Roman Polanski, or pardon me but your poll is in my neck.

I am certain there are many who will harrumph that, following this arrest, justice was done at last. But Polanski is 76. To put him on trial or keep him in jail does not serve society in general or his victim in particular. Nor does it prove the doggedness and earnestness of the American legal system. If he weren't famous, I bet no one would bother with him at all.

^^^^ this.

it's also pretty shitty that the victim and her family will have to go through reliving the details all over again.

yeah well a non-famous person wouldn't have gotten tipped off throughout the years about apprehension efforts and thus been able to avoid capture for 20+ years

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

Um, if he weren't famous, there is no way he would have gotten away with it for so long.

oh xpost

btw it's a real big fallacy imo that a non-famous person would've been forgotten about - i think shows on court tv & shit make it pretty apparent that cops & prosecutors forever hold grudges over unsolved cases & fugitives - the show FUGITIVE TASK FORCE on a&e makes it kind of apparent that the swat team & us govt will hunt your ass down over a minor parole violation let alone jumping ship like polanski did

and on top of that all, famous people & people with money have such an advantage in the legal system (and socially when it comes to stigma over crime) than non-famous people

What a waste of fucking time, says someone currently in a court case cos his parole officer fucked up his address and went to the wrong place

Hey really, isn't "he assaulted a really young girl" the first thing that comes to mind when you think of Polanski? Much as I like a few of his films it always has been for me

As reagrds stigma. It took his autobiog for me to know about the Holocaust thing.

funny how all those cons on the megan's law website aren't rich & famous people

the argument about "what good does it do prosecuting him now" seems sort of silly to me. he's not that much older than bernie madoff. old people can go to prison. (although i bet polanski won't actually do any time out of all this.) i know, the difference is that polanski's crime was years ago, but it's entirely his fault that there's been such a long gap.

Bernie Madoff was actively committing his crimes. That's kinda stupid.

bullshit, that investment cash threw itself at him

uh-uh, madoff essentially turned himself in. his crimes were done. it's not like anyone was going to invest any money with him again. what's the point in prosecuting an old man?

madoff has suffered enough, he can't even visit wall street anymore

Hahahaha I agree actually, don't see one xp

forget it jake it's wall street

he didn't even get to attend an ivy league school, the pain and suffering far outweighs his crime

j0rdan otm in this thread.

No doubt Polanski could have settled this one way or another earlier had he not, you know, plead guilty (to a much lesser charge than what was originally filed) and fled the country. Because once he did that, how could any prosecutor possibly shrug and say, "eh, what's in the past is in the past?" That's some red flag shit, and what kind of precedent would it set to let such a public figure off the hook for no good reason?

What would he be coming back to the U.S. for, exactly? His sentencing? Jail time? I can't imagine this just simply picks up where he left it off. Taking into account all the stuff surrounding this case for the past three decades, the best scenario would probably be some sort of retrial, and he could take his chances with a jury rather than that (late) crazy judge. Maybe Gov. Arnold would commute his sentence. Either way, I can imagine Polanski coming out ahead in the appeals process, one way or another. But win or not in the end, an asterisk will always be affixed to his name.

woah easy. he didn't do no steroids, buddy.

could he have still made chinatown if he HADNT sodomized a 13 yr old? im not so sure

j0rdan otm in this thread.

― deej, Sunday, September 27, 2009 9:03 PM (23 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

This whole case, this whole argument is so not at all as interesting as The Tenant. Great movie. Go see it.

Frédéric Mitterrand, the French culture minister, said the arrest was proof of the "frightening" side of America.

"In the same way as there is a generous America which we love, there is also a certain kind of America which is frightening, and it is this America which has now shown us its face," he said.

there is also a certain kind of America which is frightening

yeah, it's called north america

In a few months Interpol will bust Mitterand while feeding Camembert to a fifteen-year-old boy in a stable.

The age of consent for being fed cheese by an older man is fourteen in France, IIRC.

Memories.

There is no way Polanski will be extradited. The French don't want it, and they will twist whichever arms necessary.

The age of consent for being fed cheese by an older man is fourteen in France, IIRC

not true, although there is no age limit if you do it at home with your family during meals.

Sure was nice of Anne Applebaum, in that atrocious Washington Post op-ed, to mention the fact that her husband is, you know, the Foreign Minister of Poland. Who might have an interest in the case.

But it was a balanced piece - she even acknowledged that "He can be blamed, it is true, for his original, panicky decision to flee"

Yes, but please note the use of the passive voice.

lol

Shortly after the United States Presidential Election, 2008, opposition politician Ryszard Czarnecki charged Sikorski had repeated a joke suggesting President-elect Barack Obama's grandfather was a cannibal (who had eaten a Polish missionary. A spokesman for the Polish foreign office denied it, explaining Sikorski "was only giving an example of the unpalatable and racist 'jokes' that surround President Elect Obama".[7] His wife Anne Applebaum had declared her intent to vote for Obama.[8]

that joan z. shore essay is a humour piece right? a parody?

i am wondering that about all these articles tbh. people seem to have lost their minds.

that joan z. shore essay is a humour piece right? a parody?

― fountain bleaut (s1ocki), Monday, September 28, 2009 4:54 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

srsly.

"Swiss banking secrecy, after all, has not been a ploy to launder dirty money; it has been a time-honored tradition to respect the privacy of their customers."

not sure what the technical term is for this. "fake ratiocination"?

whatever, j0rdan, i think your argument is tunnel-visioned. on one side, we have frothing BY THE LAW loonies like you who make it into a vast bourgeois conspiracy, and on the other hand we have people crying about the holocaust and how wonderful his films are.

i am arguing that both sides are fucking idiots and are making too much of a fuss out of it. extradite him, make him invest LOTS of his money in efforts to prevent child abuse/protect abused children, and be done with it. putting dude in jail does nothing.

let's invent a new penal tariff... for some reason!

putting anyone in jail for anything "does nothing"! i think that's the point, the nothing of it.

I'm inclined to cut Polanski a tiny bit of slack, having seen the documentary on the case. He committed a crime. He pleaded guilty, as part of a plea bargain which had him serving 90 days in prison. He was freed, then apparently the judge changed his mind about the plea bargain and ordered him back to jail. It does seem there's a good chance the case might be dismissed on appeal, on account of judicial misconduct. Only he can't appeal without going back to the U.S., which in turn puts him in danger of a lengthy sentence, precisely on account of a plea that he submitted as part of a plea bargain that was never honoured. Whatever slant you want to put on this, you can hardly say it's simply justice taking its course.

is jordan or whoever really arguing that he should be in jail? mostly i think the non-joan z. shores are just arguing that he should be extradited like any other child rapist and then lets let, i dunno, a judge, or something, decide what to do

it's almost enough to put you off sex with 13 year olds, it really is.

yup um xp

I don't know about J0rdan – I'm simply arguing that I'm glad he was arrested. What happens next is for the courts to decide.

i think your argument is tunnel-visioned. on one side, we have frothing BY THE LAW loonies like you who make it into a vast bourgeois conspiracy

wtf does this even mean

what are the benefits of bumming a younger girl?

presumably he'd have a new charge to deal with for running, right? i understand that also is a no-no

presumably he'd have a new charge to deal with for running, right? i understand that also is a no-no

― goole, Monday, September 28, 2009 5:10 PM (17 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

he directed 'rosemary's baby' though.

wtf do you even mean, alfred. it's pretty simple to follow: j0rdan sounds like a right-wing wingnut, but instead he's frothin at the mouth about Polanski and nt Obamacare.