one leftist pervert down, millions to go amirite
― steamed hams (harbl), Thursday, 1 October 2009 17:58 (fourteen years ago) link
Who are you calling a leftist, thangyewverymuchyou'vebeenawunnerfulaudience
― The Prince's choice: making a brush. (Tom D.), Thursday, 1 October 2009 17:59 (fourteen years ago) link
"Prosecution by whim" doesn't even begin to come close to accurately describing a case in which someone was properly indicted by a grand jury, charged with a felony, allowed to plead guilty to a lesser felony, then fled before sentencing. It's very nearly the exact opposite, in fact.
― a wicked 60s beat poop combo (Pancakes Hackman), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:01 (fourteen years ago) link
I think the questionable thing is why it took them 31 years to get round to finding where and when he was at any given time
― The Prince's choice: making a brush. (Tom D.), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:02 (fourteen years ago) link
it's questionable i guess but has no real relevance, there are many cases that pick up steam years later because of a fresh focus or a new person on the case or whatever
― omar little, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:05 (fourteen years ago) link
Guys, let's drive to L.A. and ask to serve in the jury pool.
― Roman Polanski now sleeps in prison. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:06 (fourteen years ago) link
and even if it's a "conspiracy", the conspiracy's "endgame" appears to be "hey let's get that rapist!"
― omar little, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:06 (fourteen years ago) link
prosecution "by whim" ie randomly seems like it would produce better outcomes than the classist racist control mechanism we're getting now
― goole, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:07 (fourteen years ago) link
11 guilty votes, and one vote for "don't you obama hustlees have anything better to do than convict a director of a crime from before half of you were born?"
― omar little, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:08 (fourteen years ago) link
The idea of Roman Polanski incarcerated is an anathema and a situation that we, who have the privilege of making movies, cannot tolerate.
This passage has received more than enough attention, but too much of it directed at "we, who have the privilege of making movies." The crux is "Roman Polanski incarcerated is an anathema and a situation that we ... cannot tolerate". In totally ignoring the circumstances of his incarceration, it becomes an argument that Polanski's art places him in a special class of people, people who not only receive special treatment, but rightly deserve it. And as it speaks from membership in his class to the rest of the world, it amounts to an elite's passionate defense of their own privileged difference. It's almost shocking to hear it stated so plainly. Like reading that wingnut's call for Obama to be overthrown in a military coup.
― That's not just me saying that, that's the Pentagon. (contenderizer), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:09 (fourteen years ago) link
This is to my mum and dad and to my Roman Polanski incarcerated.
― omar little, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:11 (fourteen years ago) link
the idea that Whoopi Goldberg is incarcerated at "The View" is an anathema, and a situation that we, who have the privilege of admiring The Associate, cannot tolerate.
― Roman Polanski now sleeps in prison. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:12 (fourteen years ago) link
I wonder if any of them read it, to be honest - I just can't comprehend why they've all gone in to bat for this guy on this issue.
― Ismael Klata, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:13 (fourteen years ago) link
we hold these privileges of making movies to be self-evident
― ( ´_ゝ˙) (Dr. Phil), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:13 (fourteen years ago) link
contenderizer OTFM
― the taint of Macca is strong (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:13 (fourteen years ago) link
Maybe they all wish they were that little girl, privileged to share lukewarm water, champagne, and a sleeping pill with greatness.
― Roman Polanski now sleeps in prison. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:14 (fourteen years ago) link
Woody Allen, of all people, should know better than to stick his neck out on this particular issue (and I say this as someone who has zero issues with his marriage to Soon-Yi)
― the taint of Macca is strong (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:14 (fourteen years ago) link
it just speaks to these people leading some kind of totally, pathologically blinkered existence
― the taint of Macca is strong (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:15 (fourteen years ago) link
you mean the french?
― velko, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:16 (fourteen years ago) link
well, I DO have issues with Allen hooking up with Soon-Yi, but they're not legal.
― Roman Polanski now sleeps in prison. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:16 (fourteen years ago) link
No, just the "intellectuals"
― The Prince's choice: making a brush. (Tom D.), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:17 (fourteen years ago) link
Polanski was largely free to lay Swiss roots
He probably enjoyed that.
― The ever dapper nicolars (Nicole), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:21 (fourteen years ago) link
transcript of polanski's plea is interesting. it includes a passage where he is made to acknowledge that the judge has not decided a sentence for him, it could be as much as 20 years, and that he'd need psych evaluation and probation reports first. which seems to undermine the arguments that the judge "reneged" on a deal for a short sentence.
can an ilx lawyer explain plea bargaining - can you bargain down to a specific sentence unofficially or is it just about copping the lesser charge and the judge still has discretion up to the max sentence?
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0928091polanskiplea8.html
― joe, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:21 (fourteen years ago) link
based on my extensive knowledge of sentencing garnered from years of watching law and order, you bargain with the prosecutor--pleading guilty to a lesser charge than the charge that would be brought to trial--in exchange for a specific sentence or sentence range, which the prosecutor then brings to the judge as a recommendation and i think mostly always the judge follows it
― fleetwood (max), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:24 (fourteen years ago) link
^^
― rather shipped (J0rdan S.), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:26 (fourteen years ago) link
Here you'll take a guilty plea on a charge in exchange for dropping others, or in exchange for having the charge reduced somehow. Sentencing remains with the judge entirely. But America does seem to be different.
― Ismael Klata, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:26 (fourteen years ago) link
although, it's not always totally about pleading guilty to a lesser charge. if the charge has a range of, say, 5-25 years, you can plead guilty to the highest charge in the hopes that the judge will take the prosecutor's punishment recommendation into account as opposed to just taking your chance with the judge
― rather shipped (J0rdan S.), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:29 (fourteen years ago) link
Re Ismael: I think it's about the same in the US. Plea bargaining seems to have more to do with the charges levied than with the punishment imposed. Judges usually seem to go with the prosecutor's recs WR2 sentencing, but they aren't bound to. Crux is the "you plead guilty to this and we won't charge you with that" part.
― That's not just me saying that, that's the Pentagon. (contenderizer), Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:33 (fourteen years ago) link
right. so the idea that the judge backed out of an agreement is just a slur on a dead guy who can't answer back? because this passage has polanski and his lawyer testifying that they haven't made any backroom deal over sentencing and the judge makes it clear none of this is binding on him anyway. puts a whole new light on the judge's behaviour and makes polanski's flight even less excusable imo.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0928091polanskiplea11.html
― joe, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:37 (fourteen years ago) link
Apparently no judge is ever legally bound to accept a plea bargain, and has the right to change his mind at any time. Polanski, of course, was *afraid* the judge would change his mind, and fled before the judge ever did so. Which makes Polanski seem all the more cowardly.
The reason this is all happening now, supposedly, is that Polanski and his lawyers shook the hornets nest earlier this year. That sketchy doc had come out, replete with allegations that there was some questionable exchange between the former prosecutor (Wells) and the judge that turned the latter against (or more against) Polanski and therefore tainted the trial. Polanski, con mucho hubris, started lobbying for the case to be dropped in early '09. Of course, the current L.A. prosecution team/D.A. did not take lightly to being lobbied by a fugitive who had plead guilty to a heinous crime, but at the same time offered to reassess the case in good faith if Polanski appeared in court. He even implied Polanski's team had made several strong points. Polanski of course didn't show, and the wheels were set in motion once again.
(For that matter, in a 2003 Vanity Fair piece, the victim, too, requested Polanski appear in court to put this all behind them, which belies all the "respect the victim's wishes" cries noted that she has "forgiven" him.)
News that Wells apparently just recanted his admission in the doc that he met with the judge and convinced him to drop the plea deal pretty much fucks Polanski, since that admission is largely what Polanski's team based its renewed lobbying efforts on. Now Wells claims he just showed the judge pictures of Polanski partying with young women at Oktoberfest, but whether he's lying or not is irrelevant. By discrediting himself, Wells takes himself out of the running to testify at Polanski's bequest that anything legally shady went down behind closed doors.
And now comes news that France and Poland have significantly lessened their "Free Polanski" stance down to near nil.
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:40 (fourteen years ago) link
― That's not just me saying that, that's the Pentagon. (contenderizer), Thursday, October 1, 2009 6:09 PM (33 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
otm x 1000
― latebloomer, Thursday, 1 October 2009 18:47 (fourteen years ago) link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=373m99A_oP0
I still say Polanski's being publicly PUNISHED for having the nerve to make a slanderous film based on a slanderous book implicating ex-UK Prime Minister and soon-to-be EU President Tony Blair in the Iraq_War_(7-7)_conspiracy and CIA_torture debacle. Is it really not that obvious?
― James Mitchell, Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:11 (fourteen years ago) link
"And now comes news that France and Poland have significantly lessened their "Free Polanski" stance down to near nil."
France has always been know as a place that really sticks to their guns. France sprouting a ballsack would be "an anathema".
― Bill Magill, Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:12 (fourteen years ago) link
where would france's ballsack sprout, toulouse?
― velko, Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:15 (fourteen years ago) link
somewhere in provence maybe.
― Bill Magill, Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:15 (fourteen years ago) link
Bill Magill - Francologist (made up word)
― dowd, Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:17 (fourteen years ago) link
more like proctologist
― Roman Polanski now sleeps in prison. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:21 (fourteen years ago) link
Speaking truth to poo-er.
― Broman Polanski (Noodle Vague), Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:23 (fourteen years ago) link
good one
― Bill Magill, Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:24 (fourteen years ago) link
OK, I see why Eric hates you guys
― A Patch on Blazing Saddles (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:43 (fourteen years ago) link
This is just an internet poll (from L'Express a French bi-weekly news magazine) but it sems to be the consensus:
The arrest of Roman Polanski is:
révoltant de transformer un festival en traquenard! 11%(disgusting to turn a festival into a trap)
normal quand on est recherché par la justice. 65%(normal when you're wanted by the justice system)
ridicule, c'est une affaire vieille de trente ans... 15%(ridiculous, it's a thirty year old story)
C 'est le cadet de mes soucis! 9%(the least of my worries)
― l'homme moderne: il forniquait et lisait des journaux (Michael White), Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:46 (fourteen years ago) link
Polanski made What? since the rape, and it's an awesome flick.
― Mordy, Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:50 (fourteen years ago) link
révoltant de transformer un festival en traquenard!
^ oh, the outrage
― Bill Magill, Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:58 (fourteen years ago) link
Sarkozy has much better things to do than get stuck in a traditional French polemic that no-one in France, apart from a couple of professional 'intellectuals' cares much about. France hasn't sprouted a ball-sack, he's just listening to the polls.
― l'homme moderne: il forniquait et lisait des journaux (Michael White), Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:58 (fourteen years ago) link
this thread is a traquenard
― steamed hams (harbl), Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:59 (fourteen years ago) link
it's a traquenard
― Mr. Que, Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:59 (fourteen years ago) link
Even if you add the 'ridiculous' and the 'revolting', it's still 65% - 26% in favor of the arrest. I'm not saying that's the national average but I bet the majority understands why this is happening. The biggest outrage seems to come from the Swiss who feel their traditional neutrality and independence is in tatters and who tend to opine on that more than on the merits of the case.
― l'homme moderne: il forniquait et lisait des journaux (Michael White), Thursday, 1 October 2009 20:01 (fourteen years ago) link
Damn those ballsackless Frenchies with their uncontroversial opinions on the administration of law.
― France Sprouting a Balzac (Noodle Vague), Thursday, 1 October 2009 20:02 (fourteen years ago) link
They eat cheese, y'know.
they ROLLED OVER for the NAZI REGIME and now they're ROLLING OVER for OBAMA SOCIALISM
― omar little, Thursday, 1 October 2009 20:03 (fourteen years ago) link