crime to the holocaust, just using an extreme example of how people's emotions tend to make them act.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

I don't know enough about the case, but as I undertsand it, he raped her. Rape is unexcusable on my moral compass, thus no defence ever.

 

[Silver]

Stick him in a cell to rot. If you feel sorry for him, have a shrink talk to him down there. Having a bad life doesn't excuse these kinds of things, and even if the girl is selfish enough to drop the charges, it's not okay, and he (and everyone else) needs to be kept from doing anything similar again. Hell, she shouldn't have to be involved at all, just lock him up.

 

[oppp7]

Statutory rape is a serious crime. Even if the victim claims they don't care, it doesn't set a good example for other people.