Polanski to face justice?

he fled from a 48 day sentance?
(and talk about different justice for famous people, even in the '70's if some Joe Schmoe had done that he would have been given the book)

And isn't this the most weaselly sentence ever:

His arrest follows an American arrest warrant dating from 1978 against the filmmaker, in a case of morals.

Hell, NO, this is not a case of morals it's a case of rape. The fact they hide every relevant aspect of this case in the petition also makes me think that the people who signed it must be completely ignorant of the facts of the case. It's about the only reason I can think of that a sane and rational person might sign it.

That still leaves us with a list that contains the Hollywood perverts, ignorants and elitists, I guess. Some people are probably signing it not really knowing what they are supporting just out of

That is sadder than those twits who signed petitions banning H2O on Bullshit!

I get it, so, Bernie Madoff or an embezzler would be involved in "a case of mammon."

And maybe mass murder would be a really bad case of morals?

And that is really the fine point of the matter, isn't it?

High profile personalities, artists and celebrities behave as though they are entitled to a brand of justice that's somehow less restrictive, which allows for less personal accountability than the rest of the "unwashed masses" who provide them with such a bountiful lifestyle.

Would you or I still be on the streets and enjoying all of our privileges as citizens if we'd done the same things as Winona Ryder, Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, Vince Neil, Robert Downey Jr, Lindsay Lohan, Michael Vick, the late Senator Edward Kennedy(may he rot in hell), Sean Combs, Calvin Broadus, Nichole Richie, Shia LaBeouf, R. Kelly, etc.?

Where is the outrage from any person, celebrity or non, in regard to the huge inequities in the application of justice, particularly when it comes to celebrities who are, by their very nature, supposed to be more in touch with social equality?

I think everyone on that list is a pedophilophile.

Celebrities are supposed to be more in touch with social equality? Who decided that?


Regardless, the inequality doesn't come from their being celebrities, it comes from their having more money than regular people. Wealthier people can afford better lawyers, which is why they're convicted less often and usually serve lighter sentences than poor people. That's the inequality people should be upset about, the one between the rich and the poor.


Try complaining about the inequality between the rich and the poor on Wordforge, and see how far you get.

George Clooney.

Are you sure he wasn't just lying as part of his plan to rob a casino?

His acceptance speech for his academy award credited the Hollywood community with advancing the civil rights cause. Kind of a "we did it before it was cool" thing.

Honestly, I think some of that has to do with where said celebrity is tried. More celebs seem to get off when tried in LA or close to Hollywood than, say, New York City. Just ask Martha Stewart and Lil' Kim.

I always thought that his excuse, "well she looked 14" was weak.

If not it's definitely in the running. Of course the entire petition reeks of weaselocity, near every sentence is a contender for the top slot.

Allow me to edit the petition, I'll only excise the puffery and emotional appeals.

Okay so that leaves us with -

Yeah, pretty darn weak when you look past the easily seen nonsense.



Though idiot petition aside, I predict Mr. Polanski will serve no more time, he might pay a fine, but that's about it.

Aaaaaand the plot sickens:

One of the first and most vocal defenses of Polanski came from Frédéric Mitterand, France's cultural minister. Well, he might well have had an ulterior motive for defending him. It seems he has some very similar skeletons in his own closet:

This is all over the news here, and causing quite a scandal for the government. It will almost certainly result in Mitterand's resignation, and quite possibly more. In any case, it is causing the media to take a different slant on his defense of Polanski.

​

So, should I pull out my violin?

That sounds as though you are somehow blaming the members of this forum for the plight of the poor.

I assume you vote. Were your votes cast for candidates representing the two major parties? If you answer yes, then despite your apparent sympathy for the meager and downtrodden, you have helped to assure their continued impoverishment. Despite the claims issued by each party, promises to champion those who have not been able to do for themselves, Republicans and Democrats have consistently acted in the interest of the institution of government, to secure and expand it's power, generally in contempt of the interests and fundamental needs of the Average Joe.

They have, by example and in practice, created a mien of antagonism which has propelled and sustained them, effectively elevating them as a "protected class". Their perpetual power-grab and supervening lack of competent performance is predicated upon divisions in the electorate. They may or may not have created those divisions, but they exacerbate, and thrive upon them.

I would go easy on your fellows in this forum.

Ironically, it does seem that all of Polanski's wealth has not been able to extricate him from this predicament. He is certainly able to purchase the very finest brand of justice.

Do you believe that he is being made an example, or do you think that he is, finally, getting what he so richly deserves?

He's getting what he deserves.

Yes, yes he is.

Indeed.

Quite.

So, because Polanski has money and status, and can hire a better lawyer, he should get away with raping a child. Is that what you're saying?

I don't think he's worried about status in that equation.

Doc? Doc?

Where'd he go?

Sex with children makes you sleepy, huh?

:bully:

Wasn't he supposed to do like two months originally?

Jesus, why even bother running?

Probably afraid of what might happen to him in prison.

When you drug and ass fuck a child, all bets are off.

My guess is that it's he's a fool.

Fool enough to torment a child to begin with and fool enough to run away from a light sentence few people could be lucky enough to expect.

As it should be.

Given you are a parent I would think you would think that sex crimes against children are not something to joke about.

The Romans did that.