• 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
other said:
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.
Click to expand...

i think this is just the inept American courts trying to show that there may be someone out there they have the ability to catch. i am really surprised that France wasn't invaded by Bush over this for harboring a criminal from the US. maybe he could have actually caught someone he went after. unlike Bin Laden, where is he by the way. maybe they can ask Roman when they drag him into court.

he went to France because he had a home there. makes sense to me. he went home.

he excepted the plea on bad advise from his attorney. mistrial. now she wants the charges dropped. have a nice life you two.
 
disneydude said:
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.
Click to expand...

a voice of sanity. thank you
 
"so now the justice (if justice at all) is hurting the woman and this is a good thing in your mind? why?" - katiegrrl0

1. The victim does not determine what justice is. Society does.

2. There is still the matter of punishment. He raped a 13 year old child. Normal people consider this punishable.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
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.
Click to expand...

The reason it is 30 years ago is he fled justice. It is his fault justice is delayed.
 
The Baron said:
"so now the justice (if justice at all) is hurting the woman and this is a good thing in your mind? why?" - katiegrrl0

1. The victim does not determine what justice is. Society does.

2. There is still the matter of punishment. He raped a 13 year old child. Normal people consider this punishable.
Click to expand...

maybe back than it was punishable. now it is asinine and you should be looking for your Bin Laden and not some 76 year old film maker that is easy enough to find. why now? what Polanski has traveled the world these many years? all of a sudden the US gets a giant hard on for him and wants him arrested. give my a break. this is why your country is such a mess. how much money is all of this costing to do this.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
maybe back than it was punishable.
Click to expand...

Uhh it's still punishable. He pleaded guilty, then fled the country. There is no statute of limitations for that. And even if he didn't, he committed a serious felony...there are no statutes of limitations for those anyway.

katiegrrl0 said:
now it is asinine and you should be looking for your Bin Laden and not some 76 year old film maker that is easy enough to find.
Click to expand...

Huh? What in the world does Bin Laden have to do with anything?

katiegrrl0 said:
why now? what Polanski has traveled the world these many years? all of a sudden the US gets a giant hard on for him and wants him arrested. give my a break.
Click to expand...

The US has wanted him arrested and extradited for decades, which is why he hasn't set foot in the US since then. This is merely the first time a nation has complied.

katiegrrl0 said:
this is why your country is such a mess.
Click to expand...

Really? THIS is why? Because of Roman Polanski? Do go on. You're on a roll. :lol:
 
Kandahar said:
Uhh it's still punishable. He pleaded guilty, then fled the country. There is no statute of limitations for that. And even if he didn't, he committed a serious felony...there are no statutes of limitations for those anyway.
Huh? What in the world does Bin Laden have to do with anything?
The US has wanted him arrested and extradited for decades, which is why he hasn't set foot in the US since then. This is merely the first time a nation has complied.
Really? THIS is why? Because of Roman Polanski? Do go on. You're on a roll. :lol:
Click to expand...

he plead guilty and made a deal. the deal was taken back. he was lied to so that makes the entire confession of no value. it was bad advise from his attorney. mistrial.

well i was just thinking you should spend the money catching someone that might actually be a criminal. Bin Laden for instance.
he has been all over the world since this time. it is not like he was hiding. how did they get the Swiss to agree to this? he was to Zurich before.
this is just dumb on so many levels it is funny. i am sitting here laughing at all the responses of those that think this is a good idea. for Christ's sake the US needs to find something to do with their time. it is really getting scary.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
for Christ's sake the US needs to find something to do with their time. it is really getting scary.
Click to expand...

What do you consider more important than justice?
 
katiegrrl0 said:
he plead guilty and made a deal. the deal was taken back. he was lied to so that makes the entire confession of no value. it was bad advise from his attorney. mistrial.
Click to expand...

Like I said before, he should be sentenced in accordance with the deal he originally made. If the judge reneged, that was very unprofessional and Polanski should not be sentenced more harshly. However, that does not negate the fact that he committed a felony for which he has yet to be sentenced.

katiegrrl0 said:
well i was just thinking you should spend the money catching someone that might actually be a criminal. Bin Laden for instance.
Click to expand...

I think a nation can look for more than one person at a time. But thanks for your concern. :2wave:

katiegrrl0 said:
he has been all over the world since this time. it is not like he was hiding. how did they get the Swiss to agree to this? he was to Zurich before.
Click to expand...

According to a Swiss official, they knew where he was going to be, and they had a legitimate extradition request from the US government.

katiegrrl0 said:
this is just dumb on so many levels it is funny. i am sitting here laughing at all the responses of those that think this is a good idea. for Christ's sake the US needs to find something to do with their time. it is really getting scary.
Click to expand...

He broke the law. The fact that he may be punished for something that happened so long ago is his own fault for fleeing in the first place.
 
Redress said:
What do you consider more important than justice?
Click to expand...

maybe 30 years ago this would be able to be called justice. it would have been the way to go. Roman made a deal it was not kept. he split.

he has been free around the world for 30 years. there is no other arrests for such as this.

the woman for years now has been asking that this end for her sake.

justice is great the problem with this is it is no longer justice it is a US courts Vendetta. which by the way is making the woman involved very unhappy and it is hurting her. so you tell me just what you think justice might be in a case such as this?
 
Redress said:
The reason it is 30 years ago is he fled justice. It is his fault justice is delayed.
Click to expand...

Perhaps he fled justice because he believed no justice was going to happen, I believe I would have done the same, seeing how many still stand ready there with their forks and knives?
 
Should Roman Polanski be punished for his crime?
Click to expand...

Why would anyone have to ask this question?
 
“maybe back than it was punishable. now it is asinine…” - katiegrrl0

So according to your logic at some point it becomes “okay” to have raped a 13 year old child?

That’s not only asinine, it’s criminal.

“..and you should be looking for your Bin Laden and not some 76 year old film maker that is easy enough to find.” - katiegrrl0

1. Finding Bin Laden is another topic entirely. Try to stay focused, won’t you?

2. Nobody was looking for Polanski. Everyone knew he was in France.

“why now? what Polanski has traveled the world these many years? all of a sudden the US gets a giant hard on for him and wants him arrested. give my a break.” - katiegrrl0

As I understand the story, the U.S. knew where he would be in advance of his arrival (something they’ve not previously known in the past) and he became a target of opportunity.

“this is why your country is such a mess. how much money is all of this costing to do this.” - katiegrrl0

How do you put a price on justice?
 
paris said:
Perhaps he fled justice because he believed no justice was going to happen, I believe I would have done the same, seeing how many still stand ready there with their forks and knives?
Click to expand...

So if you don't like the possible results from your crime, you should be allowed to flee, and then come back after awhile and every one just forget it?
 
Kandahar said:
Like I said before, he should be sentenced in accordance with the deal he originally made. If the judge reneged, that was very unprofessional and Polanski should not be sentenced more harshly. However, that does not negate the fact that he committed a felony for which he has yet to be sentenced.

I think a nation can look for more than one person at a time. But thanks for your concern. :2wave:

According to a Swiss official, they knew where he was going to be, and they had a legitimate extradition request from the US government.

He broke the law. The fact that he may be punished for something that happened so long ago is his own fault for fleeing in the first place.
Click to expand...

than the deal was time served as was stated here so what is the fuss. oh someone didn't honor the deal that would be another inept American judge. holy smoke do you believe that.

you can look for more than one at a time. so tell me where is your Bin Laden? i guess maybe you can't find more than one. at a time. he has escaped from your entire military might. hehehehe

yes and the Swiss are returning a person who by the original deal should be free. that makes sense.

he left because he was not given the sentence he was promised. now this is his fault. no blame the people that changed the deal after they got a confession on false pretentious.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
than the deal was time served as was stated here so what is the fuss. oh someone didn't honor the deal that would be another inept American judge. holy smoke do you believe that.
Click to expand...

The big deal is that he was never sentenced, which makes him a fugitive. No different than someone who escaped from prison.

katiegrrl0 said:
you can look for more than one at a time. so tell me where is your Bin Laden? i guess maybe you can't find more than one. at a time. he has escaped from your entire military might. hehehehe
Click to expand...

And yet, I don't think the arrest of Roman Polanski will affect the search for Bin Laden much at all. But again, thanks for your concern. :2wave:

katiegrrl0 said:
yes and the Swiss are returning a person who by the original deal should be free. that makes sense.
Click to expand...

Because he fled before he could be sentenced.

katiegrrl0 said:
he left because he was not given the sentence he was promised. now this is his fault. no blame the people that changed the deal after they got a confession on false pretentious.
Click to expand...

He was never given any sentence at all. He FLED.
 
Redress said:
So if you don't like the possible results from your crime, you should be allowed to flee, and then come back after awhile and every one just forget it?
Click to expand...

He did not come back.

He fled because he was afraid of your judicial system and I can understand him there.

He pleaded guilty to a crime he possibly did not commit because he was told to do so by his legal consellors.

Do you know how many years of study are required to become a judge? You are all here trying to judge him without knowing the case. The fact the alleged victim wants to burry it should be very telling.
 
apdst said:
Flight is a crime. Purdy much the answer to the question.
Click to expand...

I don't think he should be charged with the separate crime for fleeing arrest, since it sounds like he may have truly been worried that they would renege, and since the statute of limitations is up.

He should, however, be sentenced for the crime to which he pleaded guilty, in accordance with his plea bargain. Until that happens, he is a fugitive from justice and the US government is right for pursuing him.
 
paris said:
He did not come back.

He fled because he was afraid of your judicial system and I can understand him there.

He pleaded guilty to a crime he possibly did not commit because he was told to do so by his legal consellors.

Do you know how many years of study are required to become a judge? You are all here trying to judge him without knowing the case. The fact the alleged victim wants to burry it should be very telling.
Click to expand...

I am not trying to judge him at all. He most certainly should face trial, where he would be judged. He is far more likely than most to see a successful legal evasion of punishment, since he has more money than most to spend on lawyers.

We do have a responsibility to those who live in this country to ensure that fleeing is not a way to evade punishment until it is forgotten.
 
This is exactly what I predicted would happen. Americans/Britons on one side of this issue, and continental Europeans on the other. Obviously the cultural divide on matters of justice is incredibly wide.
 
Kandahar said:
I don't think he should be charged with the separate crime for fleeing arrest, since it sounds like he may have truly been worried that they would renege, and since the statute of limitations is up.

He should, however, be sentenced for the crime to which he pleaded guilty, in accordance with his plea bargain. Until that happens, he is a fugitive from justice and the US government is right for pursuing him.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what he did, or didn't think. Fleeing justice is a crime and he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
 
Kandahar said:
The big deal is that he was never sentenced, which makes him a fugitive. No different than someone who escaped from prison.

Because he fled before he could be sentenced.



He was never given any sentence at all. He FLED.
Click to expand...

I used to live in the US. i never realized just how anal Americans can get over silly ****.
this really is silly stuff.

when the woman wants to drop all this why the big deal. what are you all trying to prove?

he fled because the deal he made was not going to be honored by a judge that broke his word. If you made a deal to buy a car for 20000 and then the manager says when it is time to write the check, i changed my mind it is 32000 would you stay around to honor your deal by paying 12000 more. it is the same thing. exactly the same thing. would you give up the extra 12000? according to this you would do just that.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
I used to live in the US. i never realized just how anal Americans can get over silly ****.
this really is silly stuff.
Click to expand...

Statutory rape is most certainly not silly ****.

Fleeing and evading criminal prosecutions is not silly ****.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom