roman polanski nicked in switzerland

[London_Calling]

The comparison with Glitter is a good one. Glitter has been utterly humiliated and destroyed over his behaviour which could be argued was not as serious as Polanski's. Glitter was convicted in the UK of possession of nasty child porn. He also served his sentence. Polanski drugged and sodomised a 13 year old girl, did a deal to avoid a rape charge, fled and managed avoided punishment for 30 years.

The comparison with Glitter is absurd. As the vicim states in her NYT article, the issue was not guilt, nor necessariliy a desire to avoid justice, it was a judge so consumed by the media attention that any sentence he gave could not be relied on to be "a fair judgment". She mentions 50 years though I don't know the basis for that. By the way, she expressed the view the judge was also not interested in her welfare.

Where Gary Glitter comes into that I have no idea.

 

[weltweit]

Where Gary Glitter comes into that I have no idea.

Roman Polanski is accused of drugging and raping and sodomising a 13 year old girl.

The point is being made that this offence is at least as bad as the offences Gary Glitter is guilty of.

Nothing to do with the court proceedings.

 

[invisibleplanet]

Greimer, now 45, told the court in a written statement in January 2009 that she has long opposed to the continuation of this matter

“If Polanski cannot stand before the court to make this request, I, as the victim, can and I, as the victim do. I have urged that this matter come to a formal legal end. I have urged that the district attorney and the court dismiss these charges.”

“… 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.”

 

[dylans]

Greimer, now 45, told the court in a written statement in January 2009 that she has long opposed to the continuation of this matter

With all respect to the victim, her opinion is irrelevant to the legal case. Polanski has already pleaded guilty to sex with a minor. His guilt in this matter is not in question.
Let's say for a moment that the sentence had been carried out and polanski was serving his sentence. Let's say that halfway through his sentence the victim had come forward to forgive him and ask for his release. Would Polanski have been released? Of course not, because he has already pleaded guilty and sentenced. The only difference to this scenerio is that Polanski never served his sentence BECAUSE HE FLED.

The comparison with Paul Gadd is relevant because Gadd (despite serving his sentence and paying for his crime) was hounded and utterly demonised by the tabloid press whilst Polanski, who fled his punishment, has been lauded with honours and awards. I am baffled by the double standard.

 

[London_Calling]

The point is being made that this offence is at least as bad as the offences Gary Glitter is guilty of.

It's "at least as bad" as 99% of criminal cases brought. What's it got to do with Gary Glitter.

 

[dylans]

the issue was not guilt, nor necessariliy a desire to avoid justice.

I'm sorry but I simply do not think anyone could reasonably be expected to buy that for a second. The guilt was admitted. He fled to avoid his sentence.

 

[London_Calling]

It appears the victim believes he fled to avoid the likely unfair length of the sentence of an irrational judge. What you "buy" doesn't matter an awful lot.

 

[weltweit]

It's "at least as bad" as 99% of criminal cases brought. What's it got to do with Gary Glitter.

The comparison with Paul Gadd is relevant because Gadd (despite serving his sentence and paying for his crime) was hounded and utterly demonised by the tabloid press whilst Polanski, who fled his punishment, has been lauded with honours and awards. I am baffled by the double standard.

^^ this ..

 

[London_Calling]

Go back to the twin towers conspiracy, you fool.

 

[dylans]

It appears the victim believes he fled to avoid the likely unfair length of the sentence of an irrational judge. What you "buy" doesn't matter an awful lot.

Oh boo hoo. HE decided he didn't fancy the length of the sentence so he ran away.
He should have thought of that before drugging and sodomising a 13 year old girl shouldn't he.

 

[weltweit]

Go back to the twin towers conspiracy, you fool.

Eh?

 

[London_Calling]

I've identified the issue, at least as it seems to be seen by those most directly involved. People can make their own judgeents, whether it's "boo hoo", "eh" or something with perhaps a little more nuance and reflection.

/laters

 

[weltweit]

I said "Eh" to question just what the heck the twin towers has to do with Roman Polanski?

Or what it has to do with me or dylans.

 

[weltweit]

The only issue it seems to me is should Polanski be extradited to the USA to stand trial or be sentenced for the act he committed 30 years ago?

In my opinion he should be extradited and should stand trial again.

 

[invisibleplanet]

The film recounts the details of the night Polanski brought 13-year-old Samantha Gailey to Jack Nicholson's house for a magazine photo shoot and allegedly gave her champagne and quaaludes before having sex with her. Gailey, now Samantha Geimer, tells the story from her point of view in the film, saying she's not angry with Polanski. Polanski, now 74, declined to participate in Zenovich's movie.

http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1706557,00.html

 

[dylans]

The only issue it seems to me is should Polanski be extradited to the USA to stand trial or be sentenced for the act he committed 30 years ago?

In my opinion he should be extradited and should stand trial again.

Yes. If there is a genuine issue of justice in relation to the behaviour of the original judge, then a new trial would solve that problem.

 

[invisibleplanet]

It's not that Zenovich's film attempts to whitewash its subject. Polanski has never denied having sex with 13-year-old Samantha Gailey and even cheerfully admits he was fully aware of her age at the time. And despite his friends and colleagues lining up to explain what a "charismatic" fellow he is, he remains as defiantly dislikeable as ever. For much of the film Polanski comes across as a preening, insecure smart-aleck. He mistakes amorality for abandon and leaves a trail of mess in his wake.

No, it is simply that the ensuing legal circus risks making him look halfway honourable by comparison. Some might call it karma. Just as it was Gailey's unhappy fate to run up against Roman Polanski in excitable Austin Powers mode, so it was Polanski's unhappy fate to later run up against Judge Rittenband. A star-struck, skirt-chasing buffoon, Rittenband regarded the case as his big moment in the limelight and proceeded to direct its twists and turns like some puffed-up Hollywood martinet. All the really important stuff - the victim, the accused, the search for justice - played a distant second fiddle to the Rittenband ego.

Zenovich also nails the media's handling of the case, and its depiction of the defendant as some "malignant, twisted dwarf"; the foreign interloper with a taste for young American flesh. One friend points out that the press traditionally views Polanski as "a man of darkness" and has always confused the man with his movies. He made The Tenant so must therefore be a transvestite. He made Chinatown and is therefore a paedophile. He made Rosemary's Baby and is thus in league with Satan. When Sharon Tate was murdered by supporters of Charles Manson, the media insisted that he must be at least tangentially responsible.

Wanted and Desired goes some way towards setting the record straight. It interviews most of the people involved in the case, including Gailey herself (who publicly forgave Polanski in 1997). Along the way it paints a portrait of a fascinating, brilliant, untrustworthy man. Polanski was seduced by California and it ate him up. He did wrong and was wronged. That doesn't make him the victim here but it at least merits some sympathy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2008/may/21/polanskigetsafairt

 

[weltweit]

invisibleplanet, posting pastes from other places does not disguise the fact that by his own admission Polanski is a paedophile.

 

[invisibleplanet]

In recent months, lawyers for Polanski have been seeking through the US courts to have the rape charges against him dropped, after new evidence emerged in a documentary that, they argued, showed he was a victim of "judicial misconduct" at his original trial. The film showed a former Los Angeles deputy district attorney admitting discussing the case with the trial judge while it was ongoing.

In February a Los Angeles judge agreed that "substantial … misconduct" had taken place during the original court proceedings, but said he could not drop the charges so long as Polanski remained a fugitive. Polanski has since appealed against the ruling, insisting he would not voluntarily return to the US even to clear his name.

Gailey, now called Samantha Geimer and a 44-year-old mother of three (pictured left), has also spoken in support of his attempt to dismiss the charges, accusing the district attorney's office of resurrecting "lurid details" of her assault to distract attention from its own wrongdoing. "True as they may be, the continued publication of those details causes harm to me."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/sep/27/roman-polanski-arrest-switzerland-custody

 

[invisibleplanet]

In a 2003 interview,[35] Samantha Geimer said, "Straight up, what he did to me was wrong. But I wish he would return to America so the whole ordeal can be put to rest for both of us." Furthermore, "I'm sure if he could go back, he wouldn't do it again. He made a terrible mistake but he's paid for it".

In 2008, Geimer stated in an interview that she wishes Polanski would be forgiven, "I think he's sorry, I think he knows it was wrong. I don't think he's a danger to society. I don't think he needs to be locked up forever and no one has ever come out ever - besides me - and accused him of anything. It was 30 years ago now. It's an unpleasant memory ... (but) I can live with it."[36]

In 2008, a documentary film of the aftermath of the incident, Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, premiered at the Sundance Film Festival. Following review of the film, Polanski's attorney, Douglas Dalton, contacted the Los Angeles district attorney's office about prosecutor David Wells' role in coaching judge Rittenband. Based on statements by Wells included in the film, Polanski and Dalton are seeking review of whether the prosecutor acted illegally and engaged in malfeasance in interfering with the operation of the trial.[37]

In December 2008, Polanski's lawyer in the United States filed a request to Judge David S. Wesley to have the case dismissed on the grounds of judicial and prosecutorial misconduct. The filing says that Judge Rittenband (now deceased) violated the plea bargain by keeping in communication about the case with a deputy district attorney who was not involved. These activities were depicted in Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired.[38]

In January 2009, Polanski's lawyer filed a further request to have the case dismissed, and to have the case moved out of Los Angeles, as the Los Angeles courts require him to appear before the court for any sentencing or dismissal, and Polanski will not appear. In February 2009, Polanski's request was tentatively denied by Judge Peter Espinoza, who said that he would make a ruling if Polanski appeared in court.[39][40]

That same month, Samantha Geimer filed to have the charges against Polanski dismissed from court, saying that decades of publicity as well as the prosecutor's focus on lurid details continues to traumatize her and her family.[41]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Polanski

 

[London_Calling]

She seems a very nice lady:

Interview

 

[Beanburger]

Polanski is a nonce

Well technically, he's not, is he? An attraction to post-pubescent girls isn't actually the same thing as paedophilia. His behaviour was pretty abhorrent and morally appalling, but he's not a paedo.

 

[weltweit]

Well technically, he's not, is he? An attraction to post-pubescent girls isn't actually the same thing as paedophilia. His behaviour was pretty abhorrent and morally appalling, but he's not a paedo.

I thought a paedophile was someone who had sex with minors. Polanski was 40 she was 13 therefore he is one of them. (I could be wrong)

 

[Stigmata]

I'd say 13 was borderline anyway

 

[weltweit]

I'd say 13 was borderline anyway

How do you mean?

Borderline what?

 

[Beanburger]

I thought a paedophile was someone who had sex with minors. Polanski was 40 she was 13 therefore he is one of them. (I could be wrong)

No. A paedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to pre-pubescents.

 

[invisibleplanet]

Pedophiles either act upon sexual urges towards pre-pubescent children or experience sexual urges towards prepubescent children

 

[goldenecitrone]

How do you mean?

Borderline what?

If he'd had sex with her in Spain then it would have been legal. So he should have been in those borderlines.

 

[beeboo]

Well technically, he's not, is he? An attraction to post-pubescent girls isn't actually the same thing as paedophilia. His behaviour was pretty abhorrent and morally appalling, but he's not a paedo.

What does it matter if he was a "paedo" or a "nonce" or whatever label people want to attach to it - all that gives you is a possible motivation for his actions.

The crime, one which doesn't appear to disputed, is that he drugged and raped a minor.

 

[Belushi]

If he'd had sex with her in Spain then it would have been legal. So he should have been in those borderlines.

Its not legal to drug and rape anyone in Spain.