• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Roman Polanski be punished for his crime?

Should Roman Polanski be punished for his crime?


  • Total voters
    100

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
On the one hand, he's an old man who is unlikely to reoffend (certainly not in the United States), and his victim has stated that she doesn't want him to be punished. It seems unlikely that anyone at all would benefit from Polanski's incarceration.

On the other hand, he committed a serious crime and plead guilty to it. There is no statute of limitations here. Additionally, he is a fugitive from justice, which makes him no different than an escaped convict.

Do you think Polanski should be punished for his crime? (Note: I'm not asking if you think the Swiss should extradite him, as that's a completely separate issue. I'm just asking if he should be punished from a criminal justice perspective.)
 
Last edited:
On the one hand, he's an old man who is unlikely to reoffend (certainly not in the United States), and his victim has stated that she doesn't want him to be punished. It seems unlikely that anyone at all would benefit from Polanski's incarceration.

On the other hand, he committed a serious crime and plead guilty to it. There is no statute of limitations here. Additionally, he is a fugitive from justice, which makes him no different than an escaped convict.

Do you think Polanski should be punished for his crime? (Note: I'm not asking if you think the Swiss should extradite him, as that's a completely separate issue. I'm just asking if he should be punished from a criminal justice perspective.)
he should. was the victim's mother ever charged with anything?
 
yep. this child molester's not exempt from the law.
 
yep. this child molester's not exempt from the law.
No
Lets show some intelligence here. This man is 72; the "victim" wishes for no punishment, as I have read; so, I see no gain.
Its silly to waste the money.. and for what ?
Justice?
In real life, how often do we have this ?
Revenge ?
Yeah - that works every time.....down thru the ages.....
Anyway, Polanski's claim to fame will be as a child molester, much as Barry Bonds will be noted as a cheater.
Note the general difference between cons and libs.
 
Last edited:
he should. was the victim's mother ever charged with anything?

For what? Polanski raped the girl on the second time he was with her. The mom prised the information from her daughter after finding topless polaroids whilst she was at the second appt. She called the cops immediately.

At least according to a story I read yesterday, that is what happened.


Polanski's Next Escape - The Daily Beast
 
On the other hand, he committed a serious crime and plead guilty to it. There is no statute of limitations here. Additionally, he is a fugitive from justice, which makes him no different than an escaped convict.

I am a law and order type. He is guilty of a crime with no statute of limitations, and as such should be punished as the law calls for.
 
For what? Polanski raped the girl on the second time he was with her. The mom prised the information from her daughter after finding topless polaroids whilst she was at the second appt. She called the cops immediately.

At least according to a story I read yesterday, that is what happened.


Polanski's Next Escape - The Daily Beast
okay....i heard the mother essentially offered her up. probably not.
 
On the one hand, he's an old man who is unlikely to reoffend (certainly not in the United States), and his victim has stated that she doesn't want him to be punished. It seems unlikely that anyone at all would benefit from Polanski's incarceration.

On the other hand, he committed a serious crime and plead guilty to it. There is no statute of limitations here. Additionally, he is a fugitive from justice, which makes him no different than an escaped convict.

Do you think Polanski should be punished for his crime? (Note: I'm not asking if you think the Swiss should extradite him, as that's a completely separate issue. I'm just asking if he should be punished from a criminal justice perspective.)

:rofl WTF is "other?"
 
No
Lets show some intelligence here.

yes, lets.

This man is 72;

so the law doesn't apply to 72 year olds?

the "victim" wishes for no punishment, as I have read; so, I see no gain.

so just because the victim has the decency to forgive and move on with her life that negates the confession?

what about the fact that he also broke the law by running from his crime? Just because he got away and over the year's the victim has forgiven negates the fact that he should be held responsible for his actions?

That's a great message to send to all the potential criminals out there.

Its silly to waste the money.. and for what ?
Justice?

It's not silly to have and enforce laws

In real life, how often do we have this ?
Revenge ?
Yeah - that works every time.....down thru the ages.....

point?

Anyway, Polanski's claim to fame will be as a child molester, much as Barry Bonds will be noted as a cheater.
Note the general difference between cons and libs.

that liberals wish to let child molesters go scot free because they skipped town for a certain period of time, breaking additional laws in the process?

.....
No
Lets show some intelligence here.

bears repeating
 
Last edited:
Do you think Polanski should be punished for his crime?

Yes he should be punished. THe fact he fled the country to avoid punishment is irrelevant and should not be used a ticket to avoid prison by other scum as a way to get away crime.
 
He should be punished. It is important to show that being rich and famous enough to flee the country does not excuse you from justice.
 
yes, lets.



so the law doesn't apply to 72 year olds?



so just because the victim has the decency to forgive and move on with her life that negates the confession?

what about the fact that he also broke the law by running from his crime? Just because he got away and over the year's the victim has forgiven negates the fact that he should be held responsible for his actions?

That's a great message to send to all the potential criminals out there.



It's not silly to have and enforce laws



point?



that liberals wish to let child molesters go scot free because they skipped town for a certain period of time, breaking additional laws in the process?

.....

bears repeating
i'm not so sure the out of court settlement of the lawsuit didn't contribute greatly to the victim's "forgiveness".
 
i'm not so sure the out of court settlement of the lawsuit didn't contribute greatly to the victim's "forgiveness".

certainly a possibility, but it doesn't negate a confession and the fact that he was a fugitive from justice for years.
 
yep. this child molester's not exempt from the law.

you say this knowing that the woman involved has said she wants it over that it is ruining her life. interesting. i guess no one really does care about this woman. it is a shame.
 
you say this knowing that the woman involved has said she wants it over that it is ruining her life. interesting. i guess no one really does care about this woman. it is a shame.

I care about the law. If you break the law, you deserve the punishment.
 
you say this knowing that the woman involved has said she wants it over that it is ruining her life. interesting. i guess no one really does care about this woman. it is a shame.
We promote justice even when it hurts people.
 
you say this knowing that the woman involved has said she wants it over that it is ruining her life. interesting. i guess no one really does care about this woman. it is a shame.

and who's to blame for all this? For ruining her life? POLANSKI.

I do not think she should be forced to testify, he already confessed. Plus they need to charge him for running.

I think it's a shame that anyone would oppose his prosecution for raping a defenseless young girl. Then running to france and living his life as if he'd done nothing wrong.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps you might want to get the facts straight before you render an opinion on this matter:

First of all, Polanski entered into a plea agreement with the District Attorney which the judge reneged on. It is extremely rare for a judge to interpose themselves in matters such as this. The Judge does not have the same breadth of information regarding the case that the defense and the prosecutor have. Had the judge not reneged, Polanski would have received a "time served" offer. The judge wanted him to serve multiple years in prison.

Perhaps the reason for the discrepancy was that there was a lot of things unknown regarding the case and likely difficult for the prosecution to get a conviction. What is clear is that this is not the case of a pedophile picking up a 13 year old and raping them. This case involved the girl and her mother essentially attempting to get a break in Hollywood through sexual favors. That doesn't make it right, but it makes it a different type of case. It is also unclear whether Polanski actually knew the girl was underage. Most accounts indicate that the girl looked and carried herself as substantially older.


Because of these factors, the District Attorney understood that they had problems with proof in the case and very likely would not be able to get a conviction. As a result, they offered a plea deal to Polanski which he accepted.

What Polanski did and his fleeing are certainly not commendable, however, many of the problems were created by the judge who was not aware of the weakness of the DA's case.

Polanski should be sentenced pursuant to the original deal which was "time served" and probation.
 
Do you think Polanski should be punished for his crime? (Note: I'm not asking if you think the Swiss should extradite him, as that's a completely separate issue. I'm just asking if he should be punished from a criminal justice perspective.)

I agree they are separate issues. Yes I belive he should be punished if obtained legally which I believe is the case here.
 
and who's to blame for all this? For ruining her life? POLANSKI.

Well...according to her, the courts and media circus have caused her more harm than Polanski ever did. Take that for what you will.

other said:
I do not think she should be forced to testify, he already confessed. Plus they need to charge him for running.

I agree that he should be brought to justice for his crime, but I disagree that he should be charged for running. The statute of limitations HAS expired for that crime, and since it's not a major crime (unlike his original offense) I think that one should be allowed to slide. However, he should be extradited to the United States to face sentencing for the crime to which he pleaded guilty.

other said:
I think it's a shame that anyone would oppose his prosecution for raping a defenseless young girl. Then running to france and living his life as if he'd done nothing wrong.

Actually he doesn't even need to be prosecuted; he already pleaded guilty to that crime. He just needs to be sentenced.

This is a big cultural divide between the Anglosphere and continental Europe. I think we Americans are more likely to believe that no one should be above the law, and that the time since the original offense does not lessen it (at least in some cases). It seems like the French are more likely to consider a person's accomplishments and overall character instead of just the actual offense.

I'm not saying that one view is right or wrong...but I would tend to agree that he should face the consequences of his actions despite the elapsed time and despite his other accomplishments.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps you might want to get the facts straight before you render an opinion on this matter:

First of all, Polanski entered into a plea agreement with the District Attorney which the judge reneged on. It is extremely rare for a judge to interpose themselves in matters such as this. The Judge does not have the same breadth of information regarding the case that the defense and the prosecutor have. Had the judge not reneged, Polanski would have received a "time served" offer. The judge wanted him to serve multiple years in prison.

Perhaps the reason for the discrepancy was that there was a lot of things unknown regarding the case and likely difficult for the prosecution to get a conviction. What is clear is that this is not the case of a pedophile picking up a 13 year old and raping them. This case involved the girl and her mother essentially attempting to get a break in Hollywood through sexual favors. That doesn't make it right, but it makes it a different type of case. It is also unclear whether Polanski actually knew the girl was underage. Most accounts indicate that the girl looked and carried herself as substantially older.


Because of these factors, the District Attorney understood that they had problems with proof in the case and very likely would not be able to get a conviction. As a result, they offered a plea deal to Polanski which he accepted.

What Polanski did and his fleeing are certainly not commendable, however, many of the problems were created by the judge who was not aware of the weakness of the DA's case.

Polanski should be sentenced pursuant to the original deal which was "time served" and probation.

This I can agree with. If he had worked out a deal with the district attorney, it was very unprofessional for the judge to renege. He should be brought to justice with whatever terms to which he originally agreed.
 
Well...according to her, the courts and media circus have caused her more harm than Polanski ever did. Take that for what you will.

Well that is unfortunate, but the law needs to be followed.

I agree that he should be brought to justice for his crime, but I disagree that he should be charged for running. The statute of limitations HAS expired for that crime, and since it's not a major crime (unlike his original offense) I think that one should be allowed to slide. However, he should be extradited to the United States to face sentencing for the crime to which he pleaded guilty.

Well, if the SoL is up, then it's up. So I agree here.

Actually he doesn't even need to be prosecuted; he already pleaded guilty to that crime. He just needs to be sentenced.

that's what I meant... thanks for that

This is a big cultural divide between the Anglosphere and continental Europe. I think we Americans are more likely to believe that no one should be above the law, and that the time since the original offense does not lessen it (at least in some cases). It seems like the French are more likely to consider a person's accomplishments and overall character instead of just the actual offense.

I'm not saying that one view is right or wrong...but I would tend to agree that he should face the consequences of his actions despite the elapsed time and despite his other accomplishments.

Yes. The crime was in America.
 
Perhaps you might want to get the facts straight before you render an opinion on this matter:

I'll admit, I didn't study the legal process, involved... my argument was that whatever judgement was rendered should stand and that he should be held accountable for his actions, not living it up in along the champs d'elysee.
 
On the one hand, he's an old man who is unlikely to reoffend (certainly not in the United States), and his victim has stated that she doesn't want him to be punished. It seems unlikely that anyone at all would benefit from Polanski's incarceration.

On the other hand, he committed a serious crime and plead guilty to it. There is no statute of limitations here. Additionally, he is a fugitive from justice, which makes him no different than an escaped convict.

Do you think Polanski should be punished for his crime? (Note: I'm not asking if you think the Swiss should extradite him, as that's a completely separate issue. I'm just asking if he should be punished from a criminal justice perspective.)

Yes he should be punished as not doing so will just make other criminals realize that they can just leave the country and once their old not get punished. As you said there are no statute of limitations.
 
I care about the law. If you break the law, you deserve the punishment.

so continue to punish her. this issue was 30 years ago. why bring it into her life again. he has not been in the US and there has been no repeat. he is 76 years old for Christ's sake. if the woman had not asked for this to be dropped than maybe you have a point. she has. done deal in my mind. no charges, no crime, no criminal, no time to be served.
 
Back
Top Bottom