Look if they really wanted him in prison they should have done this shit correctly the first time around. Why so incompetent?
So because they may have messed up the sentencing in the trial the first time 'round, obviously the case wasn't that important and it should just be dropped?
Here's the thing, you can run away from the law. It's just illegal, and difficult, but you can do it. Everyone knows this, and putting this dude in prison isn't going to change that.
And this makes it OK....how
It doesn't it make it ok.
Just saying that putting him prison now when he's pretty much near the end of his life anyway will be petty, and probably a vulgar display of power.
And letting him walk would send the message to everyone that if you run away from the law long enough, you'll be rewarded for it by having all charges dropped.
No, it will send the message to everyone that if you're going to run from the law, you pretty much have to keep running, forever. Like a dude who is forced to push a boulder up a hill, but every time he reaches the top, it comes back down. Forever.
Yes, truly living in France is a Sisyphean task
It's horrible. Horrible. And traveling to all those other countries, making those movies and all that money.
People who are "on the run" do not win Oscars. They get caught scavenging for food in a dumpster behind a Save-A-Lot.
Look if they really wanted him in prison they should have done this shit correctly the first time around. Why so incompetent?
So because they may have messed up the sentencing in the trial the first time 'round, obviously the case wasn't that important and it should just be dropped?
God only knows.
Mazer Rackham on
0
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
Look if they really wanted him in prison they should have done this shit correctly the first time around. Why so incompetent?
So because they may have messed up the sentencing in the trial the first time 'round, obviously the case wasn't that important and it should just be dropped?
Well, obviously, if you manage to run from the law before they put you in jail, you've earned your freedom because hey, those guys just incompetent.
reVerse on
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
Here's the thing, you can run away from the law. It's just illegal, and difficult, but you can do it. Everyone knows this, and putting this dude in prison isn't going to change that.
And this makes it OK....how
It doesn't it make it ok.
Just saying that putting him prison now when he's pretty much near the end of his life anyway will be petty, and probably a vulgar display of power.
And letting him walk would send the message to everyone that if you run away from the law long enough, you'll be rewarded for it by having all charges dropped.
No, it will send the message to everyone that if you're going to run from the law, you pretty much have to keep running, forever. Like a dude who is forced to push a boulder up a hill, but every time he reaches the top, it comes back down. Forever.
Yes, truly living in France is a Sisyphean task
It's horrible. Horrible. And traveling to all those other countries, making those movies and all that money.
People who are "on the run" do not win Oscars. They get caught scavenging for food in a dumpster behind a Save-A-Lot.
So are we looking to punish Polanski for his crime, or Europeans in general for allowing him to roman free for so long?
Look if they really wanted him in prison they should have done this shit correctly the first time around. Why so incompetent?
So because they may have messed up the sentencing in the trial the first time 'round, obviously the case wasn't that important and it should just be dropped?
Here's the thing, you can run away from the law. It's just illegal, and difficult, but you can do it. Everyone knows this, and putting this dude in prison isn't going to change that.
And this makes it OK....how
It doesn't it make it ok.
Just saying that putting him prison now when he's pretty much near the end of his life anyway will be petty, and probably a vulgar display of power.
And letting him walk would send the message to everyone that if you run away from the law long enough, you'll be rewarded for it by having all charges dropped.
No, it will send the message to everyone that if you're going to run from the law, you pretty much have to keep running, forever. Like a dude who is forced to push a boulder up a hill, but every time he reaches the top, it comes back down. Forever.
Yes, truly living in France is a Sisyphean task
It's horrible. Horrible. And traveling to all those other countries, making those movies and all that money.
People who are "on the run" do not win Oscars. They get caught scavenging for food in a dumpster behind a Save-A-Lot.
So are we looking to punish Polanski for his crime, or Europeans in general for allowing him to roman free for so long?
Look if they really wanted him in prison they should have done this shit correctly the first time around. Why so incompetent?
So because they may have messed up the sentencing in the trial the first time 'round, obviously the case wasn't that important and it should just be dropped?
Well, obviously, if you manage to run from the law before they put you in jail, you've earned your freedom because hey, those guys just incompetent.
Hey he earned his freedom, eking out an existence in the harsh wilds of European award shows.
Ed321 on
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
Look if they really wanted him in prison they should have done this shit correctly the first time around. Why so incompetent?
So because they may have messed up the sentencing in the trial the first time 'round, obviously the case wasn't that important and it should just be dropped?
Well, obviously, if you manage to run from the law before they put you in jail, you've earned your freedom because hey, those guys just incompetent.
Hey he earned his freedom, eking out an existence in the harsh wilds of European award shows.
Well prevailing rumors say that French women don't shave, and judging by his previous partners he seems to like his women smooth, so it must've been awful for him.
Look if they really wanted him in prison they should have done this shit correctly the first time around. Why so incompetent?
So because they may have messed up the sentencing in the trial the first time 'round, obviously the case wasn't that important and it should just be dropped?
Well, obviously, if you manage to run from the law before they put you in jail, you've earned your freedom because hey, those guys just incompetent.
Hey he earned his freedom, eking out an existence in the harsh wilds of European award shows.
It's like The Running Man, except with champagne and hookers, and no consequences for your actions.
Look if they really wanted him in prison they should have done this shit correctly the first time around. Why so incompetent?
So because they may have messed up the sentencing in the trial the first time 'round, obviously the case wasn't that important and it should just be dropped?
Well, obviously, if you manage to run from the law before they put you in jail, you've earned your freedom because hey, those guys just incompetent.
Hey he earned his freedom, eking out an existence in the harsh wilds of European award shows.
It's like The Running Man, except with champagne and hookers, and no consequences for your actions.
Damn you, I typed "It's like The Running Man" the first time, then I deleted it because I couldn't be bothered to check whether it was applicable in this case :x
I hope what I'm seeing here are people engaging in the time honoured art of saying stupid provocative shit on the net, as oppsed to a group of people who really think it's OK to drug and rape a little girl, then flee the justice system.
Is it ok to drug and rape little girls, or flee the justice system?
No? Ok then. Looks like he should face extradition and the courts.
Here's the thing, you can run away from the law. It's just illegal, and difficult, but you can do it. Everyone knows this, and putting this dude in prison isn't going to change that.
So the question is how does it work: A) You can run from the law, but if you ever stop running (or become a famous director, say) they will find you and catch you or you can run from the law, and if you run for long enough then hey, good on you!
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
He committed a crime, so serves the sentence which our legal system has deemed appropriate for that crime, same as anyone else.
If he'd just done the time (no doubt in some Club Fed with tennis courts and back massages...) he'd have been out twenty years ago anyway. This is nobody's fault but his own and I don't see why we should just let the whole thing go because he's gotten away with it for so long.
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
He committed a crime, so serves the sentence which our legal system has deemed appropriate for that crime, same as anyone else.
If he'd just done the time (no doubt in some Club Fed with tennis courts and back massages...) he'd have been out twenty years ago anyway. This is nobody's fault but his own and I don't see why we should just let the whole thing go because he's gotten away with it for so long.
Seriously. It's not like they just happened to discover the crime after he'd popped over to France - he knowingly took extraordinary means to avoid justice.
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
Justice.
At this point it's more about closure, than justice.
Why not charge him with a different crime and arrest him for that, such as running from the fucking law.
And I'm not saying it's OK to drug and rape little girls. It isn't OK at all.
Injustice has already been done by letting him run away for 30 years. There is nothing you can do to bring that to justice except killing him outright.
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
Justice.
Seriously.
He not only raped a 13 year old girl, but he also has been a fugitive of justice for decades. That's not a reason not to punish someone, that's a crime in and of itself. He should serve more time for that, not less.
If he'd just done the time (no doubt in some Club Fed with tennis courts and back massages...) he'd have been out twenty years ago anyway. This is nobody's fault but his own and I don't see why we should just let the whole thing go because he's gotten away with it for so long.
If stat rape fell under the statute of limitations, would you feel the same way? To be honest, while I definitely wouldn't man the baricades to keep Polanski out of prison, for me personally the combination of the two factors - this happened 32 years ago, and the victim has repeatedly expressed that she wants this to go away and she's pretty much forgiven him, not at a time when she was still traumatised but when she very much seems to have put it behind her - make me equally unlikely to be all strident and "Rah rah, justice!" If it was just the one or just the other, I might be with all of those who want him to rot in jail, but the combination makes the difference for me. And I would feel pretty much the same way if this wasn't a famous director.
Edit: To be completely honest, though, part of my reaction here stems from the fact that I don't really see the US being all that quick to extradite a US citizen accused of the same crime in Europe. So I may just be a big, fat hypocrite.
Thirith on
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
Justice.
At this point it's more about closure, than justice.
Why not charge him with a different crime and arrest him for that, such as running from the fucking law.
And I'm not saying it's OK to drug and rape little girls. It isn't OK at all.
Injustice has already been done by letting him run away for 30 years. There is nothing you can do to bring that to justice except killing him outright.
Charging him with a different offense is still going to affect the victim, since the media is going to hone in on her. And Polanski has been trying to get the rape charges dismissed/get a retrial anyway.
Ed321 on
0
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
Why not charge him with a different crime and arrest him for that, such as running from the fucking law.
Why not add that on top of the existing charges?
And I'm not saying it's OK to drug and rape little girls. It isn't OK at all.
Yes, you're just saying that it's okay to not punish people for drugging and raping little girls.
Injustice has already been done by letting him run away for 30 years. There is nothing you can do to bring that to justice except killing him outright.
OR we could put him in jail for the crimes he committed, which include running away for 30 years. I don't see where the death penalty comes in with your thinking.
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
Telling people that no matter how much money you got or how far you run or for how long. As a fugitive the US will not stop until it sees justice done.
Kipling217 on
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
Telling people that no matter how much money you got or how far you run or for how long. As a fugitive the US will not stop until it sees justice done.
So why has the US been sitting on it's fucking ass for 30 years?
If he'd just done the time (no doubt in some Club Fed with tennis courts and back massages...) he'd have been out twenty years ago anyway. This is nobody's fault but his own and I don't see why we should just let the whole thing go because he's gotten away with it for so long.
If stat rape fell under the statute of limitations, would you feel the same way? To be honest, while I definitely wouldn't man the baricades to keep Polanski out of prison, for me personally the combination of the two factors - this happened 32 years ago, and the victim has repeatedly expressed that she wants this to go away and she's pretty much forgiven him, not at a time when she was still traumatised but when she very much seems to have put it behind her - make me equally unlikely to be all strident and "Rah rah, justice!" If it was just the one or just the other, I might be with all of those who want him to rot in jail, but the combination makes the difference for me. And I would feel pretty much the same way if this wasn't a famous director.
Well, it's about precedent. We've already established that the emotional state of the victim shouldn't come into play here. If it was the sort of crime that the charges could just be dropped, she could do that, but the state is obligated to prosecute in cases of a certain gravity (like this one) regardless of the victim's feelings.
As far the statute of limitations, well, there's a reason stat rape isn't a crime that can "expire" over time - it's been deemed of a sufficient severity that we've taken measures to ensure that doesn't happen. Polanski knew that when he committed the crime three decades ago.
What if the victim ends up killing herself because of all this.
All this, for justice?
What if a girl killed herself because she was encouraged to testify in a group rape case? Should we stop prosecuting rapists because it's so hard on the victims?
Ed321 on
0
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
Telling people that no matter how much money you got or how far you run or for how long. As a fugitive the US will not stop until it sees justice done.
So why has the US been sitting on it's fucking ass for 30 years?
All the fugitives must be shitting themselves eh.
It's not a problem with the US, it's a problem with the French.
So it's GREAT that this case is still being pursued even to the detriment of the person raped.
Yes. Trials and the justice system do not exist solely for the victims.
Because yes a man who hasn't been on US shores since the great PONG craze is important to our justice system.
Then you'll say 'oh so criminals can just leave the US and we shouldn't try to catch them' to which I'll say 'dude it was 30 years ago and no one else has accused him of shit' to which you'll say 'oh good everyone gets a free rape card as long as they don't do it again' to which I'll say 'show me any evidence that he is someone who is likely to re-offend or has not suffered some punishment for the incident and in fact the media frenzy over this IS something that should be taken into account when talking about this specific case is it doing anyone any good to have this stupid shit go on for so long?' That's as far ahead as I've got please take up the argument from this point.
Why are we always unwilling to forgive people for crimes they committed long ago in the past. Why can't we just let it go. Looking forward, not back.
Not to Godwin the thread, but do you feel the same way about Nazi war criminals currently in hiding?
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
Telling people that no matter how much money you got or how far you run or for how long. As a fugitive the US will not stop until it sees justice done.
So why has the US been sitting on it's fucking ass for 30 years?
All the fugitives must be shitting themselves eh.
It's not a problem with the US, it's a problem with the French.
So it's GREAT that this case is still being pursued even to the detriment of the person raped.
Yes. Trials and the justice system do not exist solely for the victims.
Because yes a man who hasn't been on US shores since the great PONG craze is important to our justice system.
Then you'll say 'oh so criminals can just leave the US and we shouldn't try to catch them' to which I'll say 'dude it was 30 years ago and no one else has accused him of shit' to which you'll say 'oh good everyone gets a free rape card as long as they don't do it again' to which I'll say 'show me any evidence that he is someone who is likely to re-offend or has not suffered some punishment for the incident and in fact the media frenzy over this IS something that should be taken into account when talking about this specific case is it doing anyone any good to have this stupid shit go on for so long?' That's as far ahead as I've got please take up the argument from this point.
Why are we always unwilling to forgive people for crimes they committed long ago in the past. Why can't we just let it go. Looking forward, not back.
Not to Godwin the thread, but do you feel the same way about Nazi war criminals currently in hiding?
If these war criminals have since moved on with their lives and become generally decent people, then yes.
Mazer Rackham on
0
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
Telling people that no matter how much money you got or how far you run or for how long. As a fugitive the US will not stop until it sees justice done.
So why has the US been sitting on it's fucking ass for 30 years?
All the fugitives must be shitting themselves eh.
It's not a problem with the US, it's a problem with the French.
Which makes it a problem of the US.
Except... not. The French have been sitting in the way of justice. The problem is all about them.
After reading into this, I'm not sure what putting him in jail for the rest of his life accomplishes.
Telling people that no matter how much money you got or how far you run or for how long. As a fugitive the US will not stop until it sees justice done.
So why has the US been sitting on it's fucking ass for 30 years?
All the fugitives must be shitting themselves eh.
It's not a problem with the US, it's a problem with the French.
On a related note, I'm kinda suprised the French gov. are making such a stink out of this. I mean Sarkozy's never seemed to be too bothered about France's artistic "high society", and they certainly havn't got a huge hard on for him either. I'm not sure what the angle is here. Some kind of jurisdictional pissing-contest?
Posts
So because they may have messed up the sentencing in the trial the first time 'round, obviously the case wasn't that important and it should just be dropped?
People who are "on the run" do not win Oscars. They get caught scavenging for food in a dumpster behind a Save-A-Lot.
God only knows.
Well, obviously, if you manage to run from the law before they put you in jail, you've earned your freedom because hey, those guys just incompetent.
So are we looking to punish Polanski for his crime, or Europeans in general for allowing him to roman free for so long?
We're not asking god, we're asking you
Because that's what you just said
Hey he earned his freedom, eking out an existence in the harsh wilds of European award shows.
It's like The Running Man, except with champagne and hookers, and no consequences for your actions.
Damn you, I typed "It's like The Running Man" the first time, then I deleted it because I couldn't be bothered to check whether it was applicable in this case :x
Is it ok to drug and rape little girls, or flee the justice system?
No? Ok then. Looks like he should face extradition and the courts.
So the question is how does it work: A) You can run from the law, but if you ever stop running (or become a famous director, say) they will find you and catch you or
Justice.
If he'd just done the time (no doubt in some Club Fed with tennis courts and back massages...) he'd have been out twenty years ago anyway. This is nobody's fault but his own and I don't see why we should just let the whole thing go because he's gotten away with it for so long.
Sticking it to the French.
edit: uh yeah and justice
Seriously. It's not like they just happened to discover the crime after he'd popped over to France - he knowingly took extraordinary means to avoid justice.
At this point it's more about closure, than justice.
Why not charge him with a different crime and arrest him for that, such as running from the fucking law.
And I'm not saying it's OK to drug and rape little girls. It isn't OK at all.
Injustice has already been done by letting him run away for 30 years. There is nothing you can do to bring that to justice except killing him outright.
Seriously.
He not only raped a 13 year old girl, but he also has been a fugitive of justice for decades. That's not a reason not to punish someone, that's a crime in and of itself. He should serve more time for that, not less.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Edit: To be completely honest, though, part of my reaction here stems from the fact that I don't really see the US being all that quick to extradite a US citizen accused of the same crime in Europe. So I may just be a big, fat hypocrite.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Charging him with a different offense is still going to affect the victim, since the media is going to hone in on her. And Polanski has been trying to get the rape charges dismissed/get a retrial anyway.
Why not add that on top of the existing charges?
Yes, you're just saying that it's okay to not punish people for drugging and raping little girls.
OR we could put him in jail for the crimes he committed, which include running away for 30 years. I don't see where the death penalty comes in with your thinking.
Telling people that no matter how much money you got or how far you run or for how long. As a fugitive the US will not stop until it sees justice done.
All this, for justice?
What if she sprouts blue elephants out of her eyes?
So why has the US been sitting on it's fucking ass for 30 years?
All the fugitives must be shitting themselves eh.
Well, it's about precedent. We've already established that the emotional state of the victim shouldn't come into play here. If it was the sort of crime that the charges could just be dropped, she could do that, but the state is obligated to prosecute in cases of a certain gravity (like this one) regardless of the victim's feelings.
As far the statute of limitations, well, there's a reason stat rape isn't a crime that can "expire" over time - it's been deemed of a sufficient severity that we've taken measures to ensure that doesn't happen. Polanski knew that when he committed the crime three decades ago.
What if a girl killed herself because she was encouraged to testify in a group rape case? Should we stop prosecuting rapists because it's so hard on the victims?
It's not a problem with the US, it's a problem with the French.
Which makes it a problem of the US.
If these war criminals have since moved on with their lives and become generally decent people, then yes.
Except... not. The French have been sitting in the way of justice. The problem is all about them.
On a related note, I'm kinda suprised the French gov. are making such a stink out of this. I mean Sarkozy's never seemed to be too bothered about France's artistic "high society", and they certainly havn't got a huge hard on for him either. I'm not sure what the angle is here. Some kind of jurisdictional pissing-contest?
He was a French citizen already; he was born in Paris.