Polanski Not to be Extradited to US, Free man.

[Praxius]

he admitted to it, that is enough.

the fact he left the country instead of face his crime is another as well.

the guy deserves to pay.

Agreed.... regardless if the victim no longer wants to continue seeking justice is irrelevant..... he broke the law, he admitted to it, he was found guilty and he fled to avoid justice for his crimes.

He should be held accountable for his actions and he should own up, be a damn man for once in his life and accept responsibility for his actions.

Continually trying to trivialize the crimes he committed and continually trying to avoid facing punishment for his crimes is clear evidence of someone who has not accepted responsibility for his actions.

I don't condone anything done by Polanski but Having had his wife and baby slashed to death recently, most people could understand that the guy was going to be a bit unbalanced. Did the victim say she was only thirteen? Big Hollywood producer gets done by young 13 year old girl trying to look 21. More than one guy has fallen for that trap.

Geez you're trying to pull out every excuse for this guy aren't you?

If he was truly all screwed up for losing his family and that drove him to go and rape a minor, then he could have used that as an argument/excuse during the original investigation.

The courts already went through the processes in full, all the evidence was shown and heard, he admitted his guilt to the crime and the courts found him guilty and issued their punishment.

Due process was met and when it didn't suit what he wanted, he fled like the chicken sh*t child diddler he truly is.

Arguing his innocence, guilt or his insanity at this point is moot.... it was all done years ago and the final decision has been made. He is a fugitive from the law.... he's not some fugitive running away because he evaded his taxes or did some shop lifting..... he drugged and raped a minor..... and regardless of your excuses of other celebrities having minors jumping their bones, these are people who are using their influence and fame to get what they want and no matter how famous and well known you are, it does not excuse you from the responsibilities you have for abiding the law like everybody else.

Once he became famous and rich, it didn't suddenly wipe his memory of what is illegal and what is not...... I'm not the biggest expert on law, but even I know that you don't have sex with or rape minors whenever you feel like it.

 

[#juan]

quoting Praxius
Geez you're trying to pull out every excuse for this guy aren't you?

If he was truly all screwed up for losing his family and that drove him to go and rape a minor, then he could have used that as an argument/excuse during the original investigation.[/QUOTE

I'm not making excuses for him. Having sex with a minor was unlawful and disgusting. I just agree with the victim that after thirty years, we should let it go for everyone's sake.

 

[TenPenny]

quoting Praxius
Geez you're trying to pull out every excuse for this guy aren't you?

If he was truly all screwed up for losing his family and that drove him to go and rape a minor, then he could have used that as an argument/excuse during the original investigation.[/QUOTE

I'm not making excuses for him. Having sex with a minor was unlawful and disgusting. I just agree with the victim that after thirty years, we should let it go for everyone's sake.

He pled guilty, there's no need for a trial.

The issue is that he skipped the country before his sentencing, because he was afraid of the judge. Just because the victim doesn't think it's bad, that's no excuse. He had sex with a 13 year old.

13 year old.

That's a crime.

He skipped the country to avoid his sentence.

That's a crime.

I don't condone anything done by Polanski

But yet, you believe he shouldn't face the consequences.

Nice.

 

[ironsides]

Somebody will get him.

 

[#juan]

Who give a sh!t about Polanski? That BP oil gusher in the gulf of Mexico could very well end life as we know it. That 20 billion dollar offer from BP to repair damages is nothing compared to the damage to fisheries and wildlife over the whole coast of North America and beyond. God knows how far that mess will have spread after the hurricanes. It has just destroyed the livlihood of twenty million people or more. Polanski is nothing.

 

[JLM]

Who give a sh!t about Polanski? That BP oil gusher in the gulf of Mexico could very well end life as we know it. That 20 billion dollar offer from BP to repair damages is nothing compared to the damage to fisheries and wildlife over the whole coast of North America and beyond. God knows how far that mess will have spread after the hurricanes. It has just destroyed the livlihood of twenty million people or more. Polanski is nothing.

Yep, there's bigger fish to fry than Polanski, that's for sure, besides he's probably too old to be a future threat. It will take time but Mother Nature will fix up the Gulf of Mexico. I just learned another interesting "fact", the skipper of the Exon Valdez had five double vodkas before he went on shift, so I'm beginning to think there are no valid excuses for these catastrophes.

 

[TenPenny]

Who give a sh!t about Polanski? That BP oil gusher in the gulf of Mexico could very well end life as we know it. That 20 billion dollar offer from BP to repair damages is nothing compared to the damage to fisheries and wildlife over the whole coast of North America and beyond. God knows how far that mess will have spread after the hurricanes. It has just destroyed the livlihood of twenty million people or more. Polanski is nothing.

Melo****ing dramatic much?

For some reason, you don't think there's really anything wrong with what Polanski did.

Others disagree.

It has nothing to do with BP.

 

[Goober]

quoting Praxius
Geez you're trying to pull out every excuse for this guy aren't you?

If he was truly all screwed up for losing his family and that drove him to go and rape a minor, then he could have used that as an argument/excuse during the original investigation.[/QUOTE

I'm not making excuses for him. Having sex with a minor was unlawful and disgusting. I just agree with the victim that after thirty years, we should let it go for everyone's sake.

Juan

it was rape of a 13 year old girl that was drugged - So are you stating that the victim should have the right to cancel a trial - then also what about others that are caught 20 or 30 years down the road - seems we have a lot of priests convicted for similar crimes - are you saying they should not have been prosecuted.

At what stage time wise would we actively stop prosecution or hunting these creeps down.

 

[Chiliagon]

Who give a sh!t about Polanski? That BP oil gusher in the gulf of Mexico could very well end life as we know it. That 20 billion dollar offer from BP to repair damages is nothing compared to the damage to fisheries and wildlife over the whole coast of North America and beyond. God knows how far that mess will have spread after the hurricanes. It has just destroyed the livlihood of twenty million people or more. Polanski is nothing.

you're stretching the whole reality of this thing.

Life is not going to end because of 1 oil spill.

 

[ironsides]

Who give a sh!t about Polanski? That BP oil gusher in the gulf of Mexico could very well end life as we know it. That 20 billion dollar offer from BP to repair damages is nothing compared to the damage to fisheries and wildlife over the whole coast of North America and beyond. God knows how far that mess will have spread after the hurricanes. It has just destroyed the livlihood of twenty million people or more. Polanski is nothing.

Agree with you totally #juan, in time justice will catch up to Polanski now that his story is out.

you're stretching the whole reality of this thing.

Life is not going to end because of 1 oil spill.

This oil spill has the potential to destroy sea life throughout the Atlantic into the Mediterranean not to mention the fishing industries in Europe and North America. (some predict it could circle the planet because of the quantity of oil buried there.) As it is it will be decades before the Gulf recovers if they capped it today.

 

[JLM]

Melo****ing dramatic much?

For some reason, you don't think there's really anything wrong with what Polanski did.

Others disagree.

It has nothing to do with BP.

Of course there's something wrong with what Polanski did - 35 years ago, but it's just impractical to exact a pound of flesh for every crime- especially when there's espionage and murder cases unsolved. It actually does have something to do with BP. There's a finite amount of money in the world to right all the wrongs, and the oil spill in the Gulf is a greater wrong than Polanski. Polanski may have upset a dozen lives- B.P. has screwed up thousands.

 

[#juan]

Melo****ing dramatic much?

For some reason, you don't think there's really anything wrong with what Polanski did.

Others disagree.

It has nothing to do with BP.

Do a bit of reading.
Come on Ten Penny. Tell us how BP's continuing spill is not going to hurt us. Tell us how the spill is going to be good marine life and how it is going to help the fisheries. Polanski will be gone in a couple years. BP's oil disaster will be with us for decades.

 

[Goober]

Agree with you totally #juan, in time justice will catch up to Polanski now that his story is out.



This oil spill has the potential to destroy sea life throughout the Atlantic into the Mediterranean not to mention the fishing industries in Europe and North America. (some predict it could circle the planet because of the quantity of oil buried there.) As it is it will be decades before the Gulf recovers if they capped it today.

Exactly how will justice catch up with Polanski

So with the oil spill logic any old case should be set aside.

 

[JLM]

"Exactly how will justice catch up with Polanski"?

Sometimes the "big fella upstairs" has been known to intercede with these kinds of guys. Must be Hell to continuously have to look over your shoulder.

 

[Downhome_Woman]

Mr. Polanski is now 76years old. His "victim",is likely a mother herself....Maybe even a grandmother. The victim doesn't want to continue with the trial. I think it is well past time to move on. I can find no hard information that he used chemicals or booze on her against her will. The point is that the victim does not want to go on with the trial. Polanski may be the sleeziest pervert around but how long do we push this thing when nobody wants to continue? Other countries don't think the "crime" was serious enough to continue after thirty years.

Roman Polanski: The truth about his notorious sex crime - Profiles, People - The Independent

What about 'SHE WAS 13' do you not understand? Good grief - even back then that was statutory rape. Just that fact alone makes it an issue. The fact that the victim doesn't want it go go further is irelevent. also if you'd dug deeper her not wanting to have it be pursued has nothing to do with it 'being time to move on', but rather it brings up memories he'd rather forget - liker how she didn't get justice the first time ... oh - also that she has the press hounding her. Is that a reason to not go after him? Of course not! He did something illegal and never paid for it - and he continued to prey on young girls. The man is disgusting and anyone who would even entertain the idea that he should be let off because he's a great artist/it happened a long time ago/people are bored with it and want a new sexy story/whatever - is about as shallow as a mud puddle.
As far as it not being important because a lot of countries don't consider it a serious enough crime to prosecute after 30 years? Right. Tell me sunshine. what if you had a grand daughter - or grandson, for that matter, who got mixed up uith Polanski the same way this girl did - and you found out. Would you be just as complacent? Or would your precious offspring be somehow different - more important?

 

[Kreskin]

I'm with #juan. At this point the only who would benefit from an extradition is Nancy Grace and her cast of media thugs.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I find myself in agreement with juan (and in disagreement with most posters here). I am not trying to excuse what he did, and it indeed was a great miscarriage of justice that he did not serve prison time. There are never any extenuating circumstances when it comes to child abuse.

At the same time he is an old man now, this was 33 years ago. The victim has moved on and she doesn’t want to revisit the whole sordid affair yet again. Also, I assume he has led exemplary life since then (there haven’t been any further allegations against him in any of the European countries he has visited). It is time to temper justice with mercy and forget about the whole thing.

I don’t think charges against him should be dismissed; he should carry the stigma of child abuser the rest of his life. But considering that it happened more than a generation ago (and the victim does not want to proceed further), I think it is time to move on.

Incidentally, why was he allowed to skip the country in 1977? I would think it would be standard procedure to confiscate the passport of a convicted criminal.

 

[Downhome_Woman]

I find myself in agreement with juan (and in disagreement with most posters here). I am not trying to excuse what he did, and it indeed was a great miscarriage of justice that he did not serve prison time. There are never any extenuating circumstances when it comes to child abuse.

At the same time he is an old man now, this was 33 years ago. The victim has moved on and she doesn’t want to revisit the whole sordid affair yet again. Also, I assume he has led exemplary life since then (there haven’t been any further allegations against him in any of the European countries he has visited). It is time to temper justice with mercy and forget about the whole thing.

I don’t think charges against him should be dismissed; he should carry the stigma of child abuser the rest of his life. But considering that it happened more than a generation ago (and the victim does not want to proceed further), I think it is time to move on.

Incidentally, why was he allowed to skip the country in 1977? I would think it would be standard procedure to confiscate the passport of a convicted criminal.

So he's an 'old man' - big deal.All that means is that he's an old man who eluded justice and managed to live a good life in Europe.

whether or not the victim wishes to prosecute is of no matter either. Justice isn't resting on whether he is 'to old', he's paid his due (right - in France - making movies), it happened so long ago - these don't matter. He broke the law - he needs to pay the price, and even more - the world - and all those who have been abused and have not seen justice done.
Tell me SJP - what if your boy had come home and told you that the same thing had happened to him. Oh I know - he's a wonder of humanity and has always made the 'right decisions'. But just what if - this time he made an aquaintance who ending up 'grooming him - and ended up raping your precious 13 year old boy? what if the law decided to let it slide? If the perpetrator resurfaced lets say, 30 years later, would you be so blase? I'm a mother of two young women - I wouldn't be. By your 'it's been a generation since the event let's move on' sentiment I'm thinking that you must believe that all those pedofile priests should be left alone because - well, they're old and it's been a while'.

I've done something I'm usually loathe to do - I've attached 3 links. One is written by a woman who was 15 at the time of the trial - and who had suffered abuse. Another is the actual trial transcript and the other is the Wikipedia article - I included it because it is pretty faithful to the actual transcript but is condensed.
Roman Polanski sexual abuse case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



[URL="http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskia1.html"]http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskia1.html

Polanski Transcript: He Didn’t Want His Victim to Get Pregnant, So He Sodomized Her Evil Sits at the Dinner Table

So he's an 'old man' - big deal.All that means is that he's an old man who eluded justice and managed to live a good life in Europe.

whether or not the victim wishes to prosecute is of no matter either. Justice isn't resting on whether he is 'to old', he's paid his due (right - in France - making movies), it happened so long ago - these don't matter. He broke the law - he needs to pay the price, and even more - the world - and all those who have been abused and have not seen justice done.
Tell me SJP - what if your boy had come home and told you that the same thing had happened to him. Oh I know - he's a wonder of humanity and has always made the 'right decisions'. But just what if - this time he made an aquaintance who ending up 'grooming him - and ended up raping your precious 13 year old boy? what if the law decided to let it slide? If the perpetrator resurfaced lets say, 30 years later, would you be so blase? I'm a mother of two young women - I wouldn't be. By your 'it's been a generation since the event let's move on' sentiment I'm thinking that you must believe that all those pedofile priests should be left alone because - well, they're old and it's been a while'.

I've done something I'm usually loathe to do - I've attached 3 links. One is written by a woman who was 15 at the time of the trial - and who had suffered abuse. Another is the actual trial transcript and the other is the Wikipedia article - I included it because it is pretty faithful to the actual transcript but is condensed.
Roman Polanski sexual abuse case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



[URL="http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskia1.html"]http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskia1.html

 

[JLM]

What about 'SHE WAS 13' do you not understand? Good grief - even back then that was statutory rape. Just that fact alone makes it an issue. The fact that the victim doesn't want it go go further is irelevent. also if you'd dug deeper her not wanting to have it be pursued has nothing to do with it 'being time to move on', but rather it brings up memories he'd rather forget - liker how she didn't get justice the first time ... oh - also that she has the press hounding her. Is that a reason to not go after him? Of course not! He did something illegal and never paid for it - and he continued to prey on young girls. The man is disgusting and anyone who would even entertain the idea that he should be let off because he's a great artist/it happened a long time ago/people are bored with it and want a new sexy story/whatever - is about as shallow as a mud puddle.
As far as it not being important because a lot of countries don't consider it a serious enough crime to prosecute after 30 years? Right. Tell me sunshine. what if you had a grand daughter - or grandson, for that matter, who got mixed up uith Polanski the same way this girl did - and you found out. Would you be just as complacent? Or would your precious offspring be somehow different - more important?

I would imagine this case is similar to thousands of unresolved cases across the country, the only difference being that Mr. Polanski is a prominent figure. As far as public interest goes, however this case is no different from the other thousands where sometimes the victim just has to "suck it up", as a famous person said life isn't always fair.

 

[Downhome_Woman]

I would imagine this case is similar to thousands of unresolved cases across the country, the only difference being that Mr. Polanski is a prominent figure. As far as public interest goes, however this case is no different from the other thousands where sometimes the victim just has to "suck it up", as a famous person said life isn't always fair.

Apparently the victim wants to do just that - but what the victim wants is irrelevant, unfortunately. It's what needs to be done. The man trolled, he groomed, he drugged a 13 year old girl and had sex with her. It's illegal, it's a crime. There is no ambiguity - it doesn't matter if Polanski 'thought' she consented (then why the drugs?)It's illegal. the Swiss government does what it has always done. It sold out in the Second World War2, under the blanket of 'neutrality' and it sold out now - and just what was their 30 pieces of silver?

The man raped a child. He used alcohol, he used coercion, he stalked her, he used drugs, he didn't listen to her when she said no. She went along with it in the end because she had no power and if she did she could go home. She might have been a typical curious 13 year old - but she was a child - and if you read the transcript you get the feel of just how young she was - and then there was the sheer legality of it - SHE WAS 13!
- whether she was 'willing' or not is irrelevant. Legally she was a minor.- I have issues with a country that gives freedom to a person like that. I'm disgusted.Switzerland disgusts me.