What do you think about Polanski?

I've been thinking about this for a while and it makes me almost want to puke. I knew nothing about it until a couple of weeks ago, but if you drug and rape a young girl, even if it was years ago, you should go to jail for a very long time. For some reason people don't think this should be the case and even though he admitted to it in court and then fled the country, he probably won't spend any time in jail besides what he spends before the trial.

Some people said, "Let him off the hook because he was crazy because his wife was killed by the Manson Family." I say that I don't expect Liam Neeson to molest a girl anytime soon.

To further things, there is a petition going around to try and get him off the hook: http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/exclusive-global-film-community-asked-to-sign-this-petition-for-roman-polanskis-release/

This petition, to me, reads like a "We (or Polanski in general) are above the law. We are priveleged and should be allowed to do whatever we want. It is ridiculous that he is in jail for a crime he committed." The wording I hate there the most is that Polanski "suffered enough". What did he suffer? Not the scales of justice. He fled before he could be weighed by them and has lived in comfort for some thirty some years.

If there's a petition to try him as harshly as possible, I would sign it.

Agreed, if Polanksi gets away it would just show that money and fame are more powerful than the law. Polanski raped that 13 year old. She said no, he got her drunk, her fed her sedatives. It was premeditated. The tragic murder of his wife is no excuse.

Completely agree Polanksi is a sick f--- and he deserves to go to prison for a long,long time. There is no justifaction for his sadistic actions.

How are Liam's wife's death even comparable to Polanksi's wife?

And yeah, he did something that's wrong and he should probably be in jail. But it doesn't help when the victim speaks out in favor of Polanski...

As far as I know, she didn't speak out in his favor, she just doesn't want to keep going on and on and on with this because she has a family now and doesn't want it to keep coming back in the limelight. That is perfectly fair, but had he been tossed in jail a long time ago, then none of this would be necessary.

They have the chance to do it now, they have the chance to prove that fame does not 'trump' law, and they should take it.

You do the crime, you do the time, it really should be that simple.

BarcaRulz wrote:As far as I know, she didn't speak out in his favor, she just doesn't want to keep going on and on and on with this because she has a family now and doesn't want it to keep coming back in the limelight. That is perfectly fair, but had he been tossed in jail a long time ago, then none of this would be necessary.

They have the chance to do it now, they have the chance to prove that fame does not 'trump' law, and they should take it.

You do the crime, you do the time, it really should be that simple.

That's my feeling on it. And the whole Neeson thing was just trying to say that something tragic happening (like the loss of a spouse) doesn't mean that you have to commit a violent crime.

I'll just keep it simple:

He did what he did. And he fled from it for 32 years. He should be tried and convicted for both.

I find the timing & motivation interesting. Why now? Surely they have had other oppurtunities before now? I think the victim is the most important factor here. If she would just like everything dropped and forgotten and not talked about in the media etc, etc then her wishes should be respected. Is this happening for the "right" reasons? Maybe I am a cynic but is "Justice" really the reason for this, and in the legal system we use how many times is justice ignored due to technicalities, money, power, lawyers playing games etc.
Don't get me wrong, his actions were abhorrent and disgust me, alll I am doing is looking at it from a different (perhaps broader) perspective.

.

Yes, he should be in jail, but I think we all know the worst he'll get is a short length of house arrest in his Switzerland palace.

leestu wrote:I find the timing & motivation interesting. Why now? Surely they have had other oppurtunities before now? I think the victim is the most important factor here. If she would just like everything dropped and forgotten and not talked about in the media etc, etc then her wishes should be respected. Is this happening for the "right" reasons? Maybe I am a cynic but is "Justice" really the reason for this, and in the legal system we use how many times is justice ignored due to technicalities, money, power, lawyers playing games etc.
Don't get me wrong, his actions were abhorrent and disgust me, alll I am doing is looking at it from a different (perhaps broader) perspective.

.

Actually, I suspect the case was resurrected by the Wanted and Desired documentary that was shown on HBO this summer. Which is ironic, because from what I hear the doc was actually trying to show how the case was a legal mess, that underhanded techniques were used and that the case should have been dismissed due to that. Instead some LA prosecutor heard about Polanski going to Switzerland and set up the arrest.
And Leetsu, I see where you're coming from about the victim- she does indeed want to forget the whole ordeal. But for me it's far more important to show to the world that a person isn't above the law because they're rich and famous

I agree. I cannot stand the fact that celebrity seems to warrant softer sentencing or no conviction at all, to me it is a problem of equal weight in our courts with racial discrimination in sentencing. It should make no difference who a person is or what ordeals they have been through in their life unrelated to the crime, they should be judged and sentenced for the crime as the evidence of it has been presented.

Inspectors Carter and Lee should have arrested him when they had the chance.

-_-

That was terrible.

Someone clearly forgot about his cameo in Rush Hour 3.

Sounds like she got it to me.