Search forums

Forums

Export thread

Roman Polanski

Sep 28, 2009#1

Chazwozel

I'm not going to link any news articles about his arrest. I do, however, think it's complete and utter bullshit. The victim forgave him ages ago, and even requested his pardon. Roman Polanski...yeah, huge danger to society there. I say if they lock him away, they should release Charles Manson to balance out the prison costs.

The American Justice system is so convoluted and methodical. Instead of applying generic laws to individual cases and, you know, constructing some sort of justice system based on the circumstances, everything is done in such bullshit black and white fashion.

The only reason Polanski is getting arrested is to be made an example of, nothing more. It sickens me.

Sep 28, 2009#2

Gurpel

The American Justice system is so convoluted and methodical. Instead of applying generic laws to individual cases and, you know, constructing some sort of justice system based on the circumstances, everything is done in such bullshit black and white fashion.

"Murdered man 'huge douche', judge lets perp go"

Sep 28, 2009#3

Chazwozel

Gurpel said:
The American Justice system is so convoluted and methodical. Instead of applying generic laws to individual cases and, you know, constructing some sort of justice system based on the circumstances, everything is done in such bullshit black and white fashion.

Click to expand...

"Murdered man 'huge douche', judge lets perp go"

Haha.

Sep 28, 2009#4

Gurpel

haha.

don't worry though, i think this is kind of dumb too! i mean, he took naked pictures of, then drugged/raped a 13 year old girl, but she forgave him, so it's all good.

: |

Sep 28, 2009#5

WolfOfOdin

I'm hoping he goes to jail for life. I'm just annoyed California doesn't have the death penalty

Sep 28, 2009#6

Chazwozel

Gurpel said:
haha.

don't worry though, i think this is kind of dumb too! i mean, he took naked pictures of, then drugged/raped a 13 year old girl, but she forgave him, so it's all good.

: |

Riight, that's exactly what happened. He wasn't pressured into a plea bargain or anything by the judge or police. A 13 year old girl just happened to be walking home from school when Polanski and his goons hunted her down off the bus, and forced her into Jack Nicolson's house.

Sep 28, 2009#7

Gurpel

WolfOfOdin said:
I'm hoping he goes to jail for life. I'm just annoyed California doesn't have the death penalty

welp, looks like we've hit the other side of wrong.

Chazwozel said:
Riight, that's exactly what happened. He wasn't pressured into a plea bargain or anything by the judge or police. A 13 year old girl just happened to be walking home from school when Polanski and his goons hunted her down off the bus, and forced her into Jack Nicolson's house.

hm. so has he at some point denied the charges against him?

Sep 28, 2009#8

Chazwozel

I don't think he shouldn't pay towards the crime with some kind of community service, fines, and a small stint in jail...

Sep 28, 2009#9

Armadillo

Chazwozel said:
I don't think he shouldn't pay towards the crime with some kind of community service, fines, and a small stint in jail...

People get that kind of punishment for drunken bar fights.

Sep 28, 2009#10

HoboNinja

I was surprised by this the other day when I saw it on the Washington Post website, I had heard a bunch about Polanski in the past but never about this case...

As I read the article I had sympathy for him, I think statutory rape charges are ridiculous most of the time, until I got to the part about the alcohol and qualade... He straight up raped her... He essentially roofied her. That isn't just statutory, that's full on rape.

Sep 28, 2009#11

ZenMonkey

WolfOfOdin said:
I'm just annoyed California doesn't have the death penalty

Um...you can stop being annoyed then.

Sep 28, 2009#12

Gurpel

XD

aren't you supposed to be a lawyerin' type, odin?

Sep 28, 2009#13

Armadillo

Apparently France wants him to be treated lightly because of his "exceptional artistic creation and human qualities." Oh, WELL THEN, I guess we can excuse the rape because he makes good movies. So if you want to commit acts of violence or sexual abuse, just be an artist and you'll get a slap on the wrist in France!

Sep 28, 2009#14

North_Ranger

Chazwozel said:
Roman Polanski...yeah, huge danger to society there. I say if they lock him away, they should release Charles Manson to balance out the prison costs.

I'm going to venture a guess that you forgot about Sharon Tate.

If you didn't, that's just goddamn, fucking poor taste even from you.

Otherwise... well...
1.) At least the whole debate will be over. Maybe the courts will be lenient, maybe not. We'll see.
2.) The Holocaust deniers will have a field day with this one. "Pianist director and Holohoax survivor pedophile finally caught". Fuckin' assholes...

Sep 28, 2009#15

Chazwozel

Armadillo said:
Apparently France wants him to be treated lightly because of his \"exceptional artistic creation and human qualities.\" Oh, WELL THEN, I guess we can excuse the rape because he makes good movies. So if you want to commit acts of violence or sexual abuse, just be an artist and you'll get a slap on the wrist in France!

...30 years ago, alleged and basically forced confession. Roman Polanski is not a danger to society. Isn't that the whole point of incarceration? To rehabilitate? I don't see the guy going on mass raping sprees.

I believe they were going to let him off lightly in the 70's with a full psych examination and treatment, but due to the judge backing out of the plea bargain details and wanting a full prosecution, Polanski fled the country. Yes, Armadillo, having your wife stabbed 16 times while she's 8 months pregnant by a cult would fuck someone up royally.

Putting him away for this crime is not the answer.

---------- Post added at 07:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:21 PM ----------

North_Ranger;264361][quote=Chazwozel said:
Roman Polanski...yeah, huge danger to society there. I say if they lock him away, they should release Charles Manson to balance out the prison costs.

Sep 28, 2009#16

Gurpel

North_Ranger;264361][quote=Chazwozel said:
Roman Polanski...yeah, huge danger to society there. I say if they lock him away, they should release Charles Manson to balance out the prison costs.

Armadillo said:
Apparently France wants him to be treated lightly because of his \"exceptional artistic creation and human qualities.\" Oh, WELL THEN, I guess we can excuse the rape because he makes good movies. So if you want to commit acts of violence or sexual abuse, just be an artist and you'll get a slap on the wrist in France!

that's... pretty much how all of history has worked. might as well just change "artist" to "famous" and remove "in France!"

Sep 28, 2009#17

North_Ranger

Gurpel, let's just say I have very little compassion for a tweaked-out sadistic bastard and his little harem killing a pregnant woman. The complete lack of humanity in that act... GRRRRRAAAAAHHH!!!

Sep 28, 2009#18

Gurpel

North_Ranger said:
Gurpel, let's just say I have very little compassion for a tweaked-out sadistic bastard and his little harem killing a pregnant woman. The complete lack of humanity in that act... GRRRRRAAAAAHHH!!!

i don't exactly see eye to eye with hitler, but it doesn't stop me from telling holocaust jokes that are in poor taste ("even for me")

at some point we all just have to sit back, let the anger become embarrassment, and try not to repeat our mistakes.

Sep 28, 2009#19

Wasabi Poptart

So Chaz...when your daughter is 13, let's say some guy in his 40's gives her alcohol, puts some kind of drug in her drink, and then proceeds to rape and sodomize her. You wouldn't want any kind of justice for him drugging and raping your little girl as long as she forgives him. You'd want him to live his life free as a bird, right?

Sep 28, 2009#20

Steve

Gurpel said:
haha.

don't worry though, i think this is kind of dumb too! i mean, he took naked pictures of, then drugged/raped a 13 year old girl, but she forgave him, so it's all good.

: |

In his defense did you see pictures of her? She was one hot 13 year old. Who here wouldn't hit that?

Sep 28, 2009#21

Adammon

Considering he was treated with kid gloves because he was a 'famous director', I'm not so sure he should be treated with more kid gloves because he's even more famous now.

The guy bloody fled the country to avoid going to jail. If he wasn't man enough to deal with his punishment then, he can bloody well stay away from the country as continuing punishment. No, him getting extradited and brought back to the US is rather silly (and even his victim says it shouldn't happen) but the guy still broke the law.

If it was your daughter Chaz, you wouldn't be so willing to say "Aww hell, you weren't punished at all, but you're obviously a good guy so c'mon back to the US."

At the very least, the victim should receive a very nice retirement fund.

---------- Post added 09-29-2009 at 12:02 AM ---------- Previous post was 09-28-2009 at 11:58 PM ----------

In case people forgot what he did:

In 1977, Polanski, then aged 44, became embroiled in a scandal involving 13-year-old Samantha Gailey. It ultimately led to Polanski's guilty plea to the charge of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.

According to Geimer, Polanski asked Geimer's mother if he could photograph the girl for the French edition of Vogue, which Polanski had been invited to guest-edit. Her mother allowed a private photo shoot. According to Geimer in a 2003 interview, "Everything was going fine; then he asked me to change, well, in front of him." She added, "It didn't feel right, and I didn't want to go back to the second shoot."

Geimer later agreed to a second session, which took place on March 10, 1977 at the Mulholland area home of actor Jack Nicholson in Los Angeles. "We did photos with me drinking champagne," Geimer says. "Toward the end it got a little scary, and I realized he had other intentions and I knew I was not where I should be. I just didn't quite know how to get myself out of there." She recalled in a 2003 interview that she began to feel uncomfortable after he asked her to lie down on a bed, and how she attempted to resist. "I said, 'No, no. I don't want to go in there. No, I don't want to do this. No!', and then I didn't know what else to do," she stated, adding: "We were alone and I didn’t know what else would happen if I made a scene. So I was just scared, and after giving some resistance, I figured well, I guess I’ll get to come home after this".

Geimer testified that Polanski gave her a combination of champagne and quaaludes, a sedative drug, then kissed her, performed cunnilingus on her, penetrated her vaginally, and then penetrated her anally, each time after being told 'no' and being asked to stop.

Now quick, picture that crazy guy that stands on the side of the road with his "Free Cat" sign doing this. Does that change your mind on what kind of punishment the person should receive?

---------- Post added at 12:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:02 AM ----------

Oh, and just another piece of what Roman's punishment would have been had he not been a complete coward.

"If a person is more than three years older than the minor with whom they have sex, that person is guilty of a misdemeanor or a felony. If convicted of a felony, that person can be imprisoned in state prison for up to four years."

Sep 28, 2009#22

Armadillo

If this was my 13-year-old, Polanski'd be lucky to get off with 4 years in jail.

Sep 28, 2009#23

Adammon

Well, technically that's what he plea bargained down to from rape - of course when he found out that there was still going to be jail time, he skipped sentencing and went back to his home country.

Sep 28, 2009#24

Chazwozel

WildSoul said:
So Chaz...when your daughter is 13, let's say some guy in his 40's gives her alcohol, puts some kind of drug in her drink, and then proceeds to rape and sodomize her. You wouldn't want any kind of justice for him drugging and raping your little girl as long as she forgives him. You'd want him to live his life free as a bird, right?

I was waiting for some numb nut to mention my daughter. I'm kinda disappointed it was you.

Sep 28, 2009#25

Adammon

The girl didn't forgive him - she just doesn't think he should go to jail forever.

Sep 28, 2009#26

Chazwozel

I wouldn't have my daughter go off and do a 'private' midnight photo shoot with him in Jack Nicholson's house.

* what the hell is up with editing posts?*

Sep 28, 2009#27

Gurpel

Chazwozel said:
I wouldn't have my daughter go off and do a 'private' midnight photo shoot with him in Jack Nicholson's house.

* what the hell is up with editing posts?*

you have to go to the "advanced" version to work.

Sep 28, 2009#28

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Adammon said:
The girl didn't forgive him - she just doesn't think he should go to jail forever.

She's right, he shouldn't have to go to jail forever. Even a few years is excessive.

Sep 28, 2009#29

Chazwozel

Adammon said:
The girl didn't forgive him - she just doesn't think he should go to jail forever.

I'm not at all saying what he did was right in the least, but the guy is not a danger to society. The punishment at this point would not fit.

Sep 28, 2009#30

Adammon

Chazwozel;264440][quote=Adammon said:
The girl didn't forgive him - she just doesn't think he should go to jail forever.

Sep 28, 2009#31

SpecialKO

I'm wondering if the Swiss will use him as a bargaining chip to secure some tax haven-friendly banking laws Stateside.

Sep 28, 2009#32

Chazwozel

Adammon;264443][quote=Chazwozel;264440][quote=Adammon said:
The girl didn't forgive him - she just doesn't think he should go to jail forever.

I'm not at all saying what he did was right in the least, but the guy is not a danger to society. The punishment at this point would not fit.[/QUOTE]

I agree with that. Let him never enter the US again; that can be his punishment.[/QUOTE]

Sure. I think he was living quite happily in France. If that's the life he chose as opposed to facing U.S. justice, then so be it. The thing that irks me is how U.S. prosecutors have been pushing this so hard and pretty much pressured the Swiss police to make the arrest. The point isn't about the pursuit of justice anymore. It's to lynch him and say, "we got our man."

And the girl's parents are just as guilty of setting up that sort of situation to begin with. What a great parent. Send your 13 year old to a Hollywood actor's house for a private photo shoot. What did they imagine would happen? They knew they were whoring their daughter for a chance of stardom and money.

Sep 28, 2009#33

SpecialKO

Chazwozel said:
The thing that irks me is how U.S. prosecutors have been pushing this so hard and pretty much pressured the Swiss police to make the arrest. The point isn't about the pursuit of justice anymore. It's to lynch him and say, "we got our man."

It does seem like they wanted him worse than Osama bin Laden.

I'm sure that's not the case. But it did seem like it.

Sep 28, 2009#34

WolfOfOdin

Guh, mental flub on my part.

Either or it's not generally used in rape cases...the inmates do that part sans appeals.

Also, I have a -very- dim view of rapists and especially child rapists. Just because his wife was killed by the Manson family is no excuse for him to get sympathy on this matter.

Sep 28, 2009#35

Adammon

Chazwozel said:
What did they imagine would happen? They knew they were whoring their daughter for a chance of stardom and money.

Yeah, but last I heard prostitution is legal...

What?

Sep 28, 2009#36

Chazwozel

WolfOfOdin said:
Guh, mental flub on my part.

Either or it's not generally used in rape cases...the inmates do that part sans appeals.

Also, I have a -very- dim view of rapists and especially child rapists. Just because his wife was killed by the Manson family is no excuse for him to get sympathy on this matter.

Really? Cause I think having one's 8 month pregnant wife stabbed to death would dramatically alter someone's mental state for many years to come. I don't agree with what the guy did in the least, but lets look at the facts.

The parents consented to allowing a private photo shoot in a house.
Drugs and alcohol were involved prior to the incident
Drugs and alcohol were involved during.

Anyway... it was 30 years ago. He's lived in exile from the U.S., as a result, for 30 years when a 4 year sentence in prison would have been it. It's not exactly prison, but that's not a picnic either, but hey that's what he chose to do. Essentially, Polanski's not an evil man. He hasn't gone on to repeat this offense. He's not a serial rapist. Essentially the guy fucked up royally on drugs. My stance is that he's paid his dues and then some already.

Sep 28, 2009#37

WolfOfOdin

And imagine the precedent that would set, Chaz. The words "fucked up on drugs" can be twisted by defense lawyers in a million different ways to gain lighter sentencing for their clients (not that it hasn't been done before, it would just have more weight).

This also sets a precedent that if you flee from sentencing and run away to another country, as long as your 'achievements stand as a monument to your character' you can get off essentially scott-free.

A murderer and thief who uses his other natural talents to create beautiful, lasting and timeless works of art that make the angels weep is still a murderer and should be treated as such. Thusly should Polanski

Sep 28, 2009#38

Andromache

its ok to rape a child if her parents were idiots, your wife was brutally murdered and you flee the country, act remorseful, make beautiful films and live out of the reach of the law for 30 years, till the victim wants this to go away because she's had her life ruined by the media and "got over a long time ago"?

Sep 28, 2009#39

Espy

Well. This thread is going in bad directions. Hell, the tags alone are getting creepy.

It doesn't help that in my "new posts" list this one is right below the "RAPE TUNNEL" thread.

Sep 28, 2009#40

strawman

Chazwozel said:
Roman Polanski is not a danger to society. Isn't that the whole point of incarceration? To rehabilitate?

No, Mr. Wozel, there are many reasons for incarceration. Some of which are, in no particular order:

1. Punishment for crimes
2. Crime prevention (no chance to commit more crime while incarcerated)
3. Rehabilitiation
4. The threat of punishment reduces crime (due to risk/benefit)

If they slap him on the wrist and let him go, then it sends a message that anyone considering raping a child will weigh the risk/benefit equation a little more in the wrong direction - you may have people actively thinking, "Maybe I can get away with it."

I haven't read that he was caught, but it sounds like extradition went through. I'm sorry that the girl has to go through the public humiliation again (one of the reasons the names of victim's of sexual abuse are no longer released) but the fact is that he commited a crime against the STATE, and thus should be prosecuted regardless of the girl's desire or participation in the trial.

Still, you'll get your wish. If she doesn't participate (and probably even if she does) he's rich enough to fight the charges with very costly lawyers, and I doubt he'll get jail time.

You can blame it on the parents, if you like, Chaz, but at the end of the day he chose to rape her.

Your excuses all ring hollow.

-Adam

Sep 28, 2009#41

Chazwozel

stienman;264498][quote=Chazwozel said:
Roman Polanski is not a danger to society. Isn't that the whole point of incarceration? To rehabilitate?

No, Mr. Wozel, there are many reasons for incarceration. Some of which are, in no particular order:

1. Punishment for crimes
2. Crime prevention (no chance to commit more crime while incarcerated)
3. Rehabilitiation
4. The threat of punishment reduces crime (due to risk/benefit)

=If they slap him on the wrist and let him go, then it sends a message that anyone considering raping a child will weigh the risk/benefit equation a little more in the wrong direction - you may have people actively thinking, "Maybe I can get away with it."

I haven't read that he was caught, but it sounds like extradition went through. I'm sorry that the girl has to go through the public humiliation again (one of the reasons the names of victim's of sexual abuse are no longer released) but the fact is that he commited a crime against the STATE, and thus should be prosecuted regardless of the girl's desire or participation in the trial.

Still, you'll get your wish. If she doesn't participate (and probably even if she does) he's rich enough to fight the charges with very costly lawyers, and I doubt he'll get jail time.

You can blame it on the parents, if you like, Chaz, but at the end of the day he chose to rape her.

Your excuses all ring hollow.

-Adam[/QUOTE]

Funny, after O.J. was acquitted after being blatantly guilty, murder rates did not rise in the U.S. because potential murders figured they'd get off easy as long as they had a good lawyer.

The parent thing was more for the nitwits that decided to make sway my vote on a more personal level. No I would not let my 13 year old daughter go to an actors house for a private photo shoot.

---------- Post added at 11:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:13 PM ----------

WolfOfOdin said:
And imagine the precedent that would set, Chaz. The words "fucked up on drugs" can be twisted by defense lawyers in a million different ways to gain lighter sentencing for their clients (not that it hasn't been done before, it would just have more weight).

This also sets a precedent that if you flee from sentencing and run away to another country, as long as your 'achievements stand as a monument to your character' you can get off essentially scott-free.

A murderer and thief who uses his other natural talents to create beautiful, lasting and timeless works of art that make the angels weep is still a murderer and should be treated as such. Thusly should Polanski

hmmm, Michael Vick seems to have committed pretty inhumane crimes, and he's forgiven and forgotten after serving a light sentence, primarily because he's got talent.

Sep 28, 2009#42

strawman

Chazwozel said:
Funny, after O.J. was acquitted after being blatantly guilty, murder rates did not rise in the U.S. because potential murders figured they'd get off easy as long as they had a good lawyer.

Chazwozel said:
Michael Vick seems to have committed pretty inhumane crimes, and he's forgiven and forgotten after serving a light sentence, primarily because he's got talent.

No, primarily because he committed those acts against animals which have little protection.

If he was running a child fighting ring, and killed underperforming children then one can presume he'd get a slightly harsher sentence, and would not be welcomed back so well.

The other major difference is that Polanski has not, to my knowledge, ever said sorry, whereas Micheal Vick has not only plead guilty, but can't seem to stop apologizing.

The public is very forgiving when people admit guilt, promise to undo what they've done (inasmuch as possible), and promise not to do it again.

-Adam

Sep 28, 2009#43

Chazwozel

stienman;264515][quote=Chazwozel said:
Funny, after O.J. was acquitted after being blatantly guilty, murder rates did not rise in the U.S. because potential murders figured they'd get off easy as long as they had a good lawyer.

You sure about that? Citation, please.

As far as the child thing goes, it's a valid point that violence against a child is, justifiably, given a harsher sentence than violence against an adult.

-Adam[/QUOTE]

I'm not hunting down citations for you, look up murder rates in the U.S. between the years O.J. was arrested and his acquittal yourself, smartass. I'm pretty sure there wasn't a spike in murder rates because O.J. got off the hook. Nor did rape rates go up in 1977 after Polanski fled the country.

Do please stop making it seem like I condone what he did. I don't.

---------- Post added at 11:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:23 PM ----------

stienman;264515][quote=Chazwozel said:
Funny, after O.J. was acquitted after being blatantly guilty, murder rates did not rise in the U.S. because potential murders figured they'd get off easy as long as they had a good lawyer.

Chazwozel said:
Michael Vick seems to have committed pretty inhumane crimes, and he's forgiven and forgotten after serving a light sentence, primarily because he's got talent.

Sep 28, 2009#44

Armadillo

Chazwozel said:
Polanski did plead guilty. And the European public loves him...

Good for him. His crime occurred in the United States.

Sep 28, 2009#45

strawman

Chazwozel said:
I'm not hunting down citations for you

Then don't make assertions you can't back up.

Chazwozel said:
Do please stop making it seem like I condone what he did. I don't.

You are saying that he shouldn't be treated as a CHILD RAPE SUSPECT. Of course it appears that you condone what he did.

If you don't condone what he did, why are you saying that the justice dept's actions are not justified?

Chazwozel said:
Polanski did plead guilty.

Pleading guilty does not equate to an apology, and more often than not involves a plea deal which says, "I'm not REALLY guilty, but I'm cutting a deal so I don't have to be punished for the crime I actually committed, but instead will be punished for a lessor crime."

Chazwozel said:
And the European public loves him...

Huh, you brought up Michael Vick and US attitudes changing for him, and now you're talking about European attitudes? Dude, your train is derailed.

-Adam

Sep 28, 2009#46

MisterSteve

There is only one punishment suitable for rapists. The age of the victim is completely irrelevant.

Sep 29, 2009#47

@Li3n

MisterSteve said:
There is only one punishment suitable for rapists. The age of the victim is completely irrelevant.

Except that the age of the victim is the main argument for rape... otherwise he would have had a good defence case.

Still, having sex with a 13 year old = bad... punish him, but don't go overboard either.

Sep 29, 2009#48

Chazwozel

stienman;264558][quote=Chazwozel said:
I'm not hunting down citations for you

Then don't make assertions you can't back up.

Chazwozel said:
Do please stop making it seem like I condone what he did. I don't.

Chazwozel said:
Polanski did plead guilty.

Chazwozel said:
And the European public loves him...

Huh, you brought up Michael Vick and US attitudes changing for him, and now you're talking about European attitudes? Dude, your train is derailed.

-Adam[/QUOTE]

You're right, Ned. Burn the witch! Put him away for 10+ years. Roman Polanski is public enemy number 1, more dangerous than Osama Bin Laden. He deserves to rot in jail forever, for a 30 year old crime for which the victim is even asking for his pardon. But the American Justice system needs it's examples, despite that he's turned his life around after a terrible past.

Kick em while their down, right? That's the Christian way.

Let's review your reasons for incarceration:

1. Punishment for crimes
2. Crime prevention (no chance to commit more crime while incarcerated)
3. Rehabilitiation
4. The threat of punishment reduces crime (due to risk/benefit)

1. Ok, Polanski needs to serve some community service to pay back society, or spend a few months in prison to punish him for his crime. I agree something needs to be done, but not to the extent of locking him away for 10 or so years.
2. I think 30 years rape free asserts that he's not going to do it again.
3. He doesn't need rehabilitation. He's a fully function member of society for the past 30 years.
4. If you honestly believe that rape cases are going to increase because of Polanski getting off light, you need your head checked. That right there is alarmist bullshit if I ever heard it.

Do you honestly believe that it's worth the tax dollars to put him away? Like I said, if you put Polanski away, you might as well let Manson go to balance the costs?

Sep 29, 2009#49

Espy

Yeah. Still gold.

Sep 29, 2009#50

Espy

Yeah. Still gold.

Sep 29, 2009#51

Chazwozel

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/29/polanski.victim.profile/index.html

Once an aspiring actress, Geimer has said she long ago got over what Polanski did to her. She sued him, and a settlement was reached out of court. But the media, prosecutors and the courts in Los Angeles, California, continue to torment her, she has said.

Sep 29, 2009#52

Vytamindi

Chazwozel said:
I I say if they lock him away, they should release Charles Manson to balance out the prison costs.

Ummm.... yea, I am coming into this thread late... but

WHAT?

Sep 29, 2009#53

strawman

Chazwozel said:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/29/polanski.victim.profile/index.html

media, prosecutors and the courts in Los Angeles, California, continue to torment her, she has said.

Click to expand...

And just think. If he had just faced the music and done his time instead of skipping out before sentencing, then this would have been resolved over 25 years ago and it would merely be a footnote in history.

But by skipping bail and evading capture he is still compelling the district attorney to pursue this case and keeping the wound fresh and open.

-Adam

Sep 29, 2009#54

The Lovely Boehner

I don't know off the top of my head if it's a crime or not, but I think he should face U.S. prison time for fleeing his plea sentence.

Sep 29, 2009#55

North_Ranger

Vytamindi;264794][quote=Chazwozel said:
I I say if they lock him away, they should release Charles Manson to balance out the prison costs.

Ummm.... yea, I am coming into this thread late... but

WHAT?

[/QUOTE]

It's Chaz trying to be "teh phunny".

Sep 29, 2009#56

Mr_Chaz

I've been thinking about this one since I first heard about it, I think I've made up my mind now but it's still pretty confused in there.

He committed the crime so he should pay the price. That's the way it works, you mustn't get an exception just because you're famous. I don't like this, my heart tells me to disagree because I like his films, he's already had a (self imposed) punishment, he's been forgiven, and he was in a pretty bad mental state. However, I have to overrule my heart here, because exceptions can't be made.

However, this is why judges have the ability to decide on the sentence. For the reasons above (not the I like his films one obviously) the sentence should probably be lenient, a short prison term or community sentence or whatever, but a sentence there should be.

Sep 29, 2009#57

crono1224

stienman;264558][quote=Chazwozel said:
I'm not hunting down citations for you

Then don't make assertions you can't back up.

-Adam[/QUOTE]

Shouldn't you have to back up your reasoning that light sentences cause people to not care or weigh their actions less?

I don't have specific citation but criminals don't think they will get caught in the first place, it's one of the reason the death penalty doesn't work as a deterrent.

Also using the example of if it was his daughter what would he do, is asinine the reverse is if it was your brother or son that committed these acts how harshly would you want them punished.

Sep 29, 2009#58

strawman

Charlie Dont Surf said:
I don't know off the top of my head if it's a crime or not, but I think he should face U.S. prison time for fleeing his plea sentence.

He fled sentencing altogether whie he was out on bail.

Chances are good that if this actually gets to court (lots of Europe are trying to keep him from being deported, but it's up to Switzerland to make the call) then the sentence for skipping bail may well be harsher than the sentence for the rape of a minor.

Either way, by skipping bail he completely loses his plea agreement, so he forced himself into the situation he was trying to avoid - the judge throwing out his plea bargain. Still, it means that they either have to come up with another plea agreement, or go to trial. Either way the punishment is likely going to be worse than originally due to him promising to return for sentencing (and thus being allowed to stay free) and then choosing not to.

Keep in mind that the judge does NOT have to accept a plea agreement just because it's what the prosecutor and defendant agree upon, there are many reasons a judge might invalidate that and let them go back to the bargaining table or go to trial.

Also, he's not going to get bail. He will be in prison until he is sentenced. All around it's going to be rougher for him.

-Adam

---------- Post added at 07:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:51 PM ----------

crono1224;265285][quote=stienman;264558][quote=Chazwozel said:
I'm not hunting down citations for you

Then don't make assertions you can't back up.

-Adam[/quote]

Shouldn't you have to back up your reasoning that light sentences cause people to not care or weigh their actions less?[/QUOTE]

I could go ahead and show marijuana use on University of Michigan campus (where the campus police will NOT arrest for possession) and Ann Arbor city in general (where city police will arrest for possession) and the fact that Ann Arbor Police cannot work on Campus. I could then go to show that marijuana use is greater on campus than off.

The nice thing about my example is that there is an obvious correlation, if not causation. But no, I'm not going to go ahead and do the legwork.

For my assertion the effect would be small anyway, so it's not a huge deal, but it is something to take into account when deciding to pursue a case.

You don't use extradition for shoplifting.

You don't always use extradition for rape.

You do use extradition for skipping bail.

-Adam

Sep 29, 2009#59

Chazwozel

stienman said:
I could go ahead and show marijuana use on University of Michigan campus (where the campus police will NOT arrest for possession) and Ann Arbor city in general (where city police will arrest for possession) and the fact that Ann Arbor Police cannot work on Campus. I could then go to show that marijuana use is greater on campus than off.

-Adam

And that also has nothing to do with the smaller campus population vs a large city population and the higher ratio of college kids smoking more dope (and having easier access to it) than non college folk... :pud:

Getting caught with marijuana on a college campus has pretty severe consequences too, like getting booted out of school. People still do it. I think you're trying to pull your Boy Scout logic into things that just aren't there.

Sep 29, 2009#60

Cajungal

Ya know, I hear he's just a copy of a Greek Polanski.

Sep 29, 2009#61

fade

The pursuit is also about skipping the punishment. I would expect no less. Even if he got a slap on the wrist, the moment he didn't show up for that slap, the worse he made it for himself. We expect no less of our children, why should we not expect the same of an adult?

You seem insistent that not doing it again is a reason to believe he's paid his price. Why? That makes no logical sense to me. In contrast, most murders are crimes of passion, and in most cases, the murderer would never do so again, because the case was highly situational. Does that mean that if a murderer fled, he'd have the same luxury? Why not? Is that a straw man? I think not.

I also must say, I find it hard to believe that 30 years in "exile" in a first world tourist destination is a strong punishment. From a place he only lived for 10 years, following a life in the place he was "exiled" to, mind you.

Sep 29, 2009#62

Twitch

Why do we as a public never want to punish people for fleeing the law? It's a crime and has punishments associated with it. Why should we let this guy go from his original crime and fleeing his sentence? Because he's famous? Because he's sorry? Not that he fled the country for sure. Or maybe because he avoided the law for such a long amount of time he's not a threat anymore. Well damn, we shouldn't charge anyone if they can get away from it for long enough.

Sep 29, 2009#63

ZenMonkey

Cajungal said:
Ya know, I hear he's just a copy of a Greek Polanski.

:clap2:

Sep 29, 2009#64

Cajungal

ZenMonkey;265371][quote=Cajungal said:
Ya know, I hear he's just a copy of a Greek Polanski.

:clap2:[/QUOTE]

^_^ yaaaaaaay

Sep 29, 2009#65

Chazwozel

Twitch said:
Why do we as a public never want to punish people for fleeing the law? It's a crime and has punishments associated with it. Why should we let this guy go from his original crime and fleeing his sentence? Because he's famous? Because he's sorry? Not that he fled the country for sure. Or maybe because he avoided the law for such a long amount of time he's not a threat anymore. Well damn, we shouldn't charge anyone if they can get away from it for long enough.

Actually, Americans, in general, usually want to lynch the suspect before he/she's even proven guilty. I think most of the United States want Polanski to burn at the stake, because we loves us a good scapgoat. Someone to point at and say, "at least I ain't evil like that dar varmint." Black and white thinking. Gotta love it.

Sep 29, 2009#66

Twitch

Well I don't speak for the rest of America but I'm a "black and white" guy I guess. I feel that if a crime is committed the punishment should be carried out no matter who you are.

Sep 29, 2009#67

Chazwozel

Twitch said:
Well I don't speak for the rest of America but I'm a "black and white" guy I guess. I feel that if a crime is committed the punishment should be carried out no matter who you are.

black and white logic is the reason why the world is as fucked up as it is.

Sep 29, 2009#68

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Twitch said:
Well I don't speak for the rest of America but I'm a "black and white" guy I guess. I feel that if a crime is committed the punishment should be carried out no matter who you are.

What exactly do you think is punishment?

Sep 29, 2009#69

Twitch

BlackCrossCrusader;265405][quote=Twitch said:
Well I don't speak for the rest of America but I'm a "black and white" guy I guess. I feel that if a crime is committed the punishment should be carried out no matter who you are.

What exactly do you think is punishment?[/QUOTE]
The punishment is whatever the law says it is. In this case it was four years jail time plus whatever he'll face for fleeing. If we say that a crime is punishable with X and then we decide not to punish someone with X then why do we bother to enforce the law? And I'm not saying that this one case means we should abandon the law, or that it implies that we are. I'm saying that there is no reason he should be excused for his crime.

Sep 29, 2009#70

ZenMonkey

Twitch said:
Well I don't speak for the rest of America but I'm a \"black and white\" guy I guess.

(Sorry, I never get a chance to do that.)

Sep 29, 2009#71

crono1224

Chazwozel;265401][quote=Twitch said:
Well I don't speak for the rest of America but I'm a "black and white" guy I guess. I feel that if a crime is committed the punishment should be carried out no matter who you are.

black and white logic is the reason why the world is as fucked up as it is.[/QUOTE]

Impossible there cannot be any extra circumstances, a mentally disabled person committing a crime or a kid committing a crime deserve the same punishment as a stable adult. I mean after all if its purely black and white there can't be distinctions between age, mental state, or anything else.

Sep 29, 2009#72

Iaculus

Chazwozel;265401][quote=Twitch said:
Well I don't speak for the rest of America but I'm a "black and white" guy I guess. I feel that if a crime is committed the punishment should be carried out no matter who you are.

black and white logic is the reason why the world is as fucked up as it is.[/QUOTE]

Even with shades of grey, there's the case of where you put them. For instance, as mentioned above, one could believe that he should be sentenced because he committed a crime, but not believe that that sentence should be terribly harsh. If nothing else, it seems only fair that he pays for the extraordinary legal kerfuffle he's caused, but that sentence does not necessarily have to involve tar, feathers, and a rectally-inserted burning stake - though whichever poor sod was doing the paperwork for this when they could have been dealing with other, potentially more serious matters may disagree.

Sep 29, 2009#73

Twitch

crono1224;265425][quote=Chazwozel;265401][quote=Twitch said:
Well I don't speak for the rest of America but I'm a "black and white" guy I guess. I feel that if a crime is committed the punishment should be carried out no matter who you are.

Sep 29, 2009#74

crono1224

Twitch;265443][quote=crono1224;265425][quote=Chazwozel;265401][quote=Twitch said:
Well I don't speak for the rest of America but I'm a "black and white" guy I guess. I feel that if a crime is committed the punishment should be carried out no matter who you are.

black and white logic is the reason why the world is as fucked up as it is.[/quote]

Impossible there cannot be any extra circumstances, a mentally disabled person committing a crime or a kid committing a crime deserve the same punishment as a stable adult. I mean after all if its purely black and white there can't be distinctions between age, mental state, or anything else.[/QUOTE]
I didn't think that's what we were referring to. I thought we could be mature enough to keep the situations we referred to within the realm of the case at hand.[/QUOTE]

Case at hand? you are saying black and white it can't simply apply to certain crimes and not others. My problem was with the black and white statement, because it certainly feels like people feel like 'certain crimes' are just black and white.

Sep 29, 2009#75

Twitch

crono1224;265481][quote=Twitch;265443][quote=crono1224;265425][quote=Chazwozel;265401][quote=Twitch said:
Well I don't speak for the rest of America but I'm a "black and white" guy I guess. I feel that if a crime is committed the punishment should be carried out no matter who you are.

black and white logic is the reason why the world is as fucked up as it is.[/quote]

Impossible there cannot be any extra circumstances, a mentally disabled person committing a crime or a kid committing a crime deserve the same punishment as a stable adult. I mean after all if its purely black and white there can't be distinctions between age, mental state, or anything else.[/quote]
I didn't think that's what we were referring to. I thought we could be mature enough to keep the situations we referred to within the realm of the case at hand.[/quote]

Case at hand? you are saying black and white it can't simply apply to certain crimes and not others. My problem was with the black and white statement, because it certainly feels like people feel like 'certain crimes' are just black and white.[/QUOTE]
Rape is pretty black and white. I'm not too familiar with mentally disabled people raping anyone but I'm sure there's a system worked out. I just don't know of it.

Sep 29, 2009#76

Alucard

Only in Vegas though right?

Sep 29, 2009#77

lafftaff

I'm coming into this late but I'll try.

I'm sorry, when did we just start forgiving rape? "You do pretty things now, so it doesn't matter that you raped a child or ran away" The man raped a child, how is that forgiveable/forgettable? He jumped bail & has evaded capture for a terrible crime. He finally got caught, deal with it. Crimes of passion are still crimes.

This man hasn't had any real punishment at all for his terrible, child-raping crime. Unless traveling the world doing what you love has suddenly become punishment.

Yes, the victim's parents may have put her in a bad position, but that doesn't excuse Polanski for raping her. He still chose to rape a 13 yr-old girl. If I wear a short skirt it doesn't suddenly give someone the right to rape me. "But she was asking for it officer" is not an excuse.

He may not have 'raped' again, but he continued to date teenage girls. Once jumping bail & living free in France he dated Nastassja Kinski, who was 15 at the time & about 33 yrs his junior.

Polanski drugged & raped a 13yr-old girl. He then ran away when it looked like he might have to actually be punished for that crime. How people can just gloss over all that is beyond me.

Sep 29, 2009#78

JONJONAUG

This entire case reminds me of this:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=11926

The guy drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. I very much enjoy his movies, I can respect the French for not extraditing him because he's a citizen of France, but he drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. He took his penis, stuck it in her vagina, then stuck it in her ass to ejaculate. That shit don't fly.

Sep 30, 2009#79

AshburnerX

JONJONAUG said:
This entire case reminds me of this:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=11926

The guy drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. I very much enjoy his movies, I can respect the French for not extraditing him because he's a citizen of France, but he drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. He took his penis, stuck it in her vagina, then stuck it in her ass to ejaculate. That shit don't fly.

I remember reading about a particular French case in which several low level governmental employees were running and participating in a child sex slave ring. One day, the father of one of the girls involved in the ring collects his child and runs to the US, seeking asylum. The US grants it and everything looks like it will be a happy ending... until one day, French officials kidnap the girl and take her back to France. They refuse to return her and the Father is turned away at the border (or Airport rather) when he tries to go back and get her.

I think it's mentioned in the book Everything you Know is Wrong.

Sep 30, 2009#80

Adammon

JONJONAUG said:
This entire case reminds me of this:

The guy drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. I very much enjoy his movies, I can respect the French for not extraditing him because he's a citizen of France, but he drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. He took his penis, stuck it in her vagina, then stuck it in her ass to ejaculate. That shit don't fly.

Juxtaposition is important when dealing metaphorically.

---------- Post added at 08:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:34 PM ----------

This made me laugh:

"Martin Scorsese and Woody Allen are among a group of people in the film industry who have signed a petition objecting to the 76-year-old director's arrest."

Oh, Woody Allen's out there defending charges of sex with minors.. That's helpful!

Sep 30, 2009#81

ZenMonkey

Adammon said:
"Martin Scorsese and Woody Allen are among a group of people in the film industry who have signed a petition objecting to the 76-year-old director's arrest."

Oh, Woody Allen's out there defending charges of sex with minors.. That's helpful!

Facepalm @ Woody, but a giant WTF to Martin. This "he's a great artist" bullshit makes me want to spit nails.

Sep 30, 2009#82

Laurelai

Adammon;266246][quote=JONJONAUG said:
This entire case reminds me of this:

The guy drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. I very much enjoy his movies, I can respect the French for not extraditing him because he's a citizen of France, but he drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. He took his penis, stuck it in her vagina, then stuck it in her ass to ejaculate. That shit don't fly.

Juxtaposition is important when dealing metaphorically.[/QUOTE]

HA!!

Sep 30, 2009#83

ZenMonkey

Part of Samantha Geimer's deposition.

Commentary from the guy who went through the deposition.

Sep 30, 2009#84

Dave

Dude should be put in jail for a long, long time. Bring him back here and we'll put him in general population. If not for the crime itself but for being caught on the warrant for fleeing arrest, which he could be jailed for easily. People are put in jail all the time that are not a danger to society - that argument is just silly.

It's punishment pure and simple.

Oh, and cut his rapist dick off.

Sep 30, 2009#85

Espy

But Dave, he made some good movies and the french think he's cool and it was a long time ago.

Sep 30, 2009#86

ZenMonkey

Things keep getting weirder. Kirstie Alley, that deluded fruitcake, is actually making sense about this. And then there's this:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/retired-prosecutor-hbo-roman-polanski-case.html

Sep 30, 2009#87

Chazwozel

I find it funny that these articles come out days after Samantha Geimer was quoted in saying the media was far worse than what Polanski did to her.

Sep 30, 2009#88

ZenMonkey

Chazwozel said:
I find it funny that these articles come out days after Samantha Geimer was quoted in saying the media was far worse than what Polanski did to her.

Yeah, I really feel bad for her, constantly having to have this dredged up. No wonder she just wants it all over with.

Sep 30, 2009#89

Adammon

That was part of the reason for the plea bargaining with Polanski. They wanted to avoid putting her on the stand and then having the media scrutinize her. Of course, that whole plan fell apart when he ran off and she was subjected to 30 years of it.

Oct 1, 2009#90

Espy

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the French government has now pulled their support of Polanski.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...tor-Roman-Polanski-faces-extradition-U-S.html

Oct 1, 2009#91

Covar

hey according to Whoopi It's not like it was rape-rape.

Oct 1, 2009#92

Espy

Covar said:
hey according to Whoopi It's not like it was rape-rape.

That's true. Now that the brilliant minds at the View have weighed in we can all go home.

Oct 1, 2009#93

Chazwozel

Covar said:
hey according to Whoopi It's not like it was rape-rape.

I think in Whoopi's own little stupid way she was trying to blurt out that it was statutory rape. Eitherway, that statement made me /facepalm in real life when I heard it.

Oct 1, 2009#94

sixpackshaker

Covar said:
hey according to Whoopi It's not like it was rape-rape.

I know it is a little caveman of me, but I still see it as much more distasteful/illegal/immoral to yank some one off the street at the point of a weapon - than what the crime committed by Polanski.

---------- Post added at 08:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:52 PM ----------

Now the media is reporting the details of Elizabeth Smart's case.

Of course the headline is: Elizabeth Smart says she was raped daily
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091001/ap_on_re_us/us_elizabeth_smart

Why can't the media just say: Victim (Smart) testifies against kidnapper.

Oct 1, 2009#95

ZenMonkey

sixpackshaker said:
I know it is a little caveman of me, but I still see it as much more distasteful/illegal/immoral to yank some one off the street at the point of a weapon - than what the crime committed by Polanski.

Oct 1, 2009#96

Espy

sixpackshaker;267043][quote=Covar said:
hey according to Whoopi It's not like it was rape-rape.

I know it is a little caveman of me, but I still see it as much more distasteful/illegal/immoral to yank some one off the street at the point of a weapon - than what the crime committed by Polanski.
[/QUOTE]

Are... are you joking? Are you making some kind of weird joke about how unknown forced rape is worse than some old guy drugging and raping a 13 year old girl?
You are making some weird joke I don't get right?

---------- Post added at 04:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:01 PM ----------

Chazwozel;267042][quote=Covar said:
hey according to Whoopi It's not like it was rape-rape.

I think in Whoopi's own little stupid way she was trying to blurt out that it was statutory rape. Eitherway, that statement made me /facepalm in real life when I heard it.[/QUOTE]

I think you might be right, that's probably what she meant.

Which probably means she has never read the report of what went down. It's hard to read through it and not say it was, I can't believe I'm going to say this... but, "rape-rape".:faint2:

Oct 1, 2009#97

sixpackshaker

Yes, I think what happened to Elizabeth Smart is worse than what happened to Polanski's victim,Samantha Geimer.

Oct 1, 2009#98

Espy

Okay, see, you didn't say the Smart girl case. Yes, that was a more "horrible" crime, due to the length of time. I'm not going to say it was "worse" for the victim, I don't think you can compare that sort of thing, but in the eyes of justice it certainly is.
The way you wrote your post though... it just sounded like you were saying something rather different since you didn't mention Smart until your edit.

Oct 1, 2009#99

Tinwhistler

Well, it's been a long time.

But you know what? We don't have a statute of limitations on some crimes, like rape and murder. He still needs to be brought to the justice system to account for his accounts.

Just because you successfully fled the country for a few decades doesn't mean you get a free pass.

Oct 1, 2009#100

AshburnerX

Tinwhistler said:
Well, it's been a long time.

But you know what? We don't have a statute of limitations on some crimes, like rape and murder. He still needs to be brought to the justice system to account for his accounts.

Just because you successfully fled the country for a few decades doesn't mean you get a free pass.

Actually, some places in the US DO have a statute of limitations on rape and murder because it's not a federal crime, and each state/county can set it's own statute. It's asinine... some places actually have longer statutes for parking tickets than they do for Rape.

Oct 1, 2009#101

Cat

Covar said:
hey according to Whoopi It's not like it was rape-rape.

It really surprised me how many people came out to support him. You'd expect a few no matter what he did but goddamn, it's like there is a separate reality that we didn't know about.

Oct 1, 2009#102

Armadillo

Cat;267204][quote=Covar said:
hey according to Whoopi It's not like it was rape-rape.

It really surprised me how many people came out to support him. You'd expect a few no matter what he did but goddamn, it's like there is a separate reality that we didn't know about.[/QUOTE]

What blew my mind about the View wasn't so much the whole "rape-rape" thing (stupid as it was), but that you had a group of women DEFENDING A RAPIST.

Oct 1, 2009#103

Espy

Armadillo;267247][quote=Cat;267204][quote=Covar said:
hey according to Whoopi It's not like it was rape-rape.

Oct 1, 2009#104

strawman

I suspect that lots of people are going to be distancing themselves from their earlier statements over the next few days. Everyone can see this freight train of a wreck that Polanski is strapped to isn't going to end well.

-Adam

Oct 1, 2009#105

Ravenpoe

I supported him back when I thought it was a statutory rape charge. Then I read what happened, and the girl's testimony, and I fully admit that I was wrong, and that he should be brought to justice.

It could be that the majority of people supporting him simply don't know the facts.

Oct 1, 2009#106

strawman

Ravenpoe said:
I supported him back when I thought it was a statutory rape charge. Then I read what happened, and the girl's testimony, and I fully admit that I was wrong, and that he should be brought to justice.

It could be that the majority of people supporting him simply don't know the facts.

This is the same thing Oprah is saying.

Paraphrased,

"A 40 year old man having sex with a 13 year old girl is ok. It's not like it was a real rape, and so I support the man."

I just don't get it.

Where do you, or anyone else, get the idea that even statutory rape of a minor is OK?

Why does everyone have this impression that a 13 year old girl can make valid sexual decisions regarding significantly older men?

Are you all in favor of NAMBLA too?

She was a child. Even if she had consented, though I truly don't believe a 13 year girl is fully capable of the maturity required to accept such a responsibility for her own actions, but even if she had consented why is it ok? Why is it right to let him go?

-Adam

Oct 1, 2009#107

Adammon

If she had consented, it would be statutory rape and I'd be more squeamish about the whole thing but I wouldn't be picking up a torch and pitchfork. She didn't consent, period. That's rape-rape.

It doesn't even matter if she had sex with her boyfriend before she went there. It's still rape-rape.

Oct 1, 2009#108

Shakey

I've really wanted to comment in here for a while, but I don't know what to say. Are people really defending Polanski? He admitted his guilt.

He raped a 13 year old child. He raped a 13 year old child.He raped a 13 year old child.He raped a 13 year old child.He raped a 13 year old child.He raped a 13 year old child.He raped a 13 year old child.He raped a 13 year old child.He raped a 13 year old child.He raped a 13 year old child.

Don't cover up what happened because he is god damned famous. He raped a child. Living in a mansion in France is not a punishment.

Oct 1, 2009#109

Adammon

Shakey said:
Living in a mansion in France is not a punishment.

We prefer to call it a Freedom Prison.

Oct 1, 2009#110

Ravenpoe

stienman;267306][quote=Ravenpoe said:
I supported him back when I thought it was a statutory rape charge. Then I read what happened, and the girl's testimony, and I fully admit that I was wrong, and that he should be brought to justice.

It could be that the majority of people supporting him simply don't know the facts.

Oct 1, 2009#111

Shakey

Adammon;267314][quote=Shakey said:
Living in a mansion in France is not a punishment.

We prefer to call it a Freedom Prison.[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry. Living in a Freedom Prison making movies and millions is not a punishment for RAPING A 13 YEAR OLD CHILD AND RUNNING FROM YOUR SENTENCING.

Oct 1, 2009#112

I

Icarus

Having had a 14 year old gf when I was 22, I personally don't put much weight in "statutory rape" when both people are reasonably young. Much older than that, and the divide between the two generations becomes too big to comfortably cross and it becomes a matter of pure lust and on that basis alone, I don't believe it's right (unless the two people really DO love each other and manage to bridge that gap). If it's a case of sex and nothing else, I'm against it in any case. Heck, I don't even believe in one night stands let alone having a minor involved. I DO believe in love, however, and think people don't choose who they love and from the age 14+ onwards, some teenagers are well capable of having a close relationship. My gf was very mature for her age and a heck more mature than most other girls I knew my own age which says it all. I've never regretted it and neither has she - in fact, she recently told me that what we had back then changed her for the better.

Anyway, what Polanski did was NOT statutory rape, I just wanted to get the above off my chest since the discussion was revolving around that topic as well. What he did was wrong. What the girl's parents did was wrong. The industry is full of hidden shameful secrets and if they were to lift the lid, I think you might be surprised how many worse skeletons than this would fall out of the closets all over Hollywood. Too many parents are over-eager to get their children to become successful - many many models have sex with managers, designers, etc. at the age of 14-15 to get a job, to climb the ladder. It's an open secret of the industry that this happens everywhere. I've personally talked to East European girls who admitted that sex was a "must" for them to even be taken seriously as a model. So let's not pretend Polanski is the only bad apple.

Oct 1, 2009#113

strawman

Ravenpoe;267317][quote=stienman;267306][quote=Ravenpoe said:
I supported him back when I thought it was a statutory rape charge. Then I read what happened, and the girl's testimony, and I fully admit that I was wrong, and that he should be brought to justice.

It could be that the majority of people supporting him simply don't know the facts.

Ravenpoe said:
I supported him back when I thought it was a statutory rape charge.

Can't be much more clear than that. You support statutory rapists. Awesome.

-Adam

Oct 1, 2009#114

Espy

Icarus said:
So let's not pretend Polanski is the only bad apple.

No one is saying that. The problem is, that's not the issue at all. The issue is they finally got him.

So what do they do with him?

It has nothing to do with who else may have done what.

Oct 1, 2009#115

Shakey

Icarus said:
Having had a 14 year old gf when I was 22, I personally don't put much weight in "statutory rape" when both people are reasonably young. Much older than that, and the divide between the two generations becomes too big to comfortably cross and it becomes a matter of pure lust and on that basis alone, I don't believe it's right (unless the two people really DO love each other and manage to bridge that gap). If it's a case of sex and nothing else, I'm against it in any case. Heck, I don't even believe in one night stands let alone having a minor involved. I DO believe in love, however, and think people don't choose who they love and from the age 14+ onwards, some teenagers are well capable of having a close relationship. My gf was very mature for her age and a heck more mature than most other girls I knew my own age which says it all. I've never regretted it and neither has she - in fact, she recently told me that what we had back then changed her for the better.

Anyway, what Polanski did was NOT statutory rape, I just wanted to get the above off my chest since the discussion was revolving around that topic as well. What he did was wrong. What the girl's parents did was wrong. The industry is full of hidden shameful secrets and if they were to lift the lid, I think you might be surprised how many worse skeletons than this would fall out of the closets all over Hollywood. Too many parents are over-eager to get their children to become successful - many many models have sex with managers, designers, etc. at the age of 14-15 to get a job, to climb the ladder. It's an open secret of the industry that this happens everywhere. I've personally talked to East European girls who admitted that sex was a "must" for them to even be taken seriously as a model. So let's not pretend Polanski is the only bad apple.

Just to clear it up. He didn't have consensual sex with a 13 year old. HE DRUGGED AND RAPED A 13 YEAR OLD CHILD.

Oct 1, 2009#116

I

Icarus

Shakey said:
Just to clear it up. He didn't have consensual sex with a 13 year old. HE DRUGGED AND RAPED A 13 YEAR OLD CHILD.

Hence my

Shakey said:
Anyway, what Polanski did was NOT statutory rape

Better read a post first before replying.

And Espy: when you consider this case is 30+ years old and they all act as if he's the biggest villain, I think it's fair to consider the fact that there's far worse people out there who get away with far worse things and that instead of paying so much attention to this old case, maybe they should take a closer look at what is going on *right now*.

Oct 1, 2009#117

ZenMonkey

Icarus said:
maybe they should take a closer look at what is going on *right now*.

Espy said:
It has nothing to do with who else may have done what.

^^^

Yes, I had my virginity taken away from me at 17 by "statutory rape." Yes, the guy was 19 and it was 100% consensual. Just because people laugh off statutory rape in situations like these doesn't mean the statute doesn't exist for a reason, and that reason is Roman fucking Polanski in case he further had the gall to claim it was consensual.

Oct 1, 2009#118

Espy

I have this crazy idea.

If we had any sway at all we could just agree to do both.

Oct 1, 2009#119

Twitch

No, Icarus, I don't give a flying fuck how many rape cases they're prosecuting right now. Unless every lawyer in the country is tied up on serial rapists I think we can spare something to bring a man to justice even though he got away with it for thirty years.

Oct 1, 2009#120

Ravenpoe

stienman said:
I got the idea from this sentence:

Ravenpoe said:

I supported him back when I thought it was a statutory rape charge.

Click to expand...

Can't be much more clear than that. You support statutory rapists. Awesome.

-Adam

Where's the eyeroll emoticon? Ah, here it is: :rolleyes:

I know you aren't this dumb, so I'm a little dissappointed that you've chosen to take this role in debate. I supported the idea that the manhunt that had sprung up around him was overdrawn and pointless. And just for Shakey's sake, I'll go ahead and repeat that I've since realized I was wrong, now that I know the full details of what happened.

Shakey said:
Just to clear it up. He didn't have consensual sex with a 13 year old. HE DRUGGED AND RAPED A 13 YEAR OLD CHILD.

I think this might have been mentioned once or twice already.

Oct 1, 2009#121

drawn_inward

I'm just gonna jump in here. Defending Polanski in any form is tantamount to defending rape. That's how I see it. It may be short-sighted, but that sick sack of suck performed a sex act with a minor against her will. No punishment would be too harsh, IMO.

So what he's old and sorry. So what it happened a long time ago. So what someone forgave him.

Statutory or not. It was wrong and punishment has been a long time coming.

Oct 1, 2009#122

Shakey

Icarus;267368][quote=Shakey said:
Just to clear it up. He didn't have consensual sex with a 13 year old. HE DRUGGED AND RAPED A 13 YEAR OLD CHILD.

Hence my

Shakey said:
Anyway, what Polanski did was NOT statutory rape

Oct 2, 2009#123

Ross

Oct 2, 2009#124

Shakey

Ravenpoe said:
And just for Shakey's sake, I'll go ahead and repeat that I've since realized I was wrong, now that I know the full details of what happened.

You don't have to call me out, I never called you out.

Ravenpoe] [quote=Shakey said:
Just to clear it up. He didn't have consensual sex with a 13 year old. HE DRUGGED AND RAPED A 13 YEAR OLD CHILD.

I think this might have been mentioned once or twice already.[/quote]
That's fine, but I don't think everyone really get that.

Oct 2, 2009#125

makare

It doesn't seem that statutory rape is the core issue here. The girl's age is just an aggravating factor of the classic rape committed. She did not consent, and in fact, could not consent due to the drugs.

If you say too much time has passed and it is too late to punish him justly, you are saying that he deserves to get away with rape. That's all there is too it.

Oct 2, 2009#126

Ravenpoe

Shakey;267390][quote=Ravenpoe said:
And just for Shakey's sake, I'll go ahead and repeat that I've since realized I was wrong, now that I know the full details of what happened.

You don't have to call me out, I never called you out.

Ravenpoe] [quote=Shakey said:
Just to clear it up. He didn't have consensual sex with a 13 year old. HE DRUGGED AND RAPED A 13 YEAR OLD CHILD.

I think this might have been mentioned once or twice already.[/quote]
That's fine, but I don't think everyone really get that.[/QUOTE]

Oh no, wasn't calling you out. You're stating the fact that a lot of people missed, myself included, when first hearing this story, and there ain't nothing wrong with that. I was just making it clear where I stand, so you wouldn't have to waste a round preachin' to the choir.

Oct 2, 2009#127

crono1224

There is a statue of limitations but since he fled from prosecution or what ever i doubt it matters.

But generally i don't see how he can be absolved he fled from prosecution/punishment, what would be said now if say Madoff fled the country, or any other person who has committed such an act. The fact I don't even think is if he was mentally ill at the time he committed it or if his works of art free him(though they shouldn't no matter). But that he didn't fight it he fled.

Atleast one way of looking at it.

Oct 2, 2009#128

Shakey

Ravenpoe said:
Oh no, wasn't calling you out. You're stating the fact that a lot of people missed, myself included, when first hearing this story, and there ain't nothing wrong with that. I was just making it clear where I stand, so you wouldn't have to waste a round preachin' to the choir.

Cool. It just frustrates me to no end that this will end with the typical ending. No real discussion as to what he did, because he is a good guy who made pretty movies. Meanwhile all those people who weren't really "rape-raped" will fucking hesitate because of this.

Oct 2, 2009#129

I

Icarus

Twitch said:
No, Icarus, I don't give a flying fuck how many rape cases they're prosecuting right now. Unless every lawyer in the country is tied up on serial rapists I think we can spare something to bring a man to justice even though he got away with it for thirty years.

I'm talking about in terms of media attention - it's often via the media that such cases come to light in the first place.

---------- Post added at 05:43 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:36 AM ----------

ZenMonkey said:
^^^

Yes, I had my virginity taken away from me at 17 by "statutory rape." Yes, the guy was 19 and it was 100% consensual. Just because people laugh off statutory rape in situations like these doesn't mean the statute doesn't exist for a reason, and that reason is Roman fucking Polanski in case he further had the gall to claim it was consensual.

Oct 2, 2009#130

crono1224

Icarus;267408][quote=ZenMonkey said:
^^^

Yes, I had my virginity taken away from me at 17 by "statutory rape." Yes, the guy was 19 and it was 100% consensual. Just because people laugh off statutory rape in situations like these doesn't mean the statute doesn't exist for a reason, and that reason is Roman fucking Polanski in case he further had the gall to claim it was consensual.

If anything this shows the law is hopelessly out of date and needs a great deal of refinement. When a 19 year old can "rape" a 17 year old when it's consensual, the law is a joke, full stop. Refining it will make the law stronger and it will stop some ridiculous cases from going to court between a teenage boy and girlfriend. Not to mention that states among each other can't even come to an agreement when it's rape and when it's not. In Europe, many countries already have a new law which makes exceptions based on age differences and rightfully so.[/QUOTE]

The thoughts were that <18 or 16-17 depending on states can't LEGALLY CONSENT to those acts. Whether or not this is out of touch is the same problem with drinking and voting and what ever else i guess?

Especially since i think that some its janky enough if you are 1 day before birthday and they are 1 day after it, it could be statutory rape, though i doubt it would be punished/prosecuted.

Oct 2, 2009#131

strawman

Ravenpoe said:
I supported the idea that the manhunt that had sprung up around him was overdrawn and pointless.

Let me rephrase that for you:

Ravenpoe said:
I supported the idea that the manhunt that had sprung up around a person who committed statutory rape of a child and then fled the country before sentencing after pleading guilty was overdrawn and pointless.

I'm sorry that we disagree, but even if you were correct earlier and it was statutory rape, I still don't believe it's right to 'support' him in ANY way, shape, or form.

If it's overdrawn it's because the man himself was making it hard to catch him, and the media is making a circus out of it because he's a celebrity.

Statutory rape is worth prosecuting, even if it takes years to catch the person who commits it.

You are taking the same stance as Whoopi - if it's not rape-rape, then hey, you know, give the guy a break. I support him and not the state.

Sorry if I offend, but your argument utterly ridiculous. "Supporting" a rapist is supporting a rapist.

-Adam

Oct 2, 2009#132

ZenMonkey

Icarus said:
If anything this shows the law is hopelessly out of date and needs a great deal of refinement.

Yes, but that wasn't exactly my point. I'm saying the "statutory" part of it is clouding the point for some. What he did was rape-rape-rape-rape-rape-rape-rape-rape or however many goddamn times it'll take before everyone (and believe me, I am not just talking about this thread) quits with the justifications and caveats just because the issue of "statutory rape" has problems.

Oct 2, 2009#133

Heavan

I can see defense of Polanski on a law standpoint. He did something wrong, and cooperated fully with the police up to a certain point. He went to prison for a certain amount of time, had mental evaluations, all that. A plea bargain was drawn up saying that the amount of time he'd spent in prison for the evaluation was to be his sentence, and that was it. The prosecution, defense, judge, victim, and Polanski all agreed on this. But then right before his last court hearing the judge of the case went to the media and said he was going to go back on the deal and go much harsher, just because he chose to. That... isn't how the law is supposed to work. Then, in response to hearing this, Polanski fled to France.

Whether or not you agree with the sentence for the crime (60 some days in prison for rape? Even I don't agree with it) is irrelevant. While he was wrong to do what he did and then run, this could have all been over a long time ago if some moron judge didn't decide he wanted publicity.

Oct 2, 2009#134

strawman

Heavan said:
judge of the case went to the media and said he was going to go back on the deal and go much harsher, just because he chose to. That... isn't how the law is supposed to work.

First, What do you mean "Just because he chose to" ? Are you saying he had no legal reason to reject the plea bargain?

In a felony case, the judge has EVERY right to reject a plea bargain and either force the defense and prosecution to work on a new plea bargain or go to trial.

In my mugging case the judge was telling the defendant that if he didn't give him very specific details proving he was one of the attackers, then the judge wasn't going to accept his guilty plea and they would have had to go to trial.

Either you have a poor understanding of the legal system, or you know something about the case that we don't know. Please enlighten me.

Otherwise, yes - that is how the law is supposed to work. The judge determines whether the guilty plea is legal, valid, and reasonable for the crime charged. I suspect that the Judge agreed with you - 60 days was not enough and the plea needed to be reworked. If the defendant at ANY time disagrees with the judge then he gets a trial by jury of his peers.

By leaving, Polanski not only rejected the plea bargain, he also rejected the opportunity to craft a new one if rejected by the judge, and he SOUNDLY REJECTED trial by jury of his peers.

I'd say the system was, and is, working exactly as intended.

-Adam

Oct 2, 2009#135

Chazwozel

makare1 said:
It doesn't seem that statutory rape is the core issue here. The girl's age is just an aggravating factor of the classic rape committed. She did not consent, and in fact, could not consent due to the drugs.

If you say too much time has passed and it is too late to punish him justly, you are saying that he deserves to get away with rape. That's all there is too it.

Oct 2, 2009#136

Tinwhistler

crono1224 said:
There is a statue of limitations but since he fled from prosecution or what ever i doubt it matters.

Yeah, most statutes of limitations 'pause' the clock if you flee.

The purpose of a statute of limitations is to prevent someone from waiting 10 years to call rape (or theft, or whatever) on someone vindictively. If a crime happens, you need to report it when it happens, not years down the road when the suspect pisses you off again. It also keeps the government from dredging up old charges to throw at you whenever it's convenient.

Now, if you report it (as she did), and the suspect flees, well, that's not the state's (or the victim's) fault that the charges weren't able to be heard in court. So, the statute of limitations don't count for that entire time that the suspect is outside the arm of the law.

So, I think Roman Polanski needs to have his day in court.

That said, until he's judged guilty, he is an innocent man. The tar-and-feathers witch-hunt attitude some display here frightens me a little bit. Regardless of Samantha Geimer's deposition, we've heard one side of the story. We know that he attempted to make a plea bargain, and fled justice when he feared that the plea bargain would not be accepted as negotiated. But I don't think it's really fair to string the guy up until his day in court when all of the information from both sides can be heard, weighed, and decided on by a jury (or judge, if the jury option is waived).

Oct 2, 2009#137

makare

Chazwozel;267469][quote=makare1 said:
It doesn't seem that statutory rape is the core issue here. The girl's age is just an aggravating factor of the classic rape committed. She did not consent, and in fact, could not consent due to the drugs.

If you say too much time has passed and it is too late to punish him justly, you are saying that he deserves to get away with rape. That's all there is too it.

Oct 2, 2009#138

Dave

If you're 22 and have a 14 year old girlfriend you are fucking sick in the head. Had you come around last year when my daughter was 14 I would have beat the living shit out of your perverted ass and had you thrown in jail.

Oct 2, 2009#139

Covar

<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

Oct 2, 2009#140

Chazwozel

Dave said:
If you're 22 and have a 14 year old girlfriend you are fucking sick in the head. Had you come around last year when my daughter was 14 I would have beat the living shit out of your perverted ass and had you thrown in jail.

Well that came out of left field...

Oct 2, 2009#141

Dave

Icarus said:
Having had a 14 year old gf when I was 22, I personally don't put much weight in "statutory rape" when both people are reasonably young.

Top of the page.

---------- Post added at 09:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 AM ----------

Page #4 that is. I'm shocked nobody said anything about this.

Oct 2, 2009#142

Chibibar

Ok. After reading 5 pages of stuff. I still think he should pay for the crime he did.

It sets bad precedent. I mean so he is a famous director, made good movies, but if this was just a regular guy did a crime and skip out on sentencing (he did flee) and later saying "I'm sorry and I'm old" you should forgive him?

I don't think so. I have a very low tolerance for this kind of stuff (sex with kids/rape/abuse) so he does not get any sympathy from me.

Oct 2, 2009#143

sixpackshaker

Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

There needs to be adjustment for <18

Oct 2, 2009#144

Chibibar

sixpackshaker;267531][quote=Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

There needs to be adjustment for <18[/QUOTE]

Yea. It is funny how my wife and I are 7 years apart, but when I reference something of my life in the past, she always goes "Do you know how old I was back then?" luckily I met her when she was 20. so I'm safe

Oct 2, 2009#145

Chazwozel

makare1;267485][quote=Chazwozel;267469][quote=makare1 said:
It doesn't seem that statutory rape is the core issue here. The girl's age is just an aggravating factor of the classic rape committed. She did not consent, and in fact, could not consent due to the drugs.

If you say too much time has passed and it is too late to punish him justly, you are saying that he deserves to get away with rape. That's all there is too it.

What is locking him away for 10 + years in federal prison going to accomplish exactly? (aside from further wasting tax dollars).

The thing is I don't think he got away with rape at all. Look at all the media scrutiny, he's had to live in exile from the U.S. for 30 years, he payed a settlement to the victim. Over these 30 years I think he's paid for his crime. Putting him away in prison isn't going to magically make what he did go away and make him a non-rapist.[/QUOTE]

Should we just do away with the criminal justice system and simply export people to France as punishment? Personally living in France would be punishment for me but most people, I think, might like it.

And what it accomplishes is it tells Polanksi and the rest of the world that a crime of a rape does not just disappear over time.[/QUOTE]

Even after he settled with the victim with an undisclosed sum and lived in exile for 30 years? What is it exactly about serving a prison sentence makes the crime magically go away? My feeling is that he's done his time in other ways, and for the U.S. system to slap him down afresh with new charges and put him away for a number of years in a maximum security prison is far worse than what he deserves. You're trying to pull the ol' 'use him as example' argument Steinman was. Rape cases are not going to spike up to untold amounts because Roman Polanski does not go to prison, just like murders didn't spike when O.J. was acquitted.

What a way to go. The guy fucks up once in his life, and gets to finish it off in prison. Are you saying people involved in other crimes like D.U.I related death cases deserve to rot in jail for one mistake they made? Polanski is not a horrible monster. You know why this case hits so close to home for me? My brother was killed by a DUI, and the guy that did it is currently serving for it. He's got 15 years, no parole. At the time I thought it was a just ruling, but after some years passed I've gone through several sessions with my and his lawyers to see if he can get off earlier. He was just a regular dude, who one night fucked up royally. That doesn't deserve a lifetime of punishment.

Cold, straight judgment is the single biggest flaw of the system. People are not methodological robots, and make judgments without emotion based on nothing but cold assumptions is simply wrong. I agree with Tin, that it's scary how willing some people are to lynch the guy when technically he's innocent until proven guilty.

---------- Post added at 10:43 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:40 AM ----------

Dave;267526][quote=Icarus said:
Having had a 14 year old gf when I was 22, I personally don't put much weight in "statutory rape" when both people are reasonably young.

Top of the page.

---------- Post added at 09:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 AM ----------

Page #4 that is. I'm shocked nobody said anything about this.[/QUOTE]

Ok, yeah, Icarus, what the hell does a 22 year old have in common with a 14 year old? I'm afraid I'd shoot you too if that was my daughter.

Oct 2, 2009#146

Cat

Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

And she should be able to drive herself home.

Oct 2, 2009#147

Dave

Cat;267547][quote=Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

And she should be able to drive herself home.[/QUOTE]

And it should NOT BE A FUCKING CRIME TO DATE HER!

Oct 2, 2009#148

Espy

Dave;267526][quote=Icarus said:
Having had a 14 year old gf when I was 22, I personally don't put much weight in "statutory rape" when both people are reasonably young.

Top of the page.

---------- Post added at 09:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 AM ----------

Page #4 that is. I'm shocked nobody said anything about this.[/QUOTE]

I just... I just don't know what to say to be honest. I've never actually met anyone who admitted to dating what amounts to a child.

Oct 2, 2009#149

Cajungal

I read it too... but I've been trying to avoid posting here. I don't think it was a good move.

Oct 2, 2009#150

Cat

Dave;267548][quote=Cat;267547][quote=Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

And she should be able to drive herself home.[/quote]

And it should NOT BE A FUCKING CRIME TO DATE HER![/QUOTE]

Well if you want to kill the thrill...

Oct 2, 2009#151

Covar

sixpackshaker;267531][quote=Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

There needs to be adjustment for <18[/QUOTE]

why exactly?

Oct 2, 2009#152

Cajungal

Ahh, sweet taboo... :puke:

Oct 2, 2009#153

makare

Chazwozel said:
Even after he settled with the victim with an undisclosed sum and lived in exile for 30 years? What is it exactly about serving a prison sentence makes the crime magically go away? My feeling is that he's done his time in other ways, and for the U.S. system to slap him down afresh with new charges and put him away for a number of years in a maximum security prison is far worse than what he deserves. You're trying to pull the ol' 'use him as example' argument Steinman was. Rape cases are not going to spike up to untold amounts because Roman Polanski does not go to prison, just like murders didn't spike when O.J. was acquitted.

What a way to go. The guy fucks up once in his life, and gets to finish it off in prison. Are you saying people involved in other crimes like D.U.I related death cases deserve to rot in jail for one mistake they made? Polanski is not a horrible monster. You know why this case hits so close to home for me? My brother was killed by a DUI, and the guy that did it is currently serving for it. He's got 15 years, no parole. At the time I thought it was a just ruling, but after some years passed I've gone through several sessions with my and his lawyers to see if he can get off earlier. He was just a regular dude, who one night fucked up royally. That doesn't deserve a lifetime of punishment.

Cold, straight judgment is the single biggest flaw of the system. People are not methodological robots, and make judgments without emotion based on nothing but cold assumptions is simply wrong. I agree with Tin, that it's scary how willing some people are to lynch the guy when technically he's innocent until proven guilty.

Oct 2, 2009#154

Chazwozel

Covar;267563][quote=sixpackshaker;267531][quote=Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

There needs to be adjustment for <18[/QUOTE]

why exactly?[/QUOTE]

The formula doesn't work below 14 I think; 14/2 = 7 + 7 = 14

13/2 = 6.5 + 7 = 13.5

Oct 2, 2009#155

Ravenpoe

Dave;267526][quote=Icarus said:
Having had a 14 year old gf when I was 22, I personally don't put much weight in "statutory rape" when both people are reasonably young.

Top of the page.

---------- Post added at 09:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 AM ----------

Page #4 that is. I'm shocked nobody said anything about this.[/QUOTE]

How the hell did I miss that?!

My little sister is 14. If some 22 year old dude started trying to hang around her, I think I'd beat the shit out of him.

When I was 21, a 17 year old sister of a friend of mine had a crush on me, and even that made me feel a little skeevy. And in the state of Florida, that wouldn't have even been a crime.

Sorry Icarus... maybe you might want to not tell that story anymore.

Oct 2, 2009#156

Cat

Chazwozel;267570][quote=Covar;267563][quote=sixpackshaker;267531][quote=Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

There needs to be adjustment for <18[/quote]

why exactly?[/quote]

The formula doesn't work below 14 I think; 14/2 = 7 + 7 = 14

13/2 = 6.5 + 7 = 13.5[/QUOTE]

It works for the ages it is meant for.

Oct 2, 2009#157

Covar

What story?

Oct 2, 2009#158

Espy

Covar said:
What story?

The one we have right here in the chat transcripts.

Oct 2, 2009#159

Chibibar

makare1;267569][quote=Chazwozel said:
Even after he settled with the victim with an undisclosed sum and lived in exile for 30 years? What is it exactly about serving a prison sentence makes the crime magically go away? My feeling is that he's done his time in other ways, and for the U.S. system to slap him down afresh with new charges and put him away for a number of years in a maximum security prison is far worse than what he deserves. You're trying to pull the ol' 'use him as example' argument Steinman was. Rape cases are not going to spike up to untold amounts because Roman Polanski does not go to prison, just like murders didn't spike when O.J. was acquitted.

What a way to go. The guy fucks up once in his life, and gets to finish it off in prison. Are you saying people involved in other crimes like D.U.I related death cases deserve to rot in jail for one mistake they made? Polanski is not a horrible monster. You know why this case hits so close to home for me? My brother was killed by a DUI, and the guy that did it is currently serving for it. He's got 15 years, no parole. At the time I thought it was a just ruling, but after some years passed I've gone through several sessions with my and his lawyers to see if he can get off earlier. He was just a regular dude, who one night fucked up royally. That doesn't deserve a lifetime of punishment.

Cold, straight judgment is the single biggest flaw of the system. People are not methodological robots, and make judgments without emotion based on nothing but cold assumptions is simply wrong. I agree with Tin, that it's scary how willing some people are to lynch the guy when technically he's innocent until proven guilty.

My concern is the law and society. What message does it send to people if we are willing to turn a blind eye to crime, especially one so horrible? He made one mistake? No, he made two. The rape and running away. If he had stayed and gone to trial, maybe he would have been found innocent on the merits of the case. Maybe he would have been convicted and it would be over now. We will never know.

Our system of justice is based on the concept that only the judiciary can decide if an offender should be punished and only the judiciary can decide when that punishment is sufficient. My argument is not deterrence or making an example. My argument is Roman Polanksi was accused of committing a crime, he had every opportunity under the criminal law to defend against that crime, but he chose to run away. In running away he took it upon himself to undermine the right of the judiciary to decide his case but his behavior certainly does not erase the crime.

There is nothing cold about the law. Judgments are made by human beings and are based on centuries of precedent, however emotion and situation play a large part in it. If a jury decides that someone deserves the maximum punishment that is the jury's right. I am not sure what you keep referring to. The law is always bending and always changing. It is not written in stone and changes to fit many circumstances. Just because you personally do not like the outcome does not make it irrational and does not make it unjust.

And finally in criminal cases the victim is the law and until the offender "settles" with the law, it cannot be over.[/QUOTE]

The problem Chaz is this guy "exile" wasn't really an exile per se. He CHOSE to run away and live a life of luxury AND MADE A MOVIE. You don't have many freedom while in prison. To me, the self impose exile (he chose to ran away from the court) is not punishment. He still had access to everything a free person can access except going back home which to some might not be a bad punishment.

I am not advocating that a single murder put away for life (again it depend on the case) but this guy skip out on the court and fled AND commit a crime. If he had serve his time back then and let go, I wouldn't have much an issue (well personally I would but that is my personal view) since he did the time.

Right now, he did NOT do his time and skip out on the courts.

like I said before, if this was just a normal guy (a non famous person) would that person get the same treatment?

Oct 2, 2009#160

Cat

Ravenpoe said:
How the hell did I miss that?!

My little sister is 14. If some 22 year old dude started trying to hang around her, I think I'd beat the shit out of him.

Sorry Icarus... maybe you might want to not tell that story anymore.

:werd:

Oct 2, 2009#161

Espy

It's okay guys.
Polanski said, he shouldn’t go to jail just because he drugged a child then f**ked her in the ass while she begged him to stop, and that he’s already suffered enough by living his life in exile.
He agrees though that he should be punished in some very harsh way.
So he has proposed a solution:
Place him under house arrest.
Specifically, this house.

This chalet outside Gstaad, Switzerland, where singing bluebirds presumably pull your sheets back in the morning and Mr Sun gives you a big thumbs up. Oh that poor man. He’ll never make it!

*yanked from WWTDD.com

Oct 2, 2009#162

Chazwozel

Chibibar said:
like I said before, if this was just a normal guy (a non famous person) would that person get the same treatment?

Actually a regular person (with French citizenship) who had fled to France as Polanski had done probably would have gotten away Scott free. The only reason the D.A. kept going after him was because he is so famous. If he was a normal Joe, he wouldn't have been caught in Switzerland.

---------- Post added at 11:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 AM ----------

Espy said:
It's okay guys.
Polanski said, he shouldn’t go to jail just because he drugged a child then f**ked her in the ass while she begged him to stop, and that he’s already suffered enough by living his life in exile.
He agrees though that he should be punished in some very harsh way.
So he has proposed a solution:
Place him under house arrest.
Specifically, this house.

This chalet outside Gstaad, Switzerland, where singing bluebirds presumably pull your sheets back in the morning and Mr Sun gives you a big thumbs up. Oh that poor man. He’ll never make it!

*yanked from WWTDD.com

Shit, I'll go under house arrest in his stead, if that's the case.

Oct 2, 2009#163

sixpackshaker

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091002/us_time/08599192743200

Did Polanski's recent appeal of the Judges decision cost him his freedom?

He recently contacted LA District Attorney's office to look in to his allegations against the judge in the case.

Oct 2, 2009#164

Piotyr

Chazwozel;267570][quote=Covar;267563][quote=sixpackshaker;267531][quote=Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

There needs to be adjustment for <18[/QUOTE]

why exactly?[/QUOTE]

The formula doesn't work below 14 I think; 14/2 = 7 + 7 = 14

13/2 = 6.5 + 7 = 13.5[/QUOTE]

Neither does dating.

Oct 2, 2009#165

I

Icarus

Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

Oct 2, 2009#166

Iaculus

Chazwozel;267570][quote=Covar;267563][quote=sixpackshaker;267531][quote=Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

Oct 2, 2009#167

Cat

Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

:io:

Oct 2, 2009#168

Chazwozel

Iaculus;267698][quote=Chazwozel;267570][quote=Covar;267563][quote=sixpackshaker;267531][quote=Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

There needs to be adjustment for <18[/QUOTE]

why exactly?[/QUOTE]

The formula doesn't work below 14 I think; 14/2 = 7 + 7 = 14

13/2 = 6.5 + 7 = 13.5[/QUOTE]

Maybe it's subtly suggesting that you should be going for an older girlfriend, then? I see nothing wrong with that.[/QUOTE]

Well I was just commenting on why there may be an adjustment? I agree the formula works for the ages that it's intended to. Although, I remember having 'girlfriends' when I was 12 and 13... not that it amounted to anything more than holding said girlfriends hand and her books between classes, but still...

Oct 2, 2009#169

Iaculus

Chazwozel;267701][quote=Iaculus;267698][quote=Chazwozel;267570][quote=Covar;267563][quote=sixpackshaker;267531][quote=Covar said:
<your_age>/2 + 7 = bare minimal acceptable dating age

[/QUOTE]

Eh - it's never more than a ballpark figure, right? A general guide? A deviation of about a year probably isn't an issue, and at that age, the difference isn't terribly high. Only one if you're twelve or half if you're thirteen.

Oct 2, 2009#170

Chibibar

Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

Oct 2, 2009#171

I

Icarus

Chibibar;267731][quote=Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

In many society they are consider children. You can't get legally get into any contract agree with with a child under 18 without a parent consent.

Also not all 14 year old girl mentality are the same. Heck, I'm 37 and STILL play video games and people think I'm still a child. (at least my parents and relatives think so) I think the reason the age of 18 is consider adult is the cognitive process has been develop and more "hard coded" and able to make decisions (may not sound decision but they can)

until the law is changed that an adult is 14 instead of 18. She is a child.[/QUOTE]

You admit that not everyone at a certain age is the same - this was not a legal dispute (heck, that was why I gave that example - not everyone is the same) but to show that the law generalises and because of that, there's cases where it protects people who don't need protecting. If you both know you're ready, if you both know it's right, if you both really mean it and if you both know you're mature enough, are you really going to be so narrow minded to be blinded by a mere number which means nothing really?

The girl in question grew up being abused by alcoholic parents, had to take care of her little brother and had to really fight through her childhood and despite all that she had become a wonderful woman at such young an age. I was the only person she knew at the time who understood what she had gone through and who she could open up to, and that helped her immensely, something which she admitted so herself only a few months ago (yes we're still very close friends).

And then some narrow minded gits here dare to put in question this relationship based on a few figures without knowing any of the facts.

Oct 2, 2009#172

Chazwozel

Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

By perspective, you want us to be child molesters?

Nah, I've dated plenty, I've had plenty of perspective in my social/dating life; I've never had anything in common with a 14 year old girl in 8th grade- going on high school freshman - during my junior year of college. Sorry chief.

What did you do? While all your friends were out playing beer pong, you were at a Hanna Montana sleep over?

Oct 2, 2009#173

sixpackshaker

The number that should have went through your mind is 14 will get you 20.

Oct 2, 2009#174

Chazwozel

Icarus;267747][quote=Chibibar;267731][quote=Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

Oct 2, 2009#175

crono1224

Icarus;267747][quote=Chibibar;267731][quote=Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

Oct 2, 2009#176

Adammon

Chazwozel;267753][quote=Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

Oct 2, 2009#177

sixpackshaker

crono reminded me of a woman I dated when we were both 28. She was quite petite. To the point of buying clothes from the children's racks. The biggest problem we had was that she would leave her purse and ID behind. So if we stopped anywhere that needed ID, we would get kicked out. I still looked young enough then that I would get carded, and she looked 14 (half her age) and I still got treated like a dirty old man.

Oct 2, 2009#178

Chibibar

crono1224 said:
Yes cause we are going to take someones biased word that they are as mature as they say the person is. First of all 14 year old is in what middle school? Hasn't ever lived on her own, prolly never had a real job or even part time job, doesn't understand alot of how things work. The 22 year old is either in college/graduated college, or been working full time for at least a few years.

Its stage of the life differences, and beyond that its life experience differences. Fuck you can't even take her to an R rated movie, or bar, she can't fly on a plane without parents permision or her lying.

dude, I took care of my sister since I was 5. We live in the poorest place in Thailand and well.. food is scares. When we came back to the states my step dad and mother were busy working a lot. I took care of my sister at age 12. I can assure you while I have the responsibility, I can still be impressionable or even can be manipulated by the wrong people. Your situation may differ, but the law is design to protect the general public. I am sure if a woman of 20 might have an interest in me and make me think that she loves me I would probably fall for it then. Now.... no so much since I am more mature mentally. I may have been an "adult" in terms of responsibility, but I am not an adult in my head.

In this case
The guy drugged underage girl
The guy rapped underage girl

regardless of who is the girl. Drugging someone is a crime and raping is a crime. Of course having sex with a minor is ANOTHER crime, and skipping court is another crime.

that is 4 counts of crime here and you want this man to go scott free?

Oct 2, 2009#179

Cat

Icarus said:
You admit that not everyone at a certain age is the same - this was not a legal dispute (heck, that was why I gave that example - not everyone is the same) but to show that the law generalises and because of that, there's cases where it protects people who don't need protecting. If you both know you're ready, if you both know it's right, if you both really mean it and if you both know you're mature enough, are you really going to be so narrow minded to be blinded by a mere number which means nothing really?

The girl in question grew up being abused by alcoholic parents, had to take care of her little brother and had to really fight through her childhood and despite all that she had become a wonderful woman at such young an age. I was the only person she knew at the time who understood what she had gone through and who she could open up to, and that helped her immensely, something which she admitted so herself only a few months ago (yes we're still very close friends).

And then some narrow minded gits here dare to put in question this relationship based on a few figures without knowing any of the facts.

It's all right fellas, abused girls grow up real quick.

Oct 2, 2009#180

Allen, who is Quiet

lessons learned: if an underaged girl has been abused, it is not creepy to date them.

Oct 2, 2009#181

Chibibar

Cat;267779][quote=Icarus said:
You admit that not everyone at a certain age is the same - this was not a legal dispute (heck, that was why I gave that example - not everyone is the same) but to show that the law generalises and because of that, there's cases where it protects people who don't need protecting. If you both know you're ready, if you both know it's right, if you both really mean it and if you both know you're mature enough, are you really going to be so narrow minded to be blinded by a mere number which means nothing really?

The girl in question grew up being abused by alcoholic parents, had to take care of her little brother and had to really fight through her childhood and despite all that she had become a wonderful woman at such young an age. I was the only person she knew at the time who understood what she had gone through and who she could open up to, and that helped her immensely, something which she admitted so herself only a few months ago (yes we're still very close friends).

And then some narrow minded gits here dare to put in question this relationship based on a few figures without knowing any of the facts.

It's all right fellas, abused girls grow up real quick.[/QUOTE]

heh.. so I guess it is OK to have sex with underage girls who are abused and had to grow up fast? (I know you are being sarcastic Cat) you be surprise while they are "force" to grow up fast doesn't mean they are ready to be adults and thus the laws are in place to protect them (even if Icarus thinks they don't need protection)

Oct 2, 2009#182

Chazwozel

Chibibar;267785][quote=Cat;267779][quote=Icarus said:
You admit that not everyone at a certain age is the same - this was not a legal dispute (heck, that was why I gave that example - not everyone is the same) but to show that the law generalises and because of that, there's cases where it protects people who don't need protecting. If you both know you're ready, if you both know it's right, if you both really mean it and if you both know you're mature enough, are you really going to be so narrow minded to be blinded by a mere number which means nothing really?

The girl in question grew up being abused by alcoholic parents, had to take care of her little brother and had to really fight through her childhood and despite all that she had become a wonderful woman at such young an age. I was the only person she knew at the time who understood what she had gone through and who she could open up to, and that helped her immensely, something which she admitted so herself only a few months ago (yes we're still very close friends).

And then some narrow minded gits here dare to put in question this relationship based on a few figures without knowing any of the facts.

Oct 2, 2009#183

Dave

Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

Seriously? You are serious? And you say WE'RE the fucked up ones? Fucking pedophile.

Oct 2, 2009#184

Iaculus

Oct 2, 2009#185

Chibibar

Dave;267799][quote=Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

Seriously? You are serious? And you say WE'RE the fucked up ones? Fucking pedophile.[/QUOTE]

me think he is just playing Devil's advocate (I sure hope so)

Oct 2, 2009#186

Iaculus

Chibibar;267803][quote=Dave;267799][quote=Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

Oct 2, 2009#187

Chibibar

Iaculus;267806][quote=Chibibar;267803][quote=Dave;267799][quote=Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

Seriously? You are serious? And you say WE'RE the fucked up ones? Fucking pedophile.[/QUOTE]

me think he is just playing Devil's advocate (I sure hope so)[/QUOTE]

Aren't there better ways to do that than admitting to having a relationship with a fourteen-year-old, though? I mean, devil's advocate is when you take a position you don't necessarily agree with in order to shore up holes in the argument you do agree with.[/QUOTE]

not really. Playing devil's advocate without saying that you are usually mean either
1. you DO want to have sex with underage girls
2. you do support it but don't want to admit it

and later say "oh I'm just playing devil's advocate" at least that is how I look at it.

in this particular case, I don't agree with any type of pardon for Polanski. He commit the crime and ran, regardless of time and what he did, he needs to be punish for those crime.

Oct 2, 2009#188

Tinwhistler

Chazwozel said:
They don't need protection, they just need a 22 year old creep to manipulate them into having sex.

You know, most jurisdictions don't have a statute of limitations on statutory rape. The girl can file charges at any time in her adult life.

Something like this could surely come back to haunt someone some day, if they get away with it at the time.

Oct 2, 2009#189

SeraRelm

This thread needs to get slapped.

1: Teenagers think they know everything, so of course they're going to "know" it's right.
2: "But they're so mature for their age" means they're still that age, ergo still a child.
3: Bad life experiences don't mean you're ready to have sex, idiot.
4: 11 is a "mere number" too.

Oct 2, 2009#190

Iaculus

Chibibar;267809][quote=Iaculus;267806][quote=Chibibar;267803][quote=Dave;267799][quote=Icarus said:
Jesus Christ you are a close minded lot. No seriously, if you think that's messed up, you really need to get some perspective in life. If you think all 14 year old girls are still children, you need to get out more.

Seriously? You are serious? And you say WE'RE the fucked up ones? Fucking pedophile.[/QUOTE]

me think he is just playing Devil's advocate (I sure hope so)[/QUOTE]

Aren't there better ways to do that than admitting to having a relationship with a fourteen-year-old, though? I mean, devil's advocate is when you take a position you don't necessarily agree with in order to shore up holes in the argument you do agree with.[/QUOTE]

not really. Playing devil's advocate without saying that you are usually mean either
1. you DO want to have sex with underage girls
2. you do support it but don't want to admit it

and later say "oh I'm just playing devil's advocate" at least that is how I look at it.
[/QUOTE]

That's using it as an excuse, though, rather than actually doing it.

Oct 2, 2009#191

Chazwozel

In light of this new discussion. I'd like to officially change my stance on Polanski. I've never experienced it first hand nor known someone close enough, but thanks Icarus, you've shown me just how vomit inducing statutory rape is. Closet thing I've ever seen was a friend's sister get married at age 16 to a guy who was 18 years old. I thought that was pretty fucked up.

Although, I really don't think jailtime is going to solve much in the case regardless.

Oct 2, 2009#192

SeraRelm

Chazwozel said:
In light of this new discussion. I'd like to officially change my stance on Polanski. I've never experienced it first hand nor known someone close enough, but thanks Icarus, you've shown me just how vomit inducing statutory rape is.

Although, I really don't think jailtime is going to solve much in the case regardless.

"You're welcome!"

Except it was Iaculus.

Oct 2, 2009#193

Chazwozel

SeraRelm;267830][quote=Chazwozel said:
In light of this new discussion. I'd like to officially change my stance on Polanski. I've never experienced it first hand nor known someone close enough, but thanks Icarus, you've shown me just how vomit inducing statutory rape is.

Although, I really don't think jailtime is going to solve much in the case regardless.

"You're welcome!"

Except it was Iaculus.[/QUOTE]

No it was Icarus. Iaculus has the avatar, and I'm pretty sure is gonna be laughing now that you've confused him with a pedo.

Oct 2, 2009#194

Tinwhistler

Icarus said:
Having had a 14 year old gf when I was 22, I personally don't put much weight in "statutory rape"

Icarus.

Oct 2, 2009#195

Fun Size

No, Chaz is right, it was Icarus. It was only my rarely used sense of decorum that kept me from posting "But she was just a kid Icarus".

Which I guess I just posted anyway.

Oct 2, 2009#196

SeraRelm

Oh my.

Sorry Iaculus, you pedophile.

Oct 2, 2009#197

Iaculus

SeraRelm said:
Oh my.

Sorry Iaculus, you pedophile.

Eh, I can live with it.

The torch-and-pitchfork mobs have difficulty finding parking space around my house as it is.

Oct 2, 2009#198

I

Icarus

Dear God, so much stupidity I don't know where to start

a) you're ignorant if you think it's impossible for someone to be more mature than others their own age. Considering 16 is perfectly legal, and she was a mere month away from becoming 15, do you seriously think that a year will suddenly make a huge difference? Ignorance ignorance ignorance.

b) She was in High school, not middle school.

c) she had a job since she was 11 and she was more responsible than me in many areas.

d) you're all so narrow minded you think relationships are all about sex which says more about you all than about me. Romance does NOT equal sex - intimacy does NOT equal sex. I feel pity for you if that's all you can think about. I'm not going to talk about the details - that's a private matter.

e) Tell me how she couldn't possibly love me when she still does, 7 years later? Are you seriously so ignorant to think it's impossible for someone her age to know what love is, simply because most other girls her age don't?

f) it's not because YOU never met someone several years younger than you who you can't connect with that it's impossible - the world does not revolve around you. Me and her clicked on every level and that's what matters - I don't give a shit about your personal experiences, I know mine.

g) I never pushed myself on her AT ALL so keep your "creepy" comments to yourselves, jack ass.

And how the hell could you just go "oh it's bad for her" when she admits that I brought much needed stability in her life and that it did her a lot of good. How big a MORON do you need to be to think that? Seriously, the arrogance coming from small and narrow minded people here is baffling - I even saved her fucking life at one moment in time, yet you got the gall to say it was wrong simply because your mind is too primitive to understand?

And yes I will defend this full out, because you're desecrating one of the best moments in my life and you're insulting her to boot with your petty comments.

Oct 2, 2009#199

Chibibar

Icarus: I am not condeming you and your relationship but I ask you this

Did you
Drug a 14 year old and rape her?

If not, how does that relate to the original case in question?

The original topic was about sex pure and simple. It was about a man drugged a girl and raped her (basically sex without consent) He even ADMIT it. the whole point (originally) on this thread was how all these celeb is trying to get him NOT to be punish by law.

If you happen to drug that girl and raped her...... then I might condemn you since that is a despicable act, but if you didn't then, we are talking about totally two different situation now isn't it?

Oct 2, 2009#200

Cat

It's too over the top now.

Oct 2, 2009#201

makare

Icarus said:
Dear God, so much stupidity I don't know where to start

d) you're all so narrow minded you think relationships are all about sex which says more about you all than about me. Romance does NOT equal sex - intimacy does NOT equal sex. I feel pity for you if that's all you can think about. I'm not going to talk about the details - that's a private matter.

Statutory rape involves sexual contact... I officially do not know what you have been talking about.

I still think that is one of the most bizarre things I have ever witnessed someone trying to justify, in person. I mean I have heard of it but never seen it myself.

Oct 2, 2009#202

Allen, who is Quiet

He's right. These insults and rationalizations are definitive proof that being older than 18 and being romantically involved with 14 year old girls isn't creepy.

Oct 2, 2009#203

I

Icarus

Chibibar said:
Icarus: I am not condeming you and your relationship but I ask you this

Did you
Drug a 14 year old and rape her?

If not, how does that relate to the original case in question?

The original topic was about sex pure and simple. It was about a man drugged a girl and raped her (basically sex without consent) He even ADMIT it. the whole point (originally) on this thread was how all these celeb is trying to get him NOT to be punish by law.

If you happen to drug that girl and raped her...... then I might condemn you since that is a despicable act, but if you didn't then, we are talking about totally two different situation now isn't it?

I'm responding to those who called me creepy, said she couldn't possible love it, said that what we had was wrong, that she was immature, etc. I can't let such ignorance stand, I'm sorry. I didn't start it after all. After a dozen such comments, I had enough.

---------- Post added at 08:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 PM ----------

Allen said:
He's right. These insults and rationalizations are definitive proof that being older than 18 and being romantically involved with 14 year old girls isn't creepy.

"Creepy" is subjective. Gay people are "creepy" by lots of people. Senior people having sex is "creepy" by many. Heck, ugly people having sex is "creepy" too to some! Fuck creepy. That says more about the people using that word than anything else.

Oct 2, 2009#204

SeraRelm

Yeah but they aren't having sex with kids, ya creep.

Oct 2, 2009#205

Fun Size

Icarus;267872][quote=Allen said:
He's right. These insults and rationalizations are definitive proof that being older than 18 and being romantically involved with 14 year old girls isn't creepy.

aranoid:

How ugly are we talkin' here?

Oct 2, 2009#206

makare

Tonight's episode of "WTF is He Talking About" Theatre was brought to you by Icarus.

Seriously.

Oct 2, 2009#207

Allen, who is Quiet

He's right. These insults and rationalizations are definitive proof that being older than 18 and being romantically involved with 14 year old girls isn't something that only Japanese males consider acceptable

Oct 2, 2009#208

Chibibar

Icarus;267872][quote=Chibibar said:
Icarus: I am not condeming you and your relationship but I ask you this

Did you
Drug a 14 year old and rape her?

If not, how does that relate to the original case in question?

The original topic was about sex pure and simple. It was about a man drugged a girl and raped her (basically sex without consent) He even ADMIT it. the whole point (originally) on this thread was how all these celeb is trying to get him NOT to be punish by law.

If you happen to drug that girl and raped her...... then I might condemn you since that is a despicable act, but if you didn't then, we are talking about totally two different situation now isn't it?

I'm responding to those who called me creepy, said she couldn't possible love it, said that what we had was wrong, that she was immature, etc. I can't let such ignorance stand, I'm sorry. I didn't start it after all. After a dozen such comments, I had enough.[/QUOTE]

I think mainly cause you brought your story into a thread that started out as older man drug and raped a girl and should he go/no go to prison after many years of self exile.

people have "sex with underage" is a no no... so when you post your story in THIS thread, it is natural to assume you are ok with it.

Now of course in history there are many relationship that worked out with a legal vs a minor. If you think about it, when I was 18 my wife was 11 at the time. Granted I met her at 20 and love her since. We been together for 9 years now and going, but I do get a little creep out and probably end up in jail if I was dating a 11 year old at the time when I was 18.

the problem is general public and human nature are usually NOT ready at that early age. Young people are easily impression by older person. It is possible that one could understand and find love at that age, but it is hard to tell with all the other girl of the same age. Do you see the difference? The main issue is that you got yourself a special case which is not hold true to the rest of the teenage "romance" "rape" "sex abuse" that is going on with all the statistics in the world. This is why there are laws to protect them all.

Now if you love the girl and never had sex with her, that is cool. The whole issue is the sex part (well in this thread is rape part) which is a big no-no unless you happen to enjoy being raped in which case you might need to seek a partner who are into those kind of things.

There are too many people taking advantage of children and mold them or guide them into things and make them think it is their idea. That is the creepy part. There are ALWAYS exception but of course you have the law of society to worry about.

Oct 2, 2009#209

Iaculus

Chibibar said:
Now of course in history there are many relationship that worked out with a legal vs a minor. If you think about it, when I was 18 my wife was 11 at the time. Granted I met her at 20 and love her since. We been together for 9 years now and going, but I do get a little creep out and probably end up in jail if I was dating a 11 year old at the time when I was 18.

Ah... just so we're clear, were you twenty when you met, or was she?

Just wanted to be sure.

Oct 2, 2009#210

Chibibar

Iaculus;267886][quote=Chibibar said:
Now of course in history there are many relationship that worked out with a legal vs a minor. If you think about it, when I was 18 my wife was 11 at the time. Granted I met her at 20 and love her since. We been together for 9 years now and going, but I do get a little creep out and probably end up in jail if I was dating a 11 year old at the time when I was 18.

Ah... just so we're clear, were you twenty when you met, or was she?

Just wanted to be sure.[/QUOTE]

I was 27 and she was 20

Oct 2, 2009#211

Iaculus

Chibibar;267887][quote=Iaculus;267886][quote=Chibibar said:
Now of course in history there are many relationship that worked out with a legal vs a minor. If you think about it, when I was 18 my wife was 11 at the time. Granted I met her at 20 and love her since. We been together for 9 years now and going, but I do get a little creep out and probably end up in jail if I was dating a 11 year old at the time when I was 18.

Oct 2, 2009#212

Chibibar

Iaculus;267890][quote=Chibibar;267887][quote=Iaculus;267886][quote=Chibibar said:
Now of course in history there are many relationship that worked out with a legal vs a minor. If you think about it, when I was 18 my wife was 11 at the time. Granted I met her at 20 and love her since. We been together for 9 years now and going, but I do get a little creep out and probably end up in jail if I was dating a 11 year old at the time when I was 18.

Ah... just so we're clear, were you twenty when you met, or was she?

Just wanted to be sure.[/QUOTE]

I was 27 and she was 20[/QUOTE]

Yeah, figured as much. Just sounded like you met her when she was thirteen, which I know you didn't mean but amused me nonetheless.[/QUOTE]

well. It is funny cause when I talk to my wife about events like my first job vs her first job and such. She always goes, "Do you know how old I was then?" so age difference does have some impact. I told her my life in High school and she always goes, "but, I was in elementary school then"

While I love my wife with all my heart, it does creep me out what if I met her earlier even 3 years earlier or 4 years earlier might change things. (i.e. I would be 23 vs 16)

Oct 2, 2009#213

Espy

There are so many jokes in her that I don't even know where to begin. I really don't. I hate this thread because I can't decide which direction to take it in.

I think I'm going to go watch the South Park "NAMBLA" episode now. That should be a good starting place.

Oct 2, 2009#214

Iaculus

Espy said:
There are so many jokes in her that I don't even know where to begin. I really don't. I hate this thread because I can't decide which direction to take it in.

I think I'm going to go watch the South Park "NAMBLA" episode now. That should be a good starting place.

Hey, why not go for all of them at once?

Oct 2, 2009#215

Cat

Espy said:
There are so many jokes in her

Whooooa, that's not all that's in her :smick:

Oct 2, 2009#216

ZenMonkey

Icarus said:
Dear God, so much stupidity I don't know where to start

Swap "stupidity" with "creepy horribleness" and I could not possibly agree more.

Think I'm going to stick these scissors in my eye next time I decide to click on this thread.

Oct 2, 2009#217

Tinwhistler

And yes, at FOURTEEN, one year makes a hell of a difference in someone's maturity, outlook on life, etc.

Oct 2, 2009#218

Espy

Cat;267928][quote=Espy said:
There are so many jokes in her

Whooooa, that's not all that's in her :smick:[/QUOTE]

LOL, you know what? I'm just gonna leave that typo right there.

Oct 2, 2009#219

Cat

Espy said:
I think I'm going to go watch the South Park "NAMBLA" episode now. That should be a good starting place.

:clap Doing the same now.

Oct 2, 2009#220

Chazwozel

Icarus said:
Dear God, so much stupidity I don't know where to start

a) you're ignorant if you think it's impossible for someone to be more mature than others their own age. Considering 16 is perfectly legal, and she was a mere month away from becoming 15, do you seriously think that a year will suddenly make a huge difference? Ignorance ignorance ignorance.

b) She was in High school, not middle school.

c) she had a job since she was 11 and she was more responsible than me in many areas.

d) you're all so narrow minded you think relationships are all about sex which says more about you all than about me. Romance does NOT equal sex - intimacy does NOT equal sex. I feel pity for you if that's all you can think about. I'm not going to talk about the details - that's a private matter.

e) Tell me how she couldn't possibly love me when she still does, 7 years later? Are you seriously so ignorant to think it's impossible for someone her age to know what love is, simply because most other girls her age don't?

f) it's not because YOU never met someone several years younger than you who you can't connect with that it's impossible - the world does not revolve around you. Me and her clicked on every level and that's what matters - I don't give a shit about your personal experiences, I know mine.

g) I never pushed myself on her AT ALL so keep your \"creepy\" comments to yourselves, jack ass.

And how the hell could you just go \"oh it's bad for her\" when she admits that I brought much needed stability in her life and that it did her a lot of good. How big a MORON do you need to be to think that? Seriously, the arrogance coming from small and narrow minded people here is baffling - I even saved her fucking life at one moment in time, yet you got the gall to say it was wrong simply because your mind is too primitive to understand?

And yes I will defend this full out, because you're desecrating one of the best moments in my life and you're insulting her to boot with your petty comments.

So how were those Hannah Montana concerts? Did you pretend to be her dad when you picked her up from school?

Dude, she was 14/15, whatever... It's a taboo to be romantically intimate with an adolescent when you're almost 10 years her senior sex or no sex. It's been mentioned before, you can rant over and over again about how mature she was for her age, but the bottom line is a 15 year old is still maturing, developing, and is a big raging sack of hormones. That's fact for anyone at that age. No matter how much you want to spin it.

Did you ever stop and think that she came from a broken home and you took (maybe unknowingly) advantage of that? Did you ever stop and think that as an adult it was your responsibility to NOT allow that sort of relationship to develop. The stability in her life that you're referring to would have been filled any responsible adult figure. Are you too stupid to see that she had some major daddy issues? You pretty much manipulated a disturbed child. Nothing more.

And no, there is nothing wrong with an adult having an enduring friendship with a young person, but it is that adult's place to know where the line is drawn and not to cross it because a teenage child doesn't.

I'm sure as hell glad she wasn't my kid, because you'd be dead and buried in my backyard. Of course that was the problem to begin with...daddy issues... I'm sure if her parents were all there, you'd have your ass locked away or a shotgun pellet lodged in your ass.

Oh here's an interview with a pedophile, he's pretty much giving out the same rational as you are:

Oct 2, 2009#221

Wasabi Poptart

Chibibar said:
well. It is funny cause when I talk to my wife about events like my first job vs her first job and such. She always goes, "Do you know how old I was then?" so age difference does have some impact. I told her my life in High school and she always goes, "but, I was in elementary school then"

While I love my wife with all my heart, it does creep me out what if I met her earlier even 3 years earlier or 4 years earlier might change things. (i.e. I would be 23 vs 16)

I met my husband when I was 30 and he was 24. I remember when I first realized that he was a few months from being born when I went to see Star Wars with my parents. It was kind of funny. Then I realized he was only 11 when I got my driver's license. It was too icky to think about. We try not to discuss those things too much.

Oct 2, 2009#222

ElJuski

WELLLLP THIS THREAD IS FUCKING CREEPY AS FUCK

GOOD GAME ICARUS

---------- Post added at 12:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:05 AM ----------

YOU CREEPY PEDOFUCK

Oct 2, 2009#223

Adammon

Chazwozel said:
It's been mentioned before, you can rant over and over again about how mature she was for her age, but the bottom line is a 15 year old is still maturing, developing, and is a big raging sack of hormones.

If anything, talking about how mature she was highlights how immature he was.

Oct 2, 2009#224

North_Ranger

Allllllllllrighty...

Where are my pictures of Lockes, Lochs and Matlocks...?

Oct 2, 2009#225

Chibibar

Iaculus: I think Chaz might be right and he could be wrong. When a person is from a broken home, usually try to find a role model or someone that will care for them. I think this is one of the reason gangs are popular now-a-days. Parents (usually both) are so busy trying to survive in this economy and don't have time for kids.

I could be possible she look up to you since you are the adult figure who give her support that she wanted.

Oct 2, 2009#226

Adammon

Chibibar said:
Iaculus: I think Chaz might be right and he could be wrong. When a person is from a broken home, usually try to find a role model or someone that will care for them. I think this is one of the reason gangs are popular now-a-days. Parents (usually both) are so busy trying to survive in this economy and don't have time for kids.

I could be possible she look up to you since you are the adult figure who give her support that she wanted.

Poor Iaculus. You mean Icarus.

Oct 2, 2009#227

Philosopher B.

This may be one of the more disturbing threads I've seen come from this community.

/posting from a proxy

Oct 2, 2009#228

SeraRelm

Adammon;268018][quote=Chibibar said:
Iaculus: I think Chaz might be right and he could be wrong. When a person is from a broken home, usually try to find a role model or someone that will care for them. I think this is one of the reason gangs are popular now-a-days. Parents (usually both) are so busy trying to survive in this economy and don't have time for kids.

I could be possible she look up to you since you are the adult figure who give her support that she wanted.

Poor Iaculus. You mean Icarus.[/QUOTE]

Oct 3, 2009#229

Iaculus

Ladies and gentlemen, I did not have sexual relations with that teenager.

Oct 3, 2009#230

Laurelai

Iaculus said:
Ladies and gentlemen, I did not have sexual relations with that teenager.

Tell that to your signature!

Oct 3, 2009#231

SeraRelm

It's a never ending story...

Crap! *shoos her away* Run for it!

Oct 3, 2009#232

Iaculus

Laurelai;268050][quote=Iaculus said:
Ladies and gentlemen, I did not have sexual relations with that teenager.

Tell that to your signature![/QUOTE]

aranoid:

... Hey, look, what's that shiny thing over there?

Oct 3, 2009#233

The Lovely Boehner

14 year olds, dude.

Oct 3, 2009#234

ElJuski

Charlie Dont Surf said:
14 year olds, dude.

Yeah, we learn about them in my teenage psychology book. Because, you know, they're not at adult levels of thinking. Ask Piaget, or Erikson, Or Kohler.

OR YOU CAN ASK ICARUS AND SAY THAT LOVIN' DEM HOT FRESHLY-BOOBED BITCHES IS HOTTTTTTT

Oct 3, 2009#235

Iaculus

Charlie Dont Surf said:
14 year olds, dude.

... Are they naturally shiny?

Creeepy...

Oct 3, 2009#236

North_Ranger

Locked. Check.

Throw away the key. Check.

Burn my clothes. Check.

Forums