Roman Polanski seeks dismissal of charges

[Harmony 2]

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=8719536

Former Prosecutor Says He Lied About Polanski Case
Former prosecutor says statement about advising judge in Roman Polanski case was made up

 

[ThoughtFox]

I can't even watch a Woody Allen film anymore because everything reminds me of the betrayal of Mia Farrow's family by this . Watch "Hannah and her Sisters" again sometimes and you'll see what I mean - young women with old men, and people sleeping with their sisters-in-law, etc. It's all there.

I don't care how old Sun Yi was when he married her - he had a relationship with the girl's mother for years and had a child with her who was treated like Sun Yi's brother!!! "Technically" she wasn't his stepdaughter - no. But every time Mia Farrow spoke of her relationship with Woody, she mentioned their "family" life, meaning with the children, including Sun Yi. It's a betrayal of family norms and family integrity, that's what it is.

But then many people see the book and movie "Lolita" as a great work of art, but I don't. It's just the story of a pedophile with an obsession he thinks is love when it's just about controlling an innocent child.

But even if Polanski isn't "technically" a pedophile either, he raped a girl several times while she was on drugs and alcohol.

Raped. a. little. girl.

:banghead:

Anyway - I didn't mean to rant. But I keep seeing apologies for Roman Polanski all over the Internet, and it's about to make me throw up my breakfast. It's shocking that there's so little sympathy for this young victim in Hollywood. Unbelievable. :furious:

 

[Velouria]

Somehow I don't see her as a victim. She's been married to Allen for 12 years and will be financially taken care of for the rest of her life. They also have two adopted children together.

But, this thread is about RP rather than Allen.

And Jaycee Dugard spent 18 years with Phil Garrido, and bore two of his children.

IMO, the long-lasting psychological trauma of childhood sexual abuse is even more damaging than the physical violation. Remember the case of Susan Polk? She was only 16 when she became sexually involved with her therapist, Felix Polk. They later married and had two children together. She was convicted of stabbing him to death. By all accounts, their history together was troubled and turbulent. Just because SunYi is now married to Allen doesn't necessarily mean she doesn't carry some scars from what began as an illicit relationship with a man who served as her father figure.

 

[ziggy]

It wasn't rape, rape...
why are many contending this was consentual? Have they read the transcript?

I just read it and there is nothing consentual about this rape of the 13 year old girl. It's pretty disturbing.

She says she has asthma and she needs to go home (she's lying about asthma to get away from him). What does this nice man do with a child who he believes to have asthma? Well, gives her more alcohol, drugs and rapes her and sodomizes her - twice - getting interrputed by someone at the door doesn't keep him from his happy ending with a drugged 13 year old.

People. It's RAPE, RAPE. I'm writing Whoopie Goldberg a nasty letter along with ABC. These so called ladies of the View need a reality check.

A) 13 year olds cannot consent

B) She said no repeatedly

C) Victims are not allowed to forgive their offenders and make the crime go away - think about all the abused women who, through the honeymoon phase after their beating, will forgive their abuser and refuse to testify. Is it still OK that the abuser beat her to a bloody pulp? NO. It's against the law. A civilized society says this type of behavior cannot be acceptable.

Just because the abusee says it's OK to let it go doesn't mean SQUAT.

What is wrong with these poeple? I hope there is a HUGE backlash against the Hollywood idiots who are calling for RP to be let off the hook for this crime...yes CRIME.

He was given a sweet deal by being allowed to plead to the lesser charge and then he flees like a coward because he doesn't trust government because he was a Holocaust victim? OH, OK. You get 1 free rape because we feel really sorry for you. I don't think so.

 

[porkchop]

This is one thing that I can't understand. These people that are defending Polanski are some of the same people that were screaming that Micheal Vick should never be allowed to play football again. Yes Vick killed dogs but he served his time. Polanski drugged and raped a child then fled prosecution, and while he was on the run he was still able work in his given profession. I can't understand how they can demonize Vick but throw their arms around Polanski. I can't even understand how they can stand to work with or be around a child rapist. It just goes to show that Hollywood is a bunch of air heads.

 

[sniperacer]

It's RAPE, RAPE.

<snip snip>

Unfortunately, at this point in time, IMO, this case is not about rape. He was charged, 30 years ago, with "unlawful sex with a minor". IMO, the rape issue is water under the bridge and the train left over that bridge 30 years ago. I believe the statute of limitations for additional charges (or charges based upon today's standard) has expired (not to mention an uncooperative victim/witness).

I know this sucks. Rape issues have certainly changed over the last 30 years.

Todays issues with RP is extradition, judicial misconduct, a plea agreement, an admitted lying assistant DA, fleeing while on bail, and penalty. He served the 45 days outlined in the plea agreement (IMO - that seem light even by 30 year ago standards). Some judges take into account things such as being a holocaust victim, and wife and baby killed, IN SENTENCING.

IMO, IF a person can get over the rape issue, which most here can not, and look at the legal issues, some get to the "let him off the hook" point.

IMO, I believe RP should stand in a US court. But I feel the result will open a "can of worms" and not be a good example of our justice system.

 

[MomofBoys]

Easy. Polanski's one of them, Vick is not.

Are you implying it's because of race? Because I don't see that at all. Or maybe you mean something else.

I see a lot of blaming-the-victim on various sites. A lot of "he's paid his dues." Heck, I used the latter myself, at first. Until the docs I really didn't understand the crime.

I think Vick is a vile human being. I think Polanski is a vile human being, after reading the extent of what he did. Before, I was someone who lambasted Vick and gave Polanski a bit of a pass. It wasn't because of race; it was because of my ignorance on what went on that day.

 

[lonetraveler]

I'm afraid all this will result in more harm than good. Although everyone uses terms as "rape", "sodomy", "illegal drugging", etc......, Polanski was only charged with "unlawful sex with a minor".

Unfortunately, I believe, the statute of limitations has passed on additional charges, such as those worded above.

So now you have a mess of judicial misconduct with a dead judge, an old plea agreement that, with the exception of the judge, was satisfied, a defendent fleeing perceived judicial misconduct, an uncooperative victim, 30 years, and differing public opinion.

I see Polanski getting another agreement of time served. Rather than (re)open the whole judicial misconduct "can of worms". Not sure what example of justice this all shows....

In my own opinon, the example of justice shows that there was no justice done, period. The charge of "unlawful sex with a minor" is ridiculous to begin with. The tone of this language suggests a consensual agreement between a man and a girl and the "only" problem was the age of the girl. This is BS in the first degree. The man not only gave alcohol to the young girl, he also drugged her, and raped her multiply times including anal rape. Does anyone in their right mind think that this was consensual? He is a child rapist, period. He got the slap on the wrist with the ludicrous charge. Now that he is considered a "genius", his crime is shoved under the rug and he is exclaimed as a victim. This shows us just how depraved people have become.

 

[sniperacer]

Are you implying it's because of race? Because I don't see that at all. Or maybe you mean something else.

I see a lot of blaming-the-victim on various sites. A lot of "he's paid his dues." Heck, I used the latter myself, at first. Until the docs I really didn't understand the crime.

I think Vick is a vile human being. I think Polanski is a vile human being, after reading the extent of what he did. Before, I was someone who lambasted Vick and gave Polanski a bit of a pass. It wasn't because of race; it was because of my ignorance on what went on that day.

Race? Let's not go down that road.

She meant Polanski was one of Hollywood's own, while Vick was not. And the point someone was making is that Hollywood supports their own. The Hollywood executive even supported Mel's public jewish rants and the exec's are mostly jewish!

On the other hand, many sport folks support Vick. And some family members support other family members even in murder cases.

 

[LinasK]

Unfortunately, at this point in time, IMO, this case is not about rape. He was charged, 30 years ago, with "unlawful sex with a minor". IMO, the rape issue is water under the bridge and the train left over that bridge 30 years ago. I believe the statute of limitations for additional charges (or charges based upon today's standard) has expired (not to mention an uncooperative victim/witness).

I know this sucks. Rape issues have certainly changed over the last 30 years.

Todays issues with RP is extradition, judicial misconduct, a plea agreement, an admitted lying assistant DA, fleeing while on bail, and penalty. He served the 45 days outlined in the plea agreement (IMO - that seem light even by 30 year ago standards). Some judges take into account things such as being a holocaust victim, and wife and baby killed, IN SENTENCING.

IMO, IF a person can get over the rape issue, which most here can not, and look at the legal issues, some get to the "let him off the hook" point.

IMO, I believe RP should stand in a US court. But I feel the result will open a "can of worms" and not be a good example of our justice system.

The statute of limitations did not expire for murder in the extradition of Ira Einhorn from France after many years, so why should this be any different??? And Yes, it was Rape! He drugged and had sex with a 13-year-old without her consent (but even with her consent, which she wasn't old enough to give- it's still statutory rape!) The judge did NOT take into account his being a Holocaust victim, nor his family killed. He needs to return and do his time, no matter how long it is!

 

[ziggy]

Not one of THEM means not a Hollywood posse member.

I understand the issue is about the extradition etc. but the original charges cannot be overlooked when those in Hollywood are saying we should give him a pass are coupling that with what he ACTUALLY did, which we know - is what he was originally charged with.

The legal issues that are now before the court should be looked at in all aspects. If a an officer of the court lied, there needs to be full disclosure on that. If the judge thought Polanski should have served more time, then it's reasonable that the amount of time he served was not considered just penalty (perhaps because he was famous?)and it should be examined to see if he should face more time.

Regardless of what went on, he had enough money to fund a good defense and yet he chose to flee.

He should stand for those charges. He doesn't get a free pass to break our laws because he is famous, regardless of the corruption there may have been. Both issues should be dealt with NOW. Letting it go is not the right thing to do. We shouldn't avoid getting to the truth just because it might get ugly.

 

[LinasK]

I heard somewhere on TV last night, that the real reason Hollywood is mad about his arrest, is that they got him at a Film Festival, which is supposed to be "sacred ground", meaning even those who are in exile, get political freedom to attend. Tough Luck, I say!:razz: This is criminal, not political.

 

[sniperacer]

In my own opinon, the example of justice shows that there was no justice done, period. The charge of "unlawful sex with a minor" is ridiculous to begin with. The tone of this language suggests a consensual agreement between a man and a girl and the "only" problem was the age of the girl. This is BS in the first degree. The man not only gave alcohol to the young girl, he also drugged her, and raped her multiply times including anal rape. Does anyone in their right mind think that this was consensual? He is a child rapist, period. He got the slap on the wrist with the ludicrous charge. Now that he is considered a "genius", his crime is shoved under the rug and he is exclaimed as a victim. This shows us just how depraved people have become.

I think most people will agree with this. I do. The justice system did not.

The important thing, that you got, is more folks should be angry with the old justice system - not that we can change the past.

 

[CyberLaw]

How many times has the law "found" an individual well after the fact.

A women in the 1970's plants a bomb for a radical underground group that she belongs to. The Bomb goes off, people are hurt. She is arrested and released on bail.

Fast forward to 2009, she is found and returned to jail.

But of course her "supporters" use the mantra, but she has been looking over her shoulders since 1979, has she not suffered enough.

She belongs to the PTA, Girl Scouts and coaches soccer. She is a middle class housewife with a family. Since they are coming after her after all this time, they are just trying to punish her for something she did 30 years ago.

But guess what, the law only sees black and white. She committed a crime and was not punished for it.

RP is a child rapist, he raped a child. She child was 13. He felt he did nothing wrong and still does. Well of course the law and legal system does see if quite differently.

He belongs in jail, anything else would reward him for escaping justice.

 

[LinasK]

How many times has the law "found" an individual well after the fact.

A women in the 1970's plants a bomb for a radical underground group that she belongs to. The Bomb goes off, people are hurt. She is arrested and released on bail.

Fast forward to 2009, she is found and returned to jail.

But of course her "supporters" use the mantra, but she has been looking over her shoulders since 1979, has she not suffered enough.

She belongs to the PTA, Girl Scouts and coaches soccer. She is a middle class housewife with a family. Since they are coming after her after all this time, they are just trying to punish her for something she did 30 years ago.

But guess what, the law only sees black and white. She committed a crime and was not punished for it.

RP is a child rapist, he raped a child. She child was 13. He felt he did nothing wrong and still does. Well of course the law and legal system does see if quite differently.

He belongs in jail, anything else would reward him for escaping justice.

If you're speaking of Kathleen Soliah, a.k.a. Sara Jane Olsen of the Symbionese Liberation Army, she did go back and do time, although she got early release.

 

[MeoW333]

They need to make those charges stick to him for life, he'll never change. Once a perv, always a perv. He shouldn't get nothing dismissed!

 

[Miss_Scarlett]

And Jaycee Dugard spent 18 years with Phil Garrido, and bore two of his children.

IMO, the long-lasting psychological trauma of childhood sexual abuse is even more damaging than the physical violation. Remember the case of Susan Polk? She was only 16 when she became sexually involved with her therapist, Felix Polk. They later married and had two children together. She was convicted of stabbing him to death. By all accounts, their history together was troubled and turbulent. Just because SunYi is now married to Allen doesn't necessarily mean she doesn't carry some scars from what began as an illicit relationship with a man who served as her father figure.

The Susan and Felix Polk case is very interesting. She ended up behaving like a crazy and bitter loon, but it still didn't change the fact that Felix not only started a sexual relationship with her when she was his teenaged patient and could really mess up her mind, but he was crazy in many other ways. I recommend the book on that one.

As far as RP not being a pedophile, there is another name for people who are attracted to pubescent children who are older. Pedophile is about only very young children.

 

[Albert18]

I remember this as being a seedy case back when it happened, but seedy on both sides.

But how could it be seedy on the side of a 13 year old? Well, now maybe you understand why the case needs to be dropped.

People who are defending Polanski may have more info then what is currently in the public domain. Before you judge Whoopi, read what she said. That was not a flippant comment.

The woman wants this all to go away and be done with. People need to listen to her.

Roman should be ashamed of himself but if she has forgiven him and moved on then everybody else should also.

Remember we had two events, the actual event and testimony about the event. They may not be the same.

 

[MomofBoys]

We have HER words about the event, though. it's not hearsay.

Whoopi is now backtracking on her comments, just like France and me and so many others. I think actual knowledge about what happened is changing perceptions; it's not a sign of some greater insight his supporters have.

A settlement was a civil resolution. It shouldn't matter if she has let bygones be bygones from a prosecution perspective. He's a child rapist.

 

[ziggy]

I remember this as being a seedy case back when it happened, but seedy on both sides.

But how could it be seedy on the side of a 13 year old? Well, now maybe you understand why the case needs to be dropped.

People who are defending Polanski may have more info then what is currently in the public domain. Before you judge Whoopi, read what she said. That was not a flippant comment.

The woman wants this all to go away and be done with. People need to listen to her.

Roman should be ashamed of himself but if she has forgiven him and moved on then everybody else should also.

Remember we had two events, the actual event and testimony about the event. They may not be the same.

Albert, what in the heezy do you mean? First, did you read the transcript? What does Whoopi know that I don't?

If a man murders his wife, and her family forgives him and tells everyone to just put it behind them and move along because maybe that wife was annoying and provocative sometimes, that we should listen to them and just forget that a crime occured?

How can a 13 year old consent or be at all culpable?

I need more info. Your post infers there is more to it, but evades details.