Polanski to face justice?

While I don't agree with what he said, saying things that are reprehensible to get a reaction is pretty much par for the course at Wordforge and needs not be pointed out.

Pointing out people's reprehensible spew for a proper mocking/shunning is just as much par for the course at WF and also needs not to be pointed out.

But pointing fingers is also a time honored WF tradition so...

Wordforge is so full of time-honored traditions that pointing out the time-honored traditions should not need to be pointed out.

Or something.

My head hurts. I'm gonna go lie down.

That's a post that fits in just about any thread here. Spam 'er up with it! It's a time-honored wordforge tradition!

Oh, get over yourselves. I see no value in pursuing a decades old charge when the victim herself doesn't want the charge pursued.

Seems to me like some ridiculous government intrusion, which you people used to be against. Who are they looking out for here? Not the victim, she doesn't want this. Possible future victims? It's been several decades and Polanski hasn't been accused of raping anyone since, I seriously doubt he's a risk to re-offend.

What's the value to society in pursuing this?

Well let me ask you a pointed question. What do you think about this?

All of his victims are dead, so is there a value to society in pursuing his case?

What was the value of pursuing it in the first place? If a woman is raped, but finds jesus and forgives her attacker, should the case be dropped? The justice system is not there to pursue the victims interests. It is there to pursue justice. This man evaded that justice for years (which is a crime in and of itself). You are suggesting that we reward a child rapist and fugitive for his ability to successfully evade justice. How fucked up are you?

The victim is not relevant in this case. He plead guilty and then escaped to another country before he could be sentenced. This is between him and the State of California.

The victim doesn't get a say. Especially considering she got a civil case settlement from him. A large bit of money has probably made her change her mind.

Whether he would re-offend is also irrelevant. He has never paid for the crime the first time around.

This is not a ridiculous government intrusion.

Tough call. On one hand, there really isn't much point in pursuing the guy, other than revenge.

On the other, being an accessory to mass murder is far, far different than committing date rape. With murder, the victims are obviously in no position to forgive the perpetrator, so it's harder (if not impossble) to justify letting letting the perpetrator walk.

Date Rape? Is that what you call a 43 year old man fucking a 13 year old girl?

We should start calling you Ray the Child Molester.

Interesting question. I know that if I'm assaulted, or if I have death threats made against me, I have the choice of whether or not to press charges.

Should rape victims not have the same choice?

Justice for who, if not the victim?

How can that be, since the case revolves around a crime committed against the victim?

Is the justice system about serving victims, or is it about doing whatever makes the state happy?

No you don't have a choice. You may have an influence but the police need no permission from you to arrest or not.

Because you stupid child molesting asshole once you commit the crime it's between you and the state.

The state doesn't need the victim's permission to prosecute you for breaking the law.

That's right Ray the Child Molester. The victim doesn't get a say.

ohhhhhhhhhh Ray the Child Molester has scarred me for life but refusing to take me seriously anymore. What will I ever do?

Wrong. You have a choice of whether or not to report it, or if it's a misdemeanor, to get a warrant. But, once that warrant is issued or the report is filed, the DA is under zero legal obligation to consider your thoughts and feeling when making up his mind whether or not to prosecute. That he does so is a courtesy, not a requirement.

That's why I'm always, always shocked when I get the line: "I didn't want you to arrest him! I just wanted you to make him stop!" You called the police, when they show up, they're going to do their jobs.

So they can choose to prosecute if I don't want them to, and choose not to prosecute even if I do want them to?

I can understand why they get that leeway in some situations, but it's still a bit fucked up.

By the way, I didn't miss this. I'm just going to let it stand on it's own. No more really be said about you.

Perhaps he is unaware that in addition to being drugged, the victim also said "no". And she was 13.

Best scene EVA:

[yt=Awwww Man]2kFGxH4wrs4[/yt]

Date rape? You can't be serious.

Yup. Apparently forced anal rape of a 13 year old is considered date rape in Canada.

If we go by what 14thDoctor is saying...

Can't wait till my first wife dies, so I can get my rape on!

Necrophilia is a victimless crime.

Ummmmm.......yes it does....at least where I come from.

You seem to be under the mistaken belief that there are rape charges to be pressed. There aren't. Polanski pled guilty a long time ago and fled before sentencing. He's a fugitive. There's no need for his victim to testify; in fact, that's the only reason why a plea deal was struck in the first place.

Polanski was, on the admitted facts, clearly guilty of forcible rape. He drugged and gave alcohol to a 13 year old girl, then raped her after she said "no," emphatically, several times. The D.A. pled him down to a lesser charge of statutory rape specifically because the attorney for the victim supported such a plea as a way to avoid a high profile trial. D.A. policy was not to drop the more serious forcible rape charges except in exceptional circumstances. Polanski already had benefited from his fame even before fleeing by being able to use the publicity surrounding his charges to get them reduced.

It's one thing to say that a criminal shouldn't have to worry forever about charges being brought on a crime that's long in the past and that at some point a person who actually rehabilitates himself shouldn't have to worry about being caught because we want to encourage people who don't get caught to rehabilitate themselves and because it's so hard to defend yourself 30 years after the fact. That's what statutes of limitations are about. But Polanski was caught. He was charged. He had his opportunity to defend himself when the evidence was fresh. He pled guilty to a severely reduced charge that a less famous person would not even have been offered. And then he fled before sentencing. He is not entitled to sympathy, or to any credit for ostensible rehabilitation. A fugitive is not just a person who didn't get caught and moved on with his life; he's a person who got caught, had a fair determination of his guilt, and followed that up by committing an ongoing crime each and every day. He should receive the maximum sentence for statutory rape, be tried and convicted on whatever charges apply to a fugitive of his status, and then rot in prison for the rest of his life.

He should do the time.

Yep most of his supporters don't or refuse to understand that point. He admitted guilt and was going to be sentenced when he ran out of the country.

If he thought he was getting a raw deal on the sentencing then he could have appealed it.