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

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)

it just speaks to these people leading some kind of totally, pathologically blinkered existence

you mean the french?

well, I DO have issues with Allen hooking up with Soon-Yi, but they're not legal.

you mean the french?

No, just the "intellectuals"

Polanski was largely free to lay Swiss roots

He probably enjoyed that.

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

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

^^

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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, October 1, 2009 6:09 PM (33 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

otm x 1000

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?

"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".

where would france's ballsack sprout, toulouse?

somewhere in provence maybe.

Bill Magill - Francologist (made up word)

more like proctologist

Speaking truth to poo-er.

good one

OK, I see why Eric hates you guys

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)

Polanski made What? since the rape, and it's an awesome flick.

révoltant de transformer un festival en traquenard!

^ oh, the outrage

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.

this thread is a traquenard

it's a traquenard

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.

Damn those ballsackless Frenchies with their uncontroversial opinions on the administration of law.

They eat cheese, y'know.

they ROLLED OVER for the NAZI REGIME and now they're ROLLING OVER for OBAMA SOCIALISM

Got their asses handed to them in Vietnam too oh wait

WAKE UP, LIBTARDS

traquenard fromage

what a disaster for surrender monkeys

http://206.47.170.43/channels/images/panther2.jpg

EXTRADITE THIS

too late

based on my extensive knowledge of sentencing garnered from years of watching law and order,

max, you just won yrself a free beer

HUMBURGER

Polanski made What? since the rape, and it's an awesome flick.

― Mordy, Thursday, October 1, 2009 3:50 PM (20 minutes ago) Bookmark

what? is pre-chinatown so you're wrong on both counts

what?

My bad about the date. What's the other count I'm wrong on?

probably it being awesome. this thread made me get chinatown out of the library, btw

i hope you can live w/yourself

i guess you could say that the petition signers want Polanski to be free

really free

really really really really free

harbl is going on the list

good work giving MONEY to a PEDERAST, "HARBL"! maybe when you're in HELL you'll realize the MISTAKE you made!!