Re: Swiss detain Roman Polanski
It's not cut and dried that he's returning to the states either. Extradition is dicey at best even in the more sophisticated societies. He's being held right now and from what I've read is already appealing this in the Swiss court. So, we'll see.
|
Re: Swiss detain Roman Polanski
I am a big Fan of Roman :yup: but he needs to pay for his sins like everyone else :yup;
|
Originally Posted by nebbit (Post 570249)
I am a big Fan of Roman :yup: but he needs to pay for his sins like everyone else :yup;
|
Originally Posted by nebbit (Post 570249)
but he needs to pay for his sins like everyone else :yup:
|
Originally Posted by Powdered Water (Post 570134)
I think its total bullsh*t and the United States should be ashamed of itself. If this is supposed to be about the victims (which it isn't) then this should have long been forgotten. Instead, we'll most likely have yet another media circus.
Personally, I think it's his own fault in spades after he came back to the US for that awards program a few years ago, which was like thumbing his nose at the law. According to one account I read, the US resumed actively seeking Polanski's extridition in 2005. |
Re: Swiss detain Roman Polanski
And yet another person who has absolutely ZERO knowledge of the facts of the case or what actually happened, apparently.
|
Re: Swiss detain Roman Polanski
Polanski hasn't been in the U.S. for over 30 years.
|
I think that for those of us who've either seen the Wanted and Desired doc (which I have) we probably have come to the conclusion that Polanski was running from the judge... I am, though, (to gasps from the audience, no doubt :p) no lawyer and enjoyed a film which sought as much balance as it could. Just like me, though, Wanted and Desired hasn't passed its bar exams. ;)
Nevertheless, the only matter about the case itself which seems to be in doubt is the question of consent. Even if things were consensual (and I'm not saying they were), they were consensual in the mind of a 13 year old child... I don't think I need to spell things out any clearer. Yes, the case turned into a show trial and yes, everyone should be entitled to a justice system free from prejudice. Maybe he'll get the opportunity for a balanced hearing if the extradition goes ahead. |
Originally Posted by tramp (Post 570182)
I forgot to add that I think Polanski should get a new trial where I guess he would have to plead not guilty even if he had plead guilty before. I wonder if that is how it will play out. I get the feeling he deserves a new trial and if the victim won't testify, what would happen then?
There was a documentary where the prosecutor stated that he didn't blame Polanski for running. While he committed a crime, it wasn't fair what happened to him and I also think that is important. |
Originally Posted by rufnek (Post 570259)
Personally, I think it's his own fault in spades after he came back to the US for that awards program a few years ago, which was like thumbing his nose at the law. According to one account I read, the US resumed actively seeking Polanski's extridition in 2005.
But yes, continue to believe what you will! Why should facts muddy the waters of righteous indignation? They rarely do. |
Originally Posted by Powdered Water (Post 570185)
For all of you people that keep saying he "ran from the law" you really need to look into the whole thing a little deeper.
He DID NOT run from the law. He did in fact go through the entire legal process. It wasn't until the very end of the case when he and his attorney realized that he was going to be "made an example of" did he leave the country. I strongly urge you all to see Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired. There is a lot more to this case than simply. "Oh that's the dude that fled the country yeah?" Besides, I question just how "unfair" the original court was or how determined it was to "make an example" of Polanski if the judge didn't even order him to surrender his passport while out on bail. Or did Polanski obtain a fake passport to make his escape? Certainly he should not have done anything to elude justice on the advice of his attorney as that would open his attorney to disbarment and criminal charges. |
Re: Swiss detain Roman Polanski
they were consensual in the mind of a 13 year old child... I don't think I need to spell things out any clearer.
But yes, she was still 13 and Polanski has to pay for that in a fair way with everything taken into account. |
Originally Posted by 42ndStreetFreak (Post 570278)
Far from your normal 13 year old girl though
I don't wanna get all "if it happened to my 13 year old I'd cut his swingers off" Daily Mail channelling, though, but the fact remains I do have a 13 year old daughter who thinks she's oh so mature. She's probably more mature than I was at that age but that just means she doesn't laugh at fart jokes. :) |
Re: Swiss detain Roman Polanski
I love how people in the world today are so consumed with "justice". "He needs to pay!" "He should pay!"
He did pay, he was also jailed. For God's sake rufnek. Your points are completely empty because you apparently only have a very rudimentary knowledge of what happened. |
Originally Posted by Holden Pike (Post 570270)
For someone who prides themselves on a newsman's grasp of the cold hard facts and the minutiae of the historical record you have shockingly few correct here. He did not come back to the United States for an awards show or any other reason (and he won the frippin' Oscar in absentia). The reason they've been trying to get him back recently is that after the documentary that was very clearly damning of the Judge and his clerk, the current Court in California was more or less shamed into just saying, 'Come back, we'll have a hearing, pronounce the time served, blah-blah, and it'll be over with'. When Roman discovered this would be an open hearing and another surefire media circus, he declined. He also doesn't feel especially trustful of the American legal system for some reason.
But yes, continue to believe what you will! Why should facts muddy the waters of righteous indignation? They rarely do. For that matter, I never claimed inside or comprehensive knowledge of Polanski's chase beyound current news reports that he pled guilty to his crime. If that's not the case, then like Bogart in Casablanca, "I was misinformed." My remarks are addressed to the fundamentals of the law, which none of Polanski's fans want even to acknowledge. I do find odd your statement that Polanski wanted to avoid a "media circus," seeing as how he has been at the center of one ever since his escape. A movie person who abhors a "media circus"--now that is unsual. As for "righteous indignation," I leave that to you and his other fans, seeing as how I really don't give a flying f**k what happens to Polanski. Bring him back, don't bring him back--it's all far short of a truly historic moment. |
Originally Posted by Tacitus (Post 570280)
I don't think that matters a fig, to be honest, even if it's true, although I think you agree judging by your final sentence. :)
I don't wanna get all "if it happened to my 13 year old I'd cut his swingers off" Daily Mail channelling, though, but the fact remains I do have a 13 year old daughter who thinks she's oh so mature. She's probably more mature than I was at that age but that just means she doesn't laugh at fart jokes. :) I'm not saying she was simply a 'mature beyond her years' 13 year old...I'm saying she was a sexually active, sexually experienced, messed up 13 year old. |
Re: Swiss detain Roman Polanski
@ rufnek
You say you don't give a **** and yet here you are spreading around a bunch of misinformation and somehow trying to give out a sermon on the law? I don't buy it. |
Originally Posted by Powdered Water (Post 570281)
I love how people in the world today are so consumed with "justice". "He needs to pay!" "He should pay!"
He did pay, he was also jailed. For God's sake rufnek. Your points are completely empty because you apparently only have a very rudimentary knowledge of what happened. I reiterate, I couldn't care less whether Polanski does time or not. But don't play like a big-name movie celebrity with a high-priced lawyer was being railroaded by a California court! |
Originally Posted by rufnek (Post 570284)
I've given zero thought to Polanski....
I really don't give a flying f**k what happens to Polanski. Bring him back, don't bring him back--it's all far short of a truly historic moment. |
Originally Posted by rufnek (Post 570284)
For that matter, I never claimed inside or comprehensive knowledge of Polanski's chase beyound current news reports that he pled guilty to his crime. If that's not the case, then like Bogart in Casablanca, "I was misinformed." My remarks are addressed to the fundamentals of the law, which none of Polanski's fans want even to acknowledge.
Originally Posted by rufnek (Post 570284)
I do find odd your statement that Polanski wanted to avoid a "media circus," seeing as how he has been at the center of one ever since his escape. A movie person who abhors a "media circus"-- now that is unusual.
|
All times are GMT -3. The time now is 09:52 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright, ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Movie Forums