After 31 years ....

[kibbles]

Yes I said community service because I agree with BroomJockey that especially given the fact that the victim wants to let it go, that it be let go. But to receive some form of punishment that won't end up in a big public trial, that's what I said community service and I stand by it.

I never thought about the fact that she may have to pay the cash back, is that a possibility?

[BroomJockey]

I never thought about the fact that she may have to pay the cash back, is that a possibility?

Depending on if there was a gag order attached to it, yes. Add in a penalty clause, and she may have to pay extra.

[Rapscallion]

If the cash was part of a civil settlement and not part of a court proceeding, then I could see it being untouchable if a court forces him back.

I'm slightly torn on this. Paedophile, so jail him - sure. Are the interests of justice being served by jailing someone for what will be the rest of his natural life? I have my doubts, but we do it to others as far as I'm aware (at least we do over here). Generally speaking, so far I'm in favour.

However, the two points that make me wonder are that first there was a plea bargain and the court was looking as if it was going to change its mind (as far as I understand it), so was the justice system being fair and honest itself? Secondly, would there be such a concerted effort to drag him back if he wasn't so famous?

On balance, I'd say lock him up like anyone else, but there are a couple of grey areas for me.

Rapscallion

[Flyndaran]

I don't see any grey areas.
He committed rape of a child. He should see long term prison time.
I'm downright aghast that there are some of you that think he should get off for raping a child.

[gremcint]

rapist, child molester, fugitive.

What's with all the debate? SHOOT the mother****er

[Amethyst Hunter]

I don't see any grey areas.
He committed rape of a child. He should see long term prison time.
I'm downright aghast that there are some of you that think he should get off for raping a child.

This so much. Fry the bastard; I have NO sympathy for rapists whatsoever.

If we let him off, we are in effect saying that rape doesn't matter. Women (because the overwhelming majority of rapes are done by men against women) don't matter. And that's flat-out WRONG.

(Needless to say I don't feel very inclined to weep much for Mr. Polanski's dilemma. )

[Nyoibo]

(because the overwhelming majority of rapes are done by men against women)

I'd debate that, but that's another topic.

[Rapscallion]

I don't see any grey areas.

Then you didn't read my post.

I may be wrong about this, but my understanding is that the courts were agreeing to something, and then began to look as if they were reneging on it. The judicial system, including how plea bargains work, needs to be examined. I'm not particularly versed in them, so I've got no idea if this is normal for plea bargains. Given that he spent time in a concentration camp, I could understand his fear of imprisonment, though that certainly doesn't excuse him.

I think the grey areas are more for introspection of the US judicial system, than about his case. That he had sex with an underage girl is undisputed - he pled guilty to that. I'm also a touch concerned that the current media frenzy over potential child sex abuse (nothing more villified in the press these days) is colouring reactions.

Rapscallion

[Flyndaran]

I believe it was more a matter of the judge rejecting the prosecutor's deal as offensively light. Rapists shouldn't get slaps on the wrist not matter how famous they are.

[BroomJockey]

(Needless to say I don't feel very inclined to weep much for Mr. Polanski's dilemma. )

I don't give a shit about Polanski. I'm saying, this traumatic event for the girl, bringing it up 31 years later, making it the focus of her life again (because the media sure as fuck ain't gonna leave her alone), does this really need to consume her life? Does this really cry out for justice? That's why I said "Just quietly lose the extradition." It doesn't send a "rape is okay" message, or anything like that; after all, he'd still be under arrest if he went to the US. It just keeps her from being forced to continually confront a horrible moment in her life, and for no gain. She's not at risk, and he's not at risk of abusing any US citizens (since he's not allowed there). Other countries can watch out for their citizens as required.

[kibbles]

Depending on if there was a gag order attached to it, yes. Add in a penalty clause, and she may have to pay extra.

Yikes, I would agree with this if she accepted the money then pursued charges; but, she is actively trying to get them to dismiss the charges.

I totally agree with your comment before about how this is just making the victim's life harder, not easier. But I still stand behind my statement that this should just be dropped.

[Pedersen]

(because the overwhelming majority of rapes are done by men against women)

I'd debate that, but that's another topic.

Wait, did you just mean to say that male on female rape is not the most common kind of rape? Are you serious? Have any statistics to back that up? How about having the backbone to make a thread asserting that, using those stats?

Inquiring minds want to know!

[BroomJockey]

Yikes, I would agree with this if she accepted the money then pursued charges; but, she is actively trying to get them to dismiss the charges.

Sadly, in contract law, they wouldn't care. It could be as simple as "if you testify, you're hooped." That's why you read the snot out of any settlement agreement. I am just speculating as to this, though. Polanski would have been an idiot not to tack in on, however.

And Pedersen, it might just be the "overwhelming" part. After all, prison rape doesn't exactly get reported and prosecuted, and good luck convincing a guy to report that he's been raped (by a male or female). That might be enough to just make it a "majority" of rapes being male-on-female.

[telecom_goddess]

Ok here is my take.....while I agree no one should be raped and anyone who actually rapes someone is scum....do we REALLY know what happened here? Did he rape her, or did she consent to it and then cry rape later? Who knows what the scenario actually was and how guilty he actually is.

Frankly I think the whole thing is so old now it should just be dropped, and if she agrees it should be dropped then drop it. I would like to see him be able to come back to this country and make films here again.

[BlaqueKatt]

Sadly, in contract law, they wouldn't care. It could be as simple as "if you testify, you're hooped." That's why you read the snot out of any settlement agreement. I am just speculating as to this, though. Polanski would have been an idiot not to tack in on, however.

the trial took place 31 years ago-there would be no testifying-it's all over except for the sentencing he skipped out on-and she has spoken publicly about it-even granted interviews at the premiere of the movie he made-so "making her go through it again" is BS.


Plus that would set a legal precedent, skip out on a trial, be a fugitive for years and we'll let you go.....

Also-yeah his mother died in a concentration camp-he never set foot in one.


And just because a prosecutor and defense attorney reach a plea agreement DOES NOT mean a judge has to accept it-the judge was not part of the agreement-he or she is an outside third party, not bound to the agreement.