Roman Polanski Finally Arrested.

[Stark]

Fuck off, dickless. Any attempt to downgrade Polanski's crime is retarded. If anything, he should have been punished MORE due to his status and the obvious pre-meditation, and not have people explain that it was 'only' rape.

Sorry I forgot the law only counts for poor people.

[Anguirus]

Any attempt to downgrade Polanski's crime is retarded.

What attempt to downgrade his crime? Observing that he is almost certainly not a pedophile implies nothing about the heinousness of his crime, nor does it indicate any desire to reduce his jail time.

Kindly point out the part where Broomstick explained that anything was "'only' rape," or else admit that you only blew into this thread because you smelled a dick-waving opportunity.

Sorry I forgot the law only counts for poor people.

Obvious Red Herring.

Congratulations Stark, you've become the American media establishment. Your only contribution to this thread has been to violently agree with whoever seems to think the bad man is worse (because pedophilia somehow became a reliable way to measure True Evil, rather than the act of rape itself no matter what predilection motivated it).

[Havok]

Kindly point out the part where Broomstick explained that anything was "'only' rape," or else admit that you only blew into this thread because you smelled a dick-waving opportunity.

While technically he is a "pedophile", if the girl was physically mature at the time he isn't really a pedophile, just a skanky old man. Pedophiles are attracted to immature humans, not adolescents with developed secondary sexual characteristics. In fact, if I recall correctly, in some states 13 is old enough to marry with parental approval, believe it or not. Key word here being "consent". Neither the girl nor her parents in this case consented to anything, that is why it is a crime.

The issue here is really more bog standard rape than pedophilia.

Are you saying that Broomstick is not 'downgrading' in this post? She straight up says she feels it is just rape, not pedophilia.

[Stark]

Congratulations Stark, you've become the American media establishment. Your only contribution to this thread has been to violently agree with whoever seems to think the bad man is worse (because pedophilia somehow became a reliable way to measure True Evil, rather than the act of rape itself no matter what predilection motivated it).

What? Thinking Polanski is a disgusting child molester who used his status to procure, drug and rape a 13 year old girl makes me a bad person now? I think quibbling over whether or not the victims titties mitigates his crime is retarded, so you think I'm knee-jerking? Fuck off and die.

Ps, I know a 13 year old girl with big tits RIGHT NOW. Guess I should go fuck her then, because it's not -really- pedophilia, because <insert amateur psychology>. OH WAIT!

[Master of Ossus]

What attempt to downgrade his crime? Observing that he is almost certainly not a pedophile implies nothing about the heinousness of his crime, nor does it indicate any desire to reduce his jail time.

Actually, it does. Child molestation is a more serious charge than either rape or statutory rape.

Kindly point out the part where Broomstick explained that anything was "'only' rape," or else admit that you only blew into this thread because you smelled a dick-waving opportunity.

That would be here:

In fact, if I recall correctly, in some states 13 is old enough to marry with parental approval, believe it or not. Key word here being "consent". Neither the girl nor her parents in this case consented to anything, that is why it is a crime.

The issue here is really more bog standard rape than pedophilia.

(Note the non-reference to the fact that she was 13. It wouldn't have been a crime if she HAD consented?)

And here:

No, actually what happened to her is a fairly common type of rape, that is, drugging a woman and then fucking her despite her saying "no". Yes, it's outrageous, but it's also typical.

And here:

Polanski called her back for a second shoot. During that shoot he fed her champagne, some of which apparently had Quaaludes in it. When she wound up on a bed she says she protested, said no and that she didn't want to have sex several times, yet he went ahead. Yes, that's a fairly typical sort of rape scenario - invite woman over for something else, get her drunk/drugged, then fuck her despite her saying no.

Sorry I forgot the law only counts for poor people.

Obvious Red Herring.

Congratulations Stark, you've become the American media establishment. Your only contribution to this thread has been to violently agree with whoever seems to think the bad man is worse (because pedophilia somehow became a reliable way to measure True Evil, rather than the act of rape itself no matter what predilection motivated it).

Ummm... actually, in civilized countries (and I realize you know nothing of civilization) child molesting is considered a more serious form of sexual assault than "mere" rape. The two crimes very commonly take place with all sorts of other felonies (e.g., assault and battery), but in isolation raping a kid is worse than raping an adult.

[Master of Ossus]

Oh, no dispute that he should be in jail - my point is that a pedophile probably wouldn't be interested in her because of those developed secondary sexual characteristics. I never said what he did was OK. Yes, Polanski drugged and raped a woman. The fact she was a minor is an aggravating circumstance. At the time, that alone would not label him a child molester. NOW it would, but this went through the legal system 30 years ago when many of today's laws hadn't been written yet, and today's laws based everything on chronological age.

That is total bullshit. He was charged with committing a lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14." That was a contemporary law at the time that he committed his crime--in fact that was one of the more serious crimes he was indicted on. Moreover, statutory rape has always been defined by the age of the victim.

Pedophiles don't check kids' ID's for birthdates prior to molesting them, they go after children who look like children, that is, have not started to mature sexually on a physical level.

It doesn't matter: he is a child molester. In my part of the country, we have another word for child molesters: we call them pedophiles.

[Thanas]

Polanski was involved with minors before - anyone remember Natassja Kinski? So the defence that this was a one-time thing does not cut it. However, he got away with it because in most of Europe, the age of consent is lower.

[Broomstick]

Ah, I see the moral equivalence between "It's okay to marry with your parent's consent at 14," and "it's okay to drug a 13-year-old girl and have sex with her without her parents' consent."

NO, fuckwit, it's not morally equivalent.

Right, because the whole situation changes between being 13 years 364 days old and being 14 even.

Yes, it does. When she's 13 you're a child molester if you do anything sexual with her. When she's 14 you're "merely" a statutory rapist. Clearly Polanski is on the up-and-up.

Yes, there is a legal distinction, but human biology doesn't draw such strict lines.

Put her in the right clothes and add make up she's going to look like a woman, and older than she does in this picture. Human males are biologically "programmed" to find young women attractive. Most men in this day and age can resist drugging and raping newly mature females, but apparently Mr. Polanski is not one of them. Going by this photo, though, he didn't focus his attentions on a kid, he went after a female with physically mature characteristics.

How do you figure that?

She has tits and a rounded, female ass. She's not fully mature but she's not a child anymore, either. Women aren't as flat as an ironing board one day and >poof< fully mature the next. The law draws a strict line but that's not biology. Polanski went after a teen, not a child in the sense of no developed sexual characteristics. He's not some creepy old man luring 4 year olds with candy, he's a creepy old man luring teenagers. It's still a crime, it's still deplorable, and it still can't be condoned.

More accurately, this was a case of ephebophilia, the sexual preference for a mid-to-late adolescent. Except there is nothing to indicate he prefers women in that age group. He's been married three times, and normally goes after women are adult in age as well as body.

DSM's definition of pedophelia doesn't have anything to do "preference."

I was defining ephebophilia in that paragraph, not pedophila. Try to keep up.

I think this truly was a one-time giving in to temptation and not a pattern of behavior. Nonetheless, he did commit a felony.

According to the timeline, as I understand it, he had known her for months and had deliberately staged a photoshoot in order to lure her to a place where he could drug and rape her. That's not really a "one-time thing."

Her mother consented to the photo shoot. You make it sound like he kidnapped her. He didn't. He did deceive her and drug her and rape her, there's no denying that.

He's also been accused of making sexual advances towards at least one other underage girl.

Yes, apparently he likes teenagers.

Some states allow a girl as young as 14 to marry with parental consent - a clear instance where sexual activity with a minor is legal.

California is not and never has been one of them.

I understand the legal niceties here, however, the law isn't going to change the fact that a lot men find physically maturing 13 year olds sexually attractive. It's not the level of abnormality that fucking 4 year olds is.

And how is she "physically mature," in that photo you have, above?

She has tits and ass.

Even if she's developing, that's not physical maturity.

Yes, mentally, emotionally, and legally she's not an adult. Her physical body is a lot closer to adult than either of those. Regardless of her age, she's developed enough to attract male attention. Men who are not criminals will restrain themselves from acting on any desires towards young women of that age, rapists will not, but attraction to a girl like that is not the sort of perversion pedophila is.

No, actually what happened to her is a fairly common type of rape, that is, drugging a woman and then fucking her despite her saying "no". Yes, it's outrageous, but it's also typical.

You forgot the whole "luring her away from her parents so he could drug her and rape her" first.

She wasn't "lured", he didn't wave candy in front of her to lead her into a dark alley. Her parents knew where she was - and probably were dreaming dollar signs from their daughter as a young model. That's a problem, of course.

I don't see it. Rape does not typically involve isolating a 13-year-old from her parents.

What, you expect rapists to fuck a teen in front of her parents or something? How does raping a 13 year old not involve "isolating" her from other people, including her parents?

Fuck off, dickless. Any attempt to downgrade Polanski's crime is retarded. If anything, he should have been punished MORE due to his status and the obvious pre-meditation, and not have people explain that it was 'only' rape.

There is nothing “only” about rape. Yes, he should have been punished more for the premeditation, but that should apply to raping adults as well as teens.

Sorry I forgot the law only counts for poor people.

Right…. That’s why he was arrested on a 31 year old warrant. If the law “didn’t apply” he would have picked up his award and gone home instead of being arrested.

Are you saying that Broomstick is not 'downgrading' in this post? She straight up says she feels it is just rape, not pedophilia.

How is “just rape” less a crime? She is just as raped either way, whether she’s 13 or 30

Polanski was involved with minors before - anyone remember Natassja Kinski? So the defence that this was a one-time thing does not cut it. However, he got away with it because in most of Europe, the age of consent is lower.

This is where things get ridiculous – in one place it’s rape, in another it’s child molesting. It’s rape either way when you fuck someone against their will. Never said a crime didn’t take place. I find it rather appalling that some people here don’t think seem to think raping an adult women is a horrific, terrible crime that can result in lasting trauma.

[Lusankya]

I'm with Broomstick: what he did was rape, and was skeezy in that even if there was consent, it was an unequal relationship, but it wasn't paedophilia. You can tell that just by looking at the girl.

[Tolya]

Roman Polanski in Swiss detention

Film director Roman Polanski has been taken into custody in Switzerland and faces extradition to the US for having sex with a 13-year-old girl in 1977.

Mr Polanski, 76, was detained in Zurich on Saturday as he travelled from France to collect a lifetime achievement award at the Zurich Film Festival.

He is being held under a 2005 international alert issued by the US.

Mr Polanski has been to Switzerland before, but this time US authorities apparently knew of his trip in advance.

That gave them time to prepare the groundwork for his arrest and send a provisional arrest warrant to Swiss authorities, judicial officials said.

A Swiss spokesman said the US would now have to make a formal extradition request.

The director can contest his detention and any extradition decision in the Swiss courts, he added.

Mr Polanski's lawyer, Georges Kiejman, said he planned to challenge his client's arrest.

"We are going to try to lift the arrest warrant in Zurich," he told France Info radio. "The [extradition] convention between Switzerland and the United States is not very clear."

Mr Polanski fled the US in 1978 after pleading guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse with an underage girl.

He was initially indicted on six counts and faced up to life in prison.

In recent years, he has tried to have the rape case dismissed, claiming the original judge, who is now dead, arranged a plea bargain but later reneged.

Earlier this year, Judge Peter Espinoza agreed there was misconduct by the judge in the original case, but said Mr Polanski must return to the US to apply for dismissal.

Mr Polanski's lawyers said he would not return to the US because he would be immediately arrested as a fugitive.

The victim at the centre of the case, Samantha Geimer, has previously asked for the charges to be dropped, saying the continued publication of details "causes harm to me, my husband and children".

She has also called the court's insistence that Mr Polanski appear in person "a cruel joke".

'Shock and dismay'

The Paris-born Polish filmmaker - who is also a French citizen - has not set foot in the US for more than 30 years.

His Oscar for directing 2002 film The Pianist was collected by Harrison Ford, who had previously starred in his 1988 thriller, Frantic.

France's culture minister said he was "dumbfounded" by Mr Polanski's detention in Switzerland.

Frederic Mitterrand said he "strongly regrets that a new ordeal is being inflicted on someone who has already experienced so many of them".

He added that French President Nicolas Sarkozy was "following the case with great attention and shares the minister's hope that the situation can be quickly resolved".

The organisers of the Zurich Film Festival said Polanski's detention had caused "shock and dismay", but that they would go ahead with a planned retrospective of the director's work.

A special ceremony is planned for Sunday night "to allow everyone to express their solidarity for Roman Polanski and their admiration for his work", festival managers said in a statement.

Meanwhile, British author Robert Harris - who had been working with Mr Polanski on a film adaptation of his novel The Ghost - said he was taken aback by the weekend's events.

"One of the reasons I'm absolutely shocked and stunned by his arrest is that we have worked together extensively in Switzerland, where he has a home," Harris said.

"If he was such a wanted criminal why did they let him own a house and travel back and forth freely?"

But justice officials in both Switzerland and the US said the difference this time was that a provisional arrest warrant had been sent.

William Sorukas, chief of the US Marshals Service's domestic investigations branch, told the Associated Press that investigators learned about the trip days in advance and were therefore able to prepare for an arrest.

"There have been other times through the years when we have learned of his potential travel but either those efforts fell through or he didn't make the trip," he said.

CASE TIMELINE
1977 - Polanski admits unlawful sex with Samantha Geimer, 13, in Los Angeles
1978 - flees to Britain after US arrest warrant is issued
1978 - immediately moves to France where he holds citizenship
1978 - settles in France, where he is protected by France's limited extradition with US
2008 - Polanski's lawyer demands case be dismissed and hearing moved out of LA court
2009 - Polanski's request to have hearing outside LA is denied

I must say that I heard about the darker side of Roman Polanski's life, but I accounted that to rumours. This is actually quite shocking. Poles are divided in that matter: some want Polanski to be pardoned by Obama, some want him prosecuted.

The shocking thing is that the most common argument for pardoning Polanski is that "it happened a long time ago" and "he had to avoid US territory like hell for 30 years and that was his punishment".

Right, so living a full and prestigious life as an acclaimed movie and theatre director outside US is punishment now? Considering the life he led and fame he got I would say that the necessity of avoiding USA is a very minor nuisance.

For fucks sake, the guy confessed raping a 13 year old girl. Even if that wasn't an outright rape with kicking and screaming but rather a disguisting case of "a date with a minor" I still say prosecute him.

Why do celebrities have it easier with the public opinion? If this would be some just-a-guy blue collar miner everyone would demand him being hanged on the tallest tree available in the vicinity.

[loomer]

Already posted over in Off-Topic, my friend.

And here we are. http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=137277

[Broomstick]

Yeah, yeah, I know there's another thread, but I wanted to reply to this post. Can the treads be merged?

This is actually quite shocking. Poles are divided in that matter: some want Polanski to be pardoned by Obama, some want him prosecuted.

There's no way in hell Obama is going to pardon Polanski, it would be political suicide.

The shocking thing is that the most common argument for pardoning Polanski is that "it happened a long time ago" and "he had to avoid US territory like hell for 30 years and that was his punishment".

He's a fucking French citizen! It's not "punishment" to live in a country where you're a citizen! Oh, so he had to avoid the US - you know, a LOT of people live there whole lives without going to the US, in fact, MOST people in the world never visit the US. What horseshit.

Considering the life he led and fame he got I would say that the necessity of avoiding USA is a very minor nuisance.

Agreed. Oh, and he had to avoid countries willing to extradite him. Ooops. Guess he messed up with that.

For fucks sake, the guy confessed raping a 13 year old girl. Even if that wasn't an outright rape with kicking and screaming but rather a disguisting case of "a date with a minor" I still say prosecute him.

It was a date, it was under false pretenses and he drugged her. Pretty shitty.

Why do celebrities have it easier with the public opinion? If this would be some just-a-guy blue collar miner everyone would demand him being hanged on the tallest tree available in the vicinity.

I don't know - it's despicable regardless of who does it. He should also get extra time tacked on for fleeing the country instead of facing his punishment here.

[Tolya]

Already posted over in Off-Topic, my friend.

And here we are. http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=137277

Crap, I was looking for info on that in N&P and it didnt occur to me to look in the OT. Can someone merge the threads? Thanks and sorry.

[Simplicius]

Moved to N&P for easier merging.

[Thanas]

Polanski was involved with minors before - anyone remember Natassja Kinski? So the defence that this was a one-time thing does not cut it. However, he got away with it because in most of Europe, the age of consent is lower.

This is where things get ridiculous – in one place it’s rape, in another it’s child molesting. It’s rape either way when you fuck someone against their will. Never said a crime didn’t take place. I find it rather appalling that some people here don’t think seem to think raping an adult women is a horrific, terrible crime that can result in lasting trauma.

Nobody is saying that. What people are saying is that under american law, he would be a pedophile and a rapist to boot.

[Zac Naloen]

I haven't looked into this in any detail but I think UK Law omits the use of the words like paedofilia in it's sentencing of sex offenders and just uses phrases like "Sex with a minor under the age of [insert value here]". With different levels of offense between the ages of 16 and 13. Or at least that's how the sentence is given in news papers (who then add their own verdict)

Is US law worded significantly different?

[Broomstick]

Nobody is saying that. What people are saying is that under american law, he would be a pedophile and a rapist to boot.

More technically, he's a "sex offender".

[salm]

Isn´t it obvious that there´s a misunderstanding here? Broomstick is using the term pedophelia in the medical sense and the others are using it in a legal sense. Continuing to argue without sorting that out before is pointless.

[AniThyng]

Is this really a huge argument? If (for the sake of arguement, of course Polanski is an adult) a 13 year old boy had sex with a 13 yo girl, it's a vast difference between if he had sex with a 7 year old, so i don't see why anyone would have a problem with asserting that there's a difference between pedophiles that prey on preteens and "pedophiles" that prey on teenagers.

[Rye]

Fuck off, dickless. Any attempt to downgrade Polanski's crime is retarded. If anything, he should have been punished MORE due to his status and the obvious pre-meditation, and not have people explain that it was 'only' rape.

Sorry I forgot the law only counts for poor people.

I think the issue is referring to him as a paedophile when there's not much to imply he wants to fuck kids because they are kids, which is kind of key to the definition of the actual paraphilia. As for justice being exacted on him, yeah, I agree. He raped some kid and avoided justice for years, throw the fucking book at him. Seems pretty obvious.

[Edi]

Pedophilia is a clinical term even if common people tend to use it synonymously with child molester, which is a legal term. If the discussion of that comes up, the people who whine about having the distinction pointed out to them are simply in the wrong and that's an end to it.

It doesn't make Roman Polanski any less of a creepy, rapist slimeball either.

[Edi]

Threads merged.

[Solauren]

You know what this really gets down to?

The man confessed, and then ran to avoid detention, and managed to avoid detention for 30 years.

The difference between him and say, anyone else, is he took advantage of his French Citizenship. As a result, he was able to 'go into hiding' in public view.

That's it.

He didn't have to 'live underground'. He just had to avoid countries with 'more inclusive' extradition treaties with the United States. And if he went somewhere with a treaty like that, he just had to make sure it was a quick, quiet, non-public trip.


That's no different from any other convicted criminal escaping custody and avoidng capture for 30 years.


Anything else is an attempt to blur or avoid the issue. He's a wanted, CONVICTED escaped felon. Nothing more, nothing less. His financial, cultural, or celebrity status are unimportant. His age is not important. Bring him back, sentence him, and then let him start appealing.

[Atlan]

You know what this really gets down to?

The man confessed, and then ran to avoid detention, and managed to avoid detention for 30 years.

The difference between him and say, anyone else, is he took advantage of his French Citizenship. As a result, he was able to 'go into hiding' in public view.

That's it.

He didn't have to 'live underground'. He just had to avoid countries with 'more inclusive' extradition treaties with the United States. And if he went somewhere with a treaty like that, he just had to make sure it was a quick, quiet, non-public trip.

That's no different from any other convicted criminal escaping custody and avoidng capture for 30 years.

Anything else is an attempt to blur or avoid the issue. He's a wanted, CONVICTED escaped felon. Nothing more, nothing less. His financial, cultural, or celebrity status are unimportant. His age is not important. Bring him back, sentence him, and then let him start appealing.

He HAS been sentenced, "in absentia". The only thing that remains is to throw his ass in jail, should he be extradited.

[SCRawl]

You know what this really gets down to?

The man confessed, and then ran to avoid detention, and managed to avoid detention for 30 years.

It's almost that simple. The story I've heard repeatedly is that he'd arranged a plea bargain in exchange for his confession, and later got word that the agreement was going to be ignored, and he would get a much harsher sentence than what had been negotiated. So, instead of taking one up the ass -- perhaps just as literally as figuratively -- he fled. In his shoes I might have done the same thing, as it's better for him to contest the decision to void the plea bargain from the comfort of his French villa than an 8' x 10' cell.

This does not mitigate the circumstances of his original crimes, but it does explain why he didn't hang around to face the music.