SD on 28/9/2009 at 14:06
What is with all this shock and outrage over the arrest of the fugitive sex criminal Roman Polanski?
What is the world coming to when the French government can refer to the detention of paedo scum as "a new ordeal... inflicted on someone who has already experienced so many of them"?
How about the ordeal inflicted upon a 13 year old girl who was drugged and raped?
I don't care that it happened 30 years ago. I don't care that the guy is a talented individual, or that his pregnant wife was brutally murdered, or that his now middle-aged victim wants the whole thing dropped. Justice will only be done when they finally sling his filthy ass in jail.
Harrumph.
Sgt_BFG on 28/9/2009 at 14:26
who is roman polanski
Muzman on 28/9/2009 at 14:30
Isn't the fact that he took a plea that was backed up on by the judge (so I heard) somewhat material, or is it just a legal matter?
Intoxication would be somewhat mitigating too, I'd think (although no one's going to want to hear about statutory rape being mitigated in any way. The whole Statutory bit, while fair enough really, starts to seem impossibly rigid at this distance).
It would be easier if there was a chance for a trial, but I don't think there is anymore. That too does not seem just.
Queue on 28/9/2009 at 14:54
Quote Posted by SD
How about the ordeal inflicted upon a 13 year old girl who was drugged and raped?
I'm not saying what he did isn't--well--a bad thing (I'm beginning to think that deep down everyone has a perve-switch that could one day trip, and they just gotta fuck a 13 year-old), but does it not matter that the girl in question forgave him and didn't want to see him jail? Why still all the hatred for the guy?
R. KELLY WAS NEVER TREATED LIKE THIS!
...and he never did a remake of Oliver Twist.
Thirith on 28/9/2009 at 14:59
Quote Posted by SD
I don't care that it happened 30 years ago.
I do care about that. I'm not saying it renders the crime null and void, but IMO it is a valid point to discuss, especially when there's been a a plea deal and when the victim, 30 years later (i.e. not at a time when she's young and impressionable), expresses quite clearly that she wants the world to move on. As I've said, I don't think that any of these should be an automatic "Get out of jail" card, but I think they should be valid grounds for discussion. If not, then any thread about this will be nothing other than variations on the theme of "I'm right!" "No,
I'm right!" "No, you're wrong!" "No,
you're wrong!"
And frankly, SD, I think that people who believe they are the ones who know exactly what justice is are fairly close to people who believe in God *and* they're the ones who know exactly what His opinion is on morality. Either justice is a metaphysical notion that no one has direct, immediate access to, or it's a social construct, in which case it's most definitely open for discussion. "Justice will only be done when..." is
Daily Mail-type rhetorics.
Thief13x on 28/9/2009 at 15:19
In that case, why do we prosecute any child rapists?
R Soul on 28/9/2009 at 15:43
Quote Posted by Thirith
when the victim, 30 years later (i.e. not at a time when she's young and impressionable), expresses quite clearly that she wants the world to move on.
If the world just moves on it won't provide much of a deterrent to other would-be paedophiles.
rachel on 28/9/2009 at 15:48
What I'm interested in is the sudden interest of Switzerland for a guy who'd been there quite a bit in the last 30 years already, to the point of owning a house there. What the fuck is going on behind the scenes?
Queue on 28/9/2009 at 15:59
That's a really good point.
Are there some backdoor shenanigans (pardon the pun) going on?
Ulukai on 28/9/2009 at 16:28
Who's got a Nazi Gold Conspiracy Theory then?
