The U.S. of A wants Polanski- Page 2

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 1/8/15 at 5:29pm

You asked the question, but then you also seemed to answer it, which is the part people didn't like.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 1/8/15 at 5:47pm

"It's Erik. With a K.
He's a child rapist who admitted his guilt in court. He should have to face the consequences of that just like people without his wealth or fame do when they drug and rape a child.
I think the suggestion that he's already paid the price is a little ridiculous. Especially considering the awful nature of the crime he committed."

I know your name is spelled with a k; I apologize for the typo.

From VANITY FAIR, the rest of the story:

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2013/10/roman-polanski-interview#


One issue that will loom large in any future trial is that Polanski already served a six-week prison sentence and was then released by authorities. This embarrassed the judge and caused the judge to threaten Polanski with 50 years in prison instead. So there will be issues of "cruel and unusual punishment", among others.

The fact is Polanski surrendered and served the sentence he was told to serve (counting both the judge and the prison authorities). That the judge later disliked press coverage of the events wasn't really Polanski's fault, and so we'll see "double jeopardy" motions as well.

As I keep saying, even IF Polanski is extradited, it may be 10 years or more before these issues are litigated and appealed. This is the reality, regardless of whether any of us thinks he has been punished enough.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 1/8/15 at 5:50pm

"Perhaps it sends some kind of comforting signal to other victims of sexual crimes?"

How comforted will they be when the criminal trial and appeals stretch out for a decade or more?

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 1/8/15 at 8:03pm

"Perhaps it sends some kind of comforting signal to other victims of sexual crimes?"

That they managed to get Polanski after 40 years? Where exactly is the comfort when they see countless current rape trials be deemed not guilty? Comfort that nothing is going to happen to Cosby? Getting Polanski doesn't help **** when you have rape victims going years waiting only to be told their cases are being closed.

He's nothing and the fact of spending millions of dollars for a publicity stunt is insulting when you know it's going to change nothing for anybody.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 1/8/15 at 9:45pm

Thanks, TheatreFan4. Not that I'm assuming you meant to agree with me, but it was very lonely in here until you arrived.

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 1/8/15 at 9:52pm

I did. It's just... why are you dumping millions into attempting to capture one guy that in the end won't happen, when you could be putting that money towards rape cases you can try here with more probable outcomes.

Like you said, he'll sit on trial forever and most likely be dead before a sentence is even given. And that's the best case scenario.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 1/9/15 at 12:24pm

I guess that one could debate the financial worth of bringing Polanski to justice in the United States. I think justice is a tricky thing to put a price tag on. But that's not really what I'm talking about.
My problem is when people like Gaveston make comments like this:
"I said (and implied) that Polanski has been branded a sex criminal and banished from the cultural capital of his industry and the world for 40 years. "
To me, that implies that somehow Polanski has suffered enough and is a victim in this whole thing. It also bothers me when people imply that the offense he committed wasn't really that bad. Like the girl was asking for it, or it was her mother's fault, or that it wasn't really sodomy. He was branded a sex criminal because he IS a sex criminal. A sex criminal that fled the country.
The man drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. I hardly think he's suffered through having a successful film career, an Oscar, and living a pretty privileged life in Europe.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 1/9/15 at 6:09pm

An Oscar he couldn't show up to accept. But never mind that.

EriK, you are putting words in my mouth. My point wasn't whether Polanski has suffered "enough", only that there have been some difficult-to-swallow consequences stemming from his years of exile.

If the judge and prosecutor had kept the original agreement, Polanski would have been out of prison in 3 months (rather than 6 weeks) and the entire episode would be a mere footnote in his illustrious career.

(FWIW, I don't know about the 1970s, but nowadays it isn't unusual for a convict to serve only half his sentence because of overcrowding.)

Instead, there hasn't been a mention of Polanski in 40 years that hasn't rehashed the sex charges and pending charges. One could well argue that six weeks in jail were traded for a lifetime of notoriety.

Updated On: 1/9/15 at 06:09 PM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 1/9/15 at 6:10pm

"You asked the question, but then you also seemed to answer it, which is the part people didn't like."

What can I say? Nature abhors a vacuum.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 1/9/15 at 7:11pm

For what it's worth, I do understand your points.

I guess it's just hard to think dispassionately and pragmatically about such things - I'm sure prosecuting attorneys make hard decisions like this every day about all sorts of crimes, a job I could never do!

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 1/9/15 at 7:15pm

I know what you mean, Jay. I assume DAs see first-hand how the system would break down without our plea-bargaining system.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 1/21/15 at 12:05pm

Uh-oh Spaghetti-O's
Polish court to consider U.S. request to extradite Polanski

[Gothampc]

Posted: 1/21/15 at 12:21pm

The more interesting question I think is if Polanski is brought back to the US, will he be put in a high-class people's jail or will he be put in with the regular prison population? Will he get special treatment like Robert Downey Jr did?