The "Let's Excuse The Rape Of A Child" thread...

[asdf2231]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6639021


charlie  (1000+ posts)      Sun Sep-27-09 07:40 AM
Original message
Roman Polanski arrested in Switzerland on 31 year old US warrant
 This is a surprise. I thought any chance of Polanski facing the charges of drugging and raping a minor was effectively moot. Is the long arm of US law about to snatch him back for trial?

Roman Polanski was arrested by Swiss police at the request of US authorities as the film director arrived in the country to receive an award at the Zurich Film Festival.

Polanski was held yesterday on the basis of a 1978 U.S. arrest warrant, the festival organizers said today in an e- mailed statement. The arrest was confirmed by Zurich Cantonal Police spokesman Stefan Oberlin in a telephone interview.

Oberlin wouldn't comment further on the background of the arrest, referring questions to the Justice Ministry in the capital, Bern.

Polanski, 76, left the US in 1978 prior to being sentenced for having sex with a 13-year-old girl, and is considered a fugitive in the country. He hasn't returned to the US since. The director, a French citizen, asked a Los Angeles court in December to dismiss the 1977 case because of judicial and prosecutorial misconduct...

http://www.theage.com.au/world/polanski-arrested-in-swi...

Hannah Bell  (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. the girl's now near 50, & she wants it dropped.

orpupilofnature57 (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. She didn't want to make a big deal out of it then ,I was her age and then
 considering her mother sent her there alone, I assumed as did the world that she like me and millions our age at that time,were sexually experienced.

EFerrari  (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #12
61. Polansky settled with her years ago. n/t

proteus_lives  (1000+ posts)      Sun Sep-27-09 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #61
99. And that makes everything ok.(sarcastic smiley)

He's still a child rapist.

proud2BlibKansan  (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
2. He could spend the rest of his life in prison if he's returned to the US

proteus_lives  (1000+ posts)      Sun Sep-27-09 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Good.
 Let's hope so.

Good for you Proteus!  Seriously.

Hannah Bell  (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 07:55 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. even though the now middle-aged victim wants the charges dropped.

proteus_lives  (1000+ posts)      Sun Sep-27-09 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. Please explain why he should be given a free pass for child rape.
 Because he makes good movies? Because it was a long time ago? Because the victim doesn't want it dredged up?

A rich and famous man used his fame and fortune to get away with a horrible crime. That is wrong and it should be made right.

 

Hannah Bell  (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #16
34. per the victim, she was neither forced nor virginal, & was interrupted
 during the proceedings by angelica houston, yet didn't ask for help. her mother sent her, alone, into the hands of a known lech, at night, to shoot topless photos.

to whom are you making it right?

Seriously... WHAT THE ****?!?!

Cetacea  (1000+ posts)        Mon Sep-28-09 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #96
144. A few weeks from legal age. A non-virgin "child". 
 And her mother wanted her to be in the movies. Hmmm. I wonder if he even touched her? Were tests conducted? I honestly don't know.

proteus_lives  (1000+ posts)      Sun Sep-27-09 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #74
97. He fled the country and has lived the high life in Europe for 30-40 years.
 Sounds like a free pass to me.

So, why are you a rape-apologist in this case? Because he makes good movies?

t0dd  (570 posts)      Mon Sep-28-09 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #74
139. If you disagree with anything about what has happened or should happen, you are a child
 rape apologist. Don't you know how this works? And if too many child rape apologists sprout up, I'm going to throw a temper tantrum and plug my ears and puke. So watch out!

hlthe2b  (1000+ posts)      Sun Sep-27-09 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
28. Geebus.... No one here denies the seriousness of the charges
 Edited on Sun Sep-27-09 08:57 AM by hlthe2b
nor wants any less than you to protect children from being exploited. But, this hard-line stance on a crime that appears to have been strictly "statutory" in nature 31 years ago and victimless from the standpoint of the now, 50 year old subject seems ridiculous. Should he have stayed to face the consequences? Yes. Should anyone condone sexual activity with a minor? Absolutely not.

Did he get off free of consequences for three decades? I don't think so. Polanski lost his ability to travel freely nor to live in the US for three decades.... He has rightfully been disgraced worldwide for what he did, with the label of pedophile rapist following him in most settings and statutory rapist, at a minimum, in others.

Big deal, you say? He's paid quite a karmic debt to date, already as well. Many do not realize that his father survived the Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp in Austria, but his pregant mother died in 1942 in the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Polanski himself escaped the Kraków Ghetto in 1943, and survived the war with the help of Polish Roman Catholic families. Given the recent death of Susan Atkins in prison, the Manson member who brutally murdered Polanski's wife, Sharon Tate and his unborn child, along with several friends staying at his home, it is hard not to look at Polanski's life in totality.

If I had a vote, I'd say the debt is paid.

  YHGTBFKM...

csziggy  (1000+ posts)      Sun Sep-27-09 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. When the news first came out I was very unforgiving of Polanski
 But after I heard about his life and the link to Sharon Tate, I felt more sorry for him. If I remember correctly, after Sharon's murder and the whole Manson trial circus, Polanski was a mess for a very long time.

It is hard to forgive him having sex with a 13 year old, consenting or not, though. Now I do not know how I feel about him being prosecuted so many years later - maybe the jury will be sympathetic.

Hepburn  (1000+ posts)      Sun Sep-27-09 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #24
48. After 31 years, he's still a threat?

PS: I am a lawyer.

WeDidIt  (1000+ posts)      Sun Sep-27-09 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
29. This is why I always try to separate the art from the artist
 Polanski is a convicted felon pedophile.

That doesn't alter the art, it simply describes the artist.

izquierdista (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
47. Threads like this are funny 
 Nothing like Roman Polanski to get the bring-to-justice Chihuahuas yapping their fool heads off. Misplaced faith in an American legal system combined with Puritanical attitudes towards sex is a nasty combination. I would hope the the American pee-pee police are too busy investigating Janet Jackson's wardrobe and making sure that magazines in convenience stores are at the appropriate eye-level to bother trying to export American attitudes. I can see a Swiss magistrate dropping this arrest once he actually reads the charges.

By the way, you do know that the Chihuahua was originally meant to be a food item, nothing more, don't you?

I bet this one had to tell the neighbors what he was convicted of when he moved in next door.

MattBaggins (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #47
51. Sex with 13 year old gilrs
 yaaaaayyyyy. Consenting adults can do what they want but **** you if you really think disdain for child diddling is "Puritanical"

Giving drugs and molesting a 13 year old and your fine with that.... Creep.

izquierdista (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #51
53. Fine? No, not "fine".   
 I'm just amused that what amounted to "contributing to delinquency" has resulted in more police, prosecutor, and court time than the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

   

uppityperson  (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #53
128. raping a 13 yr old = "contributing to delinquency"? WTF?

I agree with uppityperson.  I just threw up in my mouth a little.

[Celtic Rose]

13 year old=child=keep your freaking hands to yourself.

I am disgusted that so many on that thread are defending him.  According to her own testimony, she did not consent.  He gave her alcohol and barbiturates, yet the DUmmies are defending him? 

From the London Times article

Samantha Geimer, who was the teenager in question and who has called for the case against Polanski to be dropped after she reached a settlement with the director, recalled in 2003 that she began to feel uncomfortable after he asked her to lie down on a bed. “I said, ‘No, no. I don’t want to go in there. No, I don’t want to do this. No’, and then I didn’t know what else to do,” she said in an interview.

“We were alone and I didn’t know what else would happen if I made a scene. So I was just scared, and after giving some resistance, I figured well, I guess I’ll get to come home after this.”

Link

So DUmmies, you now have no leg to stand on in saying that you support victims rights.   

[DumbAss Tanker]

Cetacea  (1000+ posts)        Mon Sep-28-09 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #96
144. A few weeks from legal age. A non-virgin "child".

14 was the age of consent at that time???!!!???     I find that pretty hard to believe.

[Gratiot]

  them all 

[NHSparky]

Let's not forget our recently departed (booted) troll...

"Samantha Geimer filed court papers in January saying, "I am no longer a 13-year-old child. I have dealt with the difficulties of being a victim, have surmounted and surpassed them with one exception.

"Every time this case is brought to the attention of the Court, great focus is made of me, my family, my mother and others. That attention is not pleasant to experience and is not worth maintaining over some irrelevant legal nicety, the continuation of the case."

Geimer, now 45, married and a mother of three, sued Polanski and received an undisclosed settlement. She long ago came forward and made her identity public -- mainly, she said, because she was disturbed by how the criminal case had been handled."

According to the woman he raped it does.  If the person that a crime was committed against does not wish to press charges, was a crime really committed?

He plead guilty to it back when it happened, moron.

"Trespassing, vandalism, and attempted arson are wrong because you think they violate someone's free speech,"

That makes no sense, but I know what you're trying to say.  I never said that any of that was ok.  You assumed I thought it was.  My point was that the VFW broke the law too.  Vigilantism is illegal.

"but rape is okay because the victim has "moved on".

If the victim has come out and said that she doesn't want him prosecuted, what right does the state have to arrest and charge him?  There are very few instances where this is allowed, murder for example.  If I steal your car stereo but you don't press charges, the police can't arrest me.

If anything this little slut should be arrested for prostitution she accepted money for sex!!!

He plead guilty to unlawful sex with a minor.  Not rape.  http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/12/polanski.case/index.html  The victim filed for charges to be dropped.  But I guess you conservatives know what's best for this woman and her family...

If in fact this dipshit DOES have a daughter, I would seriously be considering calling CPS based on the above statements alone.

[djones520]

"She wasn't a virgin, so it was ok."

Everyone who posted that needs to be lined up and shot.

[NHSparky]

14 was the age of consent at that time???!!!???     I find that pretty hard to believe.

14 has NEVER been legal in California.  18 is the age of consent, although there are stipulations so that daddy doesn't try to prosecute 18-year old boyfriends for having sex with 17-year old daughter.

Three years age difference is the key, IIRC.

http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/261.5.html
http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/288.html

[Celtic Rose]

14 has NEVER been legal in California.  18 is the age of consent, although there are stipulations so that daddy doesn't try to prosecute 18-year old boyfriends for having sex with 17-year old daughter.

Three years age difference is the key, IIRC.

http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/261.5.html
http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/288.html

It was 14 prior to 1897...Think Polanski can use that in his defence 

California was one of the first states to raise the age-of-consent. In 1889, it raised it from 10-years to 14-years and then, in 1897, raised it again to 16-years; in 1913, it raised it to its current level of 18 years-of-age.

Link

Disclaimer:This quote is from Counterpunch, which is very possibly an untrustworthy source.  I will happily change this post if a more trustworthy source comes to light.

[TheSarge]

Hannah Bell  (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #16
34. per the victim, she was neither forced nor virginal, & was interrupted
 during the proceedings by angelica houston, yet didn't ask for help. her mother sent her, alone, into the hands of a known lech, at night, to shoot topless photos.

I think I now know what Lleu's DU name is.

[NHSparky]

I think I now know what Lleu's DU name is.

Oh, gawd, if only we could get an IP trace from DU back to her (his?) cubicle back at "Can you draw a bunny U" (sorry, BC--stolen).

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

If only Polanski were a Roman Catholic priest the DUmmies would be howling for his head and lawsuits to bankrupt the Church.

[debk]

orpupilofnature57 (1000+ posts)        Sun Sep-27-09 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. She didn't want to make a big deal out of it then ,I was her age and then
 considering her mother sent her there alone, I assumed as did the world that she like me and millions our age at that time,were sexually experienced.

I was 25 at the time this happened.

I didn't know any 13 yo that was sexually active!!!

My brother was 11 at the time, and spent the summer with me....he was a typical boy and not interested in girls at that time. Though by the time he was 15 he was dating an 18yo who was out of high school. I thought it was weird, but my dad and my brother's mother were ok with it.

[Ptarmigan]

It was 14 prior to 1897...Think Polanski can use that in his defence 

That won't hold up for Polanski.

[GOBUCKS]

It was 14 prior to 1897...Think Polanski can use that in his defence 

That's the loophole that coach's squeeze, DUmmy TLB, slipped through.

[The Village Idiot]

I wonder if Jack Nicholson ever sold that house?

[Karin]

coach's squeeze, DUmmy TLB,

     Them's fightin' words! 

Lleu got booted, huh?  Pretty outrageous calling her a prostitue for accepting settlement money.  Some people are a waste of good air.  That's what pisses me off about "spreading the wealth."  My hard earned money going to creepfux like that?  No.  They can freeze in a cardboard box for all I care. 

[GOBUCKS]

     Them's fightin' words! 

Nah, coach is way too refined for that.

He might get worked up over a catfight between TLB and the soil scientist, though.

[USA4ME]

The primitives has complained how the wealthy and influential have gotten away with crimes against individuals and society for way too long.  But when it comes their their idols like vast Teddy and now Polanski, suddenly it's as though the complaints against those of priviledge never existed.

.

[BlueStateSaint]

Nah, coach is way too refined for that.

He might get worked up over a catfight between TLB and the soil scientist, though.

We haven't heard about the soil scientist lately!