• If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread
  • The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us.
  • >>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
    Don't forget to include your username

Roman Polanski Arrested In Switzerland

I have no idea how they're planning to prosecute him though...he's already paid millions to his victim and she's publicly forgiven him. I have a feeling the whole case will be thrown out as soon as he comes back.
 
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that "unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13 year old" meant STATUATORY rape and not ACTUAL rape.

If it was the latter, I'll assume that the victim has "publicly forgiven him" because of pressure from the media and because of social humiliation due to the fact he is a famous director who had his wife and unborn child murdered and she is a slut who didn't have her wife and unborn child murdered so, by that definition, shouldn't have been there in the first place and, therefore, had it coming.🙄


Poor 'ol little victim Roman.

If it was the former, then I have no clue why this useless shit is even being dragged out right now. Statuatory rape (or jailbaiting, as it is commonly referred to) is very common, unfortunately. And rather anticlimactic in the greater scheme of the world. Especially after thirty plus years.

If He had done this last week then I would be angry.
 
Actually

"unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13 year old"
is not statutory rape.
In most states it is aggrevated child molestation.
and just because the victim doesn't press charges, does not mean the state will not.
 
Frowg said:
"unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13 year old"
is not statutory rape.
In most states it is aggrevated child molestation.
and just because the victim doesn't press charges, does not mean the state will not.
Click to expand...

Was it considered aggravated child molestation in 1978 though? If I'm not mistaken, I believe the age of consent was much lower then, 14 maybe.

Anyway, I'm not taking Polanski's side at all, especially after reading some of the grand jury transcripts. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskicover1.html I feel bad for Polanski because his wife was brutally murdered while pregnant with his child, and I'm sure that has fucked him up psychologically, but still.... you don't bang a 13 year old when you're 43. He deserves some jail time.
 
Well ,he may be an internationally renowned and pretty good director, but I don't think I would like to be him. First Charlie Manson's bunch murder his wife and unborn kid, then this.
 
It wasn't just sex, he apparently got her drunk and drugged her too...so the guy is basically a rapist.

On the other hand...

The reason he left the country is because he knew he couldn't trust the judge to give him a fair trial. The judge was holding press conferences about the case (totally unheard-of, censurable behavior), and in private he was saying that no matter what happened, Polanski was going away for life.

So in that context, I don't blame him for leaving the country. Even the girl said she doesn't blame him for running. She said he should have at least been entitled to a fair trial.

After this long, I don't know what they're trying to accomplish. Polanski's 76 years old, for God's sake. :shrug:
 
He'll be in trouble. Fleeing the country to avoid prosecution is a crime in itself. I think his life of freedom is probably over. If you're ever on the run, be sure you know what countries it's safe to show your face in. Switzerland may be a good place to hide your money, but it's obviously not a safe haven for your actual physical ass.
 
WorkInProgress said:
He'll be in trouble. Fleeing the country to avoid prosecution is a crime in itself. I think his life of freedom is probably over. If you're ever on the run, be sure you know what countries it's safe to show your face in. Switzerland may be a good place to hide your money, but it's obviously not a safe haven for your actual physical ass.
Click to expand...

If he's smart he'll deposit himself in a bank.
 
And once again, the ridiculousness of our sex laws becomes embarassingly apparent.
 
c7_assassin said:
I have no idea how they're planning to prosecute him though...he's already paid millions to his victim and she's publicly forgiven him. I have a feeling the whole case will be thrown out as soon as he comes back.
Click to expand...
They may not have to try him - they did that already.

Polanski pleaded guilty to a charge of unlawful intercourse with a minor. Under the terms of the plea bargain Polanski avoided other more serious charges, such as providing a minor with a controlled substance. Those charges were dropped and Polanski was ordered to a California prison for a 90 day evaluation period. The understanding, under the plea bargain, was that this was the only prison time Polanski would serve. The Los Angeles District Attorney's office was not seeking more. However Polanski still had to be sentenced on the unlawful intercourse charge. Probation was the expected outcome.

Polanski was released from the evaluation program after 42 days. At about the same time, word reached him that the judge, due in part to improper interference from a prosecutor not involved in the case, planned to throw out his plea bargain and reinstate the more serious charges. There was also mention of a prison sentence on the lesser charge to which he had already pleaded guilty. Polanski immediately fled to England, and then to France. The court issued a bench warrant for Polanski's arrest, because he still faced sentencing for the charge he pleaded guilty to. France refused to extradite him (he's a French citizen), and that's where things have stood for the last 30 years.

Polanski's victim considers what he did to be a serious mistake, but doesn't believe that he's dangerous. She believes he has been punished sufficiently, and has filed court papers to have the case dismissed.

It's very unlikely that he would be charged on the counts that were dismissed in his plea bargain - the file for his case has been lost since 2003, and it's unlikely that his victim would agree to testify. However he still faces sentencing for the remaining charge - he pleaded guilty to that one, so they don't have to try him.
 
The man had sex with a minor and skipped bail for 30 years. If he wasn't famous he'd have been hunted by Interpol, found and pressure would be put on France to extradite him though the EU courts. He would be very publicly flown back the States and sent to Prison for the rest of his life.

Because of fame and Americas anal obsession with it the worst this rapist will get is a few months in an open prison and he'll be out in 25 days for good behavior. He'll make millions off the publicity, book deals and film of his life.

Ironically the bastard stands to make more money from this than all the combined US rape victims payout across the 30 years he was on the run. Land of hope and glory 🙂
 
Never heard of the guy!!!!!! i guess he didn't change they way I put on my pants lol lol lol. so he didn't matter to me.
 
Raytheon said:
The man had sex with a minor and skipped bail for 30 years. If he wasn't famous he'd have been hunted by Interpol, found and pressure would be put on France to extradite him though the EU courts. He would be very publicly flown back the States and sent to Prison for the rest of his life.
Click to expand...
No, probably not. You see, Polanski is a French citizen. France's extradition treaty with the US specifically allows it to refuse to extradite French citizens, and in fact France almost never does extradite them. They are also reluctant to extradite people accused under American sex crime laws, because the French people are a bit suspicious of the way we enforce those.

So the EU court would look at the extradition treaty and say "Sorry, America, but you signed off on this to give them the right to do exactly what they're doing."

As for fame, if Polanski wasn't famous the Los Angeles DA's office almost certainly would have forgotten about him by now. Most 30-year old bench warrants come up only if the miscreant is arrested for something else and the police do a warrant search on him. But Polanski's fame has kept his story on the top of the LA DA's desk - even though there have been five different men in that office since Polanski was convicted.

Because of fame and Americas anal obsession with it the worst this rapist will get is a few months in an open prison and he'll be out in 25 days for good behavior. He'll make millions off the publicity, book deals and film of his life.
Click to expand...
That remains to be seen, but there's an excellent chance that you're wrong about that too. The fact that the DA's office has kept after him for this long means they're hot to nail him, and judges are seldom sympathetic to people who skip out to avoid sentencing.

If Polanski does get off lightly, it will be for two reasons: the fact that his victim has filed court papers to have the charges dismissed, and the fact that there are demonstrable irregularities in the way the original judge handled his case.

Ironically the bastard stands to make more money from this than all the combined US rape victims payout across the 30 years he was on the run. Land of hope and glory 🙂
Click to expand...
Wow, you're more upset about him than his victim is. That might be worth thinking about.
 
Fire_Sprite said:
Agreed. To think a 40 year old man can't even drug and molest a 13 year old. This is supposed to be a free country!
Click to expand...

Uh... no... to think that a judge can reneg on a settlement without being disbarred shows how fucked our system is.

Polansky left the country after finding out how treacherous our Justice System can be.
 
MrMacphisto said:
Uh... no... to think that a judge can reneg on a settlement without being disbarred shows how fucked our system is.

Polansky left the country after finding out how treacherous our Justice System can be.
Click to expand...

You didn't mention the judge, you said our sex laws were ridiculous.
 
I think he should get off for that, the way the judge handled that trial really was bullshit. But he shouldn't get away with raping the little girl.
 
You didn't mention the judge, you said our sex laws were ridiculous.
Fire_Sprite
Click to expand...
True, but I think he was referring to the habit of overzealousness when it comes to American sex laws. In the Polanski case I think he was referring to the attitude behind American sex laws that would prompt a legislature to doggedly pursue a one-time rapist--as far as we know he hasn't done it again--as if he were the 20th hijacker of the 9/11 attacks long after it would have done any good.

They didn't even go after Phil Spector as vigorously as they have Polanski, and he was a stark raving lunatic and (multi-)murderer.

After a certain point, the pursuit of justice can turn into overkill if there's no real useful point to it. And I think that was his point: that American sex laws promote and provoke that kind of Javert-esque over-zealousness.
 
Fire_Sprite said:
You didn't mention the judge, you said our sex laws were ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Well, they are.

Here's what I don't get. We have a sex offender's registry, but not one for murderers.

So if you kill somebody, you don't have to go door to door telling people about it in your neighborhood, but if you have consensual sex with a 17 year old in certain states, you end up on the same list as the guy who violently rapes somebody.

That's the sort of thing I'm talking about.

By the way, you can even be classed as a sex offender for doing something as innocuous as pissing in your backyard, if your neighbor sees it and reports you. You could be charged with something like indecent exposure.

Now, I'm not condoning pissing in your backyard, but clearly, the law doesn't seem to categorize things in enough detail to separate offenders properly.
 
I had fuzzy memories of the crime that Polanski was accused of. So with this debate here I went back and read the transcripts from the trial, and this is a summery of them:

In 1977, Roman Polanski was 44-years-old and one of the most prominent directors in Hollywood. In March of that year, during a private photo shoot with a 13-year-old girl named Samantha Gailey, he gave her champagne, quaaludes and a sedative. Then, despite her telling him that she wanted to go home and “no” and “stop” while he forced himself on her, he performed oral sex, intercourse and sodomy on her. To put it another way, he drugged a child then fucked her in the ass while she begged him to stop.

source: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskicover1.html

I'm thinking of this when watching what the legal system does with him.

Myriads
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
What's New
11/14/25
Visit Door 44 for tickling clips of all types!

Door 44
Live Camgirls!
Live Camgirls
Streaming Videos
streaming tickling videos on demand at the TMF!
Tickling videos on demand!
Pic of the Week
Pic of the Week
Congratulations to
*** brad1701 ***
 The winner of our weekly Trivia, held every Sunday night at 11PM EST in our Chat Room
Back
Top