Mr.Canada Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 (edited) This man drugged then had anal, vaginal and oral sex with a 13 year old girl. This is disgusting. I don't understand how anyone can defend this guy. Or how Whoopi Goldberg can say it "wasn't really rape, rape". Edited October 6, 2009 by Mr.Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Even if she does want the whole thing dropped, that's not really up to her. The law is supposed to provide not just restitution, but also retribution and deterrence.That is correct. I'd also like to point out while the girl is the direct victim, she is not the only one who was adversly affected by his crimes. Many people suffered indirectly, from the taxpayers who had to fund his initial arrest/incarceration/etc., to people who unfortunately have to negatively restrict the movement of their children. Whenever a crime occurs, EVERYONE suffers to some degree. True. In fact, they had made attempts as recently as 2007, when he visited Israel. (Unfortunately, the U.S. was not able to get all the relevant information to Israeli authorities in time.) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/ro...e-director.html Its quite possible that the reason why the prosecutors had a renewed interest in the case is that Polanski himself (through his lawyers) was attempting to get the charges dropped. Had he simply sat in Europe, molesting the children there, then the U.S. authorities may not have even bothered to ask Switzerland to arrest him. Plus this response from you... This is the best answer I've seen yet and I accept your view on the situation. Well said. I just noticed a general charge for the torches and pitchforks and wondered if it was more a case of two wrongs making a right. But, my point re: the California state prison system stands...depending where he gets sent, it could well amount to a death sentence. He would have been MUCH better off taking his lumps back in the 1970s. But, I think at least one poster here is OK with that. Que sera sera. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 This is the best answer I've seen yet and I accept your view on the situation. Well said. I just noticed a general charge for the torches and pitchforks and wondered if it was more a case of two wrongs making a right. But, my point re: the California state prison system stands...depending where he gets sent, it could well amount to a death sentence. He would have been MUCH better off taking his lumps back in the 1970s. But, I think at least one poster here is OK with that. Que sera sera. I and a lot of Americans. what happens in prison stays in prison. Of course Polanski can make arrangements to stay in the hole for the duration of his prison sentance. It's been discussed previously that other attempts have been made to get him but were unsuccessful. Oh well, time for Polanski to face the music. But apparently in your eyes famous directors who skip the country on rape convictions are above facing the music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 (edited) I and a lot of Americans. what happens in prison stays in prison.Of course Polanski can make arrangements to stay in the hole for the duration of his prison sentance. It's been discussed previously that other attempts have been made to get him but were unsuccessful. Oh well, time for Polanski to face the music. But apparently in your eyes famous directors who skip the country on rape convictions are above facing the music. I never said anything of the sort. Like you, I do find the image of an old Jewish pervert with a tragic past tossed in with MS-13, the Aryan Brotherhood plus assorted Bloods and Crips somewhat ironic. He best be sewing a few copies of War and Peace into his sweater 'round about near the kidneys. But then, Chino's book club might consist of prisoners clubbing him with books...lol (thanks Sideshow Bob). Edited October 6, 2009 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 But, my point re: the California state prison system stands...depending where he gets sent, it could well amount to a death sentence. How do you figure that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 How do you figure that? Certain California state prisons have reputations re: inmate aggression. Cocoran and Pelican Bay in particular. As I mentioned, I'm not sure how they determin where a convicted sex offender ends-up, but Cocoran has a history of the prison population applying their own version of justice. If he's lucky, he'll end up in special containment (like Charlie Manson) where they'll have trouble getting close to him. But even Charlie has been assulted in S.C. by determined inmates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Certain California state prisons have reputations re: inmate aggression. Cocoran and Pelican Bay in particular. As I mentioned, I'm not sure how they determin where a convicted sex offender ends-up, but Cocoran has a history of the prison population applying their own version of justice. If he's lucky, he'll end up in special containment (like Charlie Manson) where they'll have trouble getting close to him. But even Charlie has been assulted in S.C. by determined inmates. Manson's crime was much more horrific that Polanski's, should he be convicted, so I would think Manson would be more likely to be assaulted. Usually it's the Mansons and Jeffrey Dahmers who end up being killed by other prisoners. I just don't think it's accurate to say "it could well amount to a death sentence" considering there isn't a high number of inmates killed by other inmates because of the crimes they committed; and I can't see where Polanski would be any more likely to be killed for statutory rape than any other person convicted of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Whoopi Goldberg has clarified her comment "that it wasn't rape-rape".She says she was only referring to the legal charge Polanski was convicted of, which was not "rape", but "unlawful sex with a minor". http://allday.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/10/01/2084644.aspx I did not see the original context of her remarks and am not sure if this flies. If she was providing a factual correction, then ok. If she was trying to minimize the crimes with which Polanski was convicted, then no, dickering over the specifics of what he was charged with is not going to buy him any sympathy and her comments are not excused. In 1977, Polanski was charged with rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14 and furnishing a controlled substance to a minor. These charges were dropped as part of a plea bargain that saw the director admit to the lesser charge of unlawful sex with a minor, while he later fled the US on the eve of sentencing. http://www.digitalspy.com/showbiz/a179696/...-rape-rape.html -k if it was a rape in the legal definition the charges should follow him for life... reading Goldberg's comment I begin to wonder that maybe we don't know the whole story? not very long ago sex with a 13 yr old was legal here, drugging them first obviously would not be legal if it was my daughter I would've followed him to france and beat the crap out of him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Manson's crime was much more horrific that Polanski's, should he be convicted, so I would think Manson would be more likely to be assaulted. Usually it's the Mansons and Jeffrey Dahmers who end up being killed by other prisoners. I just don't think it's accurate to say "it could well amount to a death sentence" considering there isn't a high number of inmates killed by other inmates because of the crimes they committed; and I can't see where Polanski would be any more likely to be killed for statutory rape than any other person convicted of it. ...murderers are on top of the prison social ladder Dahmer was killed by a prisoner who was as crazy as he was... sex criminals particularily pedo's (skinners) are the lowest in prison, abused by everyone...even criminals have kids they love, getting sent to prison for hurting a kid and your time there is very unpleasant...it's always open season on pedo's in prison... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Manson's crime was much more horrific that Polanski's, should he be convicted, so I would think Manson would be more likely to be assaulted. Usually it's the Mansons and Jeffrey Dahmers who end up being killed by other prisoners. I just don't think it's accurate to say "it could well amount to a death sentence" considering there isn't a high number of inmates killed by other inmates because of the crimes they committed; and I can't see where Polanski would be any more likely to be killed for statutory rape than any other person convicted of it. It would be very ironic if they ended up in the same prison...Manson, Polanski. Re: sex offenders in prison...especially celebrity sex offenders. Some gang-member stuck in the same institute would get some pretty righteous prison-cred by 'offing' Polanski. Seriously. Mr Target-On-His-Back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 At first I was all Hollywood about this dated but not dead Polanski saga. I even thought that perhaps this young victim at the time was a very mature teenager...THEN I was reminded that she was but a child of 13...worst was when I was informed that the girl was drugged..That Polanski slipped a qualude into her milk..or what ever...a powerful sleeping pill that brought about the valley girl drawl that still exists today...Lastly that the bastard not only had sex with the sleeping victim but sodomized her as well....I would say Polanski must pay dispite what Hollywood and even the victim say...IF Polanski is let off then that opens the door and further legitimized the rape and sodomy of children..The lefties in Hollywood do not want this done to their children but seemingly find it okay for the children of others - This mentality is the first sign of an insidious self indulgent eliteness that must be nipped in the bud...and I don't care if it's decades latter....we still punish aging Nazis...Polanski must also be punished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 It would be very ironic if they ended up in the same prison...Manson, Polanski. Re: sex offenders in prison...especially celebrity sex offenders. Some gang-member stuck in the same institute would get some pretty righteous prison-cred by 'offing' Polanski. Seriously. Mr Target-On-His-Back. Manson is in Corcoran in the Protective Housing Unit. Sirhan Sirhan is also in the same prison and same unit as Manson. It's possible he'd end up there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Manson is in Corcoran in the Protective Housing Unit. Sirhan Sirhan is also in the same prison and same unit as Manson. It's possible he'd end up there. Polanski is considered white collar. He will probably end up playing chess with Lord Black...who will eventually get drunk on some smuggled in scotch and punch the old polacks lights out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 The lefties in Hollywood do not want this done to their children but seemingly find it okay for the children of others - This mentality is the first sign of an insidious self indulgent eliteness that must be nipped in the bud...and I don't care if it's decades latter....we still punish aging Nazis...Polanski must also be punished.give it up with the leftie poo already...I'm as socialist as can be it's not a political issue, it's an elitest issue, where the famous of any political leanings can get a slap on the wrist while the rest of us can expect to get hammered... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 While, to my knowledge, it's true that those who commit sex offenses agaisnt children often have a bad time of it in prison, I admit I"m a bit surprised by those who look with such glee (maybe sexual pleasure) at the notion of prison rape. So, for all the knuckleheads out there who don't understand who and what they're supporting, here's a crucial bit of education: The vast majority--the overwhelming majority--of prison rape victims are non-violent offenders, men who are NOT hardened criminals, being victimized by brutal predators. Every time you laugh about prison rape--or worse, support the noxious idea--you are supporting and defending cruel, predatory, violent individuals who are abusing men weaker and less violent than themselves. As usual, it comes down to power--some poeple will quite reflexively and naturally support and defend the powerful against the weak. If the powerful is a raping lowlife--well, that's fine and dandy with these power-worshippers, evidently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 While, to my knowledge, it's true that those who commit sex offenses agaisnt children often have a bad time of it in prison, I admit I"m a bit surprised by those who look with such glee (maybe sexual pleasure) at the notion of prison rape. So, for all the knuckleheads out there who don't understand who and what they're supporting, here's a crucial bit of education: The vast majority--the overwhelming majority--of prison rape victims are non-violent offenders, men who are NOT hardened criminals, being victimized by brutal predators. Every time you laugh about prison rape--or worse, support the noxious idea--you are supporting and defending cruel, predatory, violent individuals who are abusing men weaker and less violent than themselves. As usual, it comes down to power--some poeple will quite reflexively and naturally support and defend the powerful against the weak. If the powerful is a raping lowlife--well, that's fine and dandy with these power-worshippers, evidently. Evidently its no different with people who scorn the idea that Afghan detainees are being tortured. Its not TORTURE torture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 Evidently its no different with people who scorn the idea that Afghan detainees are being tortured. Its not TORTURE torture. Well said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted December 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 14, 2009 (edited) Evidently its no different with people who scorn the idea that Afghan detainees are being tortured.Its not TORTURE torture. Eyeball, I see a difference between the action of Polanski and the actions of Canadian soldiers who handed an ordinary Afghan over to Afghan authorities.This question deserves a separate thread. Edited December 14, 2009 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted December 14, 2009 Report Share Posted December 14, 2009 (edited) Eyeball, I see a difference between the action of Polanski and the actions of Canadian soldiers who handed an ordinary Afghan over to Afghan authorities. This question deserves a separate thread. I'm not talking about the actions of Polanski or our government, I'm pointing out that the definitions of what happened to the victims in both cases are being diminished in the same way for exactly the same reason, to defend the indefensible and support the unsupportable. What's particularly vile is the hypocrisy of people who scorned the statement "its not RAPE rape" that are now effectively saying the same thing about the treatment of detainees, that its not TORTURE torture. Its grotesque GROTESQUE. Edited December 14, 2009 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted December 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 15, 2009 (edited) What's particularly vile is the hypocrisy of people who scorned the statement "its not RAPE rape" that are now effectively saying the same thing about the treatment of detainees, that its not TORTURE torture.An injustice is an injustice. But the mother of the young girl is in a different level of injustice from Polanski.IOW, there are degrees to injustice. And it is not hypocrisy to note the fact that injustice comes in different degrees. Edited December 15, 2009 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.