Quoted from Murphy Unable to make the movies he wanted, unable to get the most out of his talent, unable to work with the people he wants to work with. He has undoubtedly had 30 years of punishment for his crime, far more and far worse than had he actually gone to jail. So all this talk of him having got of scott free is simply not true.

Eh? The following is a list of the films he has made while "unable to make the movies he wanted"! It should be noted that he won an Oscar for "The Pianist", plus the Palme D'Or and many other awards.

Not bad for "30 years of punishment"!

1979     Tess     
1986     Pirates          
1988     Frantic          
1992     Bitter Moon          
1994     Death and the Maiden          
1999     The Ninth Gate          
2002     The Pianist
2005     Oliver Twist          

As I said in an earlier post - if he was an ordinary nobody that no one had heard of, nobody would be jumping to his defense. Being a world famous, Oscar winning film Director does not put him above the law.

If we do not seek to bring to justice those who break the law, then why bother having those laws, or a Police force, or Courts to enforce them?

Quoted from Niles_Crane Not bad for "30 years of punishment"! 1979     Tess      1986     Pirates           1988     Frantic           1992     Bitter Moon           1994     Death and the Maiden           1999     The Ninth Gate           2002     The Pianist 2005     Oliver Twist

Yeah, but he really wanted to make Transformers. Those other movies you mention were just stay-busy movies  

Quoted from Niles_Crane As I said in an earlier post - if he was an ordinary nobody that no one had heard of, nobody would be jumping to his defense. Being a world famous, Oscar winning film Director does not put him above the law.

No, you have got that the wrong way round. If he was an ordinary nobody that no one had heard of then nobody would have bothered arresting him in the first place. He is only being extradited because he is Roman Polanski. It does work both ways.

The response is yes he should have gone to prison.

These days you can go to prison for using a computer to look at but he had sex with and fled the country. Innocent people don't flee.

The message I get is "Sleep with as many kids as you want and move to this place, we condone child sex"

This thread gives him too much credit in my opinion.

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

How do you argue that? He pleads guilty and runs...

Quoted from Murphy If he was an ordinary nobody that no one had heard of then nobody would have bothered arresting him in the first place

I don't know where you live, but here if a 44 year man rapes a 13 year old girl, he gets arrested. And if he flees abroad they will have him extradited if he is caught no matter who he is.

The way some people has spoken about Polanski on this thread you'd think he'd been hiding in a cave in Outer Mongola rather than walking about free in France, making movies and earning a lot of money!

According to a CNN article, various film makers, incl. Woody Allen, Martin Scorcese and David Lynch, protest the arrest of Roman Polanski. There's even a "Free Polanski" badge now.

I thought Hollywood couldn't make me more sick - it just did.

No surprise that Woody Allen is champing at the bit for his release.

Andrew

I think that gets to pay, but not in a prision. He may pays his crime with a great amount of money to instituitions like that protect abused children in africa or in east europe,or  latin america or USA. For me is anough charge for him.

Quoted from Helio I think that gets to pay, but not in a prision. He may pays his crime with a great amount of money to instituitions like that protect abused children in africa or in east europe,or  latin america or USA. For me is anough charge for him.

Helio, That is a very sensible suggestion.

Quoted from Helio I think that gets to pay, but not in a prision. He may pays his crime with a great amount of money to instituitions like that protect abused children in africa or in east europe,or  latin america or USA. For me is anough charge for him.

Whilst very "sensible", it also sends out a message that as long as you have the fame and money, it's ok to go on the lam, and then after 31 years,  just pay off your debt with money accrued whilst on the lam.

Nothing remotely sensible about that.

On a separate note, well done to Luc Besson for refusing to sign the despicable little list that's circulating.

Andrew

The facts of the case are that he plead guilty to a crime and part of that agreement was that he would spend 42 days in psychiatric evaluation and not serve any jail time. That was the deal promised to him by the judge in charge.

Whether you like the deal or not makes no difference, we were not there at the time and are not party to all the facts. The facts are that the judge make a commitment and Polanski went along with the process.

Then afterwards the judge changed his mind, there are rumours of corruption, the judge certainly seemed to have let the fame of handling a high profile case get to his head and loved being a TV star. He stated making noises in the news about going back on his deal and talking about life imprisonment and deportation.

This is why he says he fled, he was convinced he was the subject of a witchhunt and that something far more corrupt was going on.

I know this is a very emotional subject and certainly crimes of this nature are despicable to all of us and I would imagine those amongst us with children certainly more so as it is certainly makes crimes like this more more personal.

But the fact seems to have been overlooked that Polanski was charged and pleaded guilty to consensual sex with a minor. A disgusting crime, and should not go unpunished. But those who are only relying on the victims testimony are showing that they do not give a stuff about the law at all and therefore are quite happy to convict someone based on nothing more than a victims word and tabloid gossip.

This is why we have courts, this is why we have jurors. Because, believe it or not people lie. That is why civilized people have no choice but to put their faith in the justice system to do the right thing and then accept that decision as correct. In this case it seems the very system that we put our faith into delivering justice failed, it failed the victim and it failed Polanski in that he was not getting the fair trial that everybody deserves.

He is not a felon on the run, he pleaded guilty and accepted his punishment. I think some people are allowing their emotion to get the better of them and are not even thinking about the circumstances of this particular case.

Roman Polanski should not have run but he felt he was left with no choice. Now he has been caught then yes, it is only fair that he is returned to the US to face his charges, I have not said anything different. I just happen to think that there is no point to sending him to prison after all that has happened.

But when taking about this "despicable list" and so on you are making it sound like anyone who is supporting him are part of some gang of pedophiles. These are people who were around at the time and no doubt know more about what happened than you or I.


This is a Owen Gleiberman's review of a documentary about the case that premiered at Sundance a few years ago...

Quoted Text �We all think we know what happened when the celebrated and infamous demon-imp film director took a one-way ticket out of Los Angeles, skipping the country early in 1978 just as he was about to face sentencing for the crime of �unlawful sexual intercourse� with a 13-year-old girl. But Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, Marina Zenovich�s startling and grippingly told anatomization of the case, will make you realize that you barely know the half of it. At first, I feared that the movie was going to tiptoe around the issue of Polanski�s guilt. But no, it never denies that he committed a heinous crime. Yet by showing how a media feeding frenzy shaped the story, oozing like slime into the wheels of justice, and by going deep behind the closed doors of the hearings and negotiations (presided over by a judge on such a star trip he made Lance Ito look like Solomon), the movie creates an indictment of a legal system that was corrupted and warped by the celebrity culture � that is, by the very entitlement it was trying so hard to rein in. Polanski, that troubled and charming creep-genius, emerges, if you can believe it, as both guilty as sin and a victim. It�s that ambivalence that makes Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired a documentary of rare fascination and power.�

Quoted from Murphy But when taking about this "despicable list" and so on you are making it sound like anyone who is supporting him are part of some gang of pedophiles. These are people who were around at time time, people who will know much more about what went on, people who no doubt know Roman's side of the story.

It's a fair point. And in no way am I trying to suggest this is a measure of a person to support Polanski. It's something I am guilty of - writing and speaking in a forthright manner and this ruffles feathers, pisses people off, or leads them to think I am arrogant. Fair enough. I have always been taught to say what I mean, and mean what I say. Nothing said from me is intended as personal, and if it is, then people know about it. Same goes for this, I believe the list is despicable as opposed to the people. A lot of those who have signed that list have my respect, but this action and issue is an area of fundamental disagreement.

In terms of the charges, Polanski may have been dealt a ridiculous sentence, but upon appeal, it would've been quashed had it been so ridiculous it would lead him to consider fleeing the country. The plea bargain has gone, so it's not really an issue. Also, let's not lose sight of the fact he flouted US law by remaining a fugitive, and actively eluding capture for many years. Victims lie, rapists lie, sure. However, actions often speak louder than words, and Roman's certainly spoke volumes. At the very least, he is guilty of sex with an underage girl - the disgusting representation of a "Little Lolita" at the time remains odd considering she was a child and he was a grown man who should know better -, giving her drugs and alcohol, and of remaining a fugitive, so sympathy is not on my list. Instead, I care about people who have been molested by adults concerned with their own gratification. Consensual or not, and she has maintained for many years it was not.

I can understand if people feel he should get a fair trial, but to say he should not face trial at all is quite honestly a pretty hollow thing to say.

Andrew

Fair points Andrew, I must say I never really knew much about the details of this case until this past week.  I knew the girl was modelling nude for him in Jack Nicholson's house and it was consensual. So had just assumed she was slightly underage and this was all a bit of a bad beat for Polanski.

Reading about what is supposed to have happened is a little more chilling, if of course it is true. So my earlier posts had not really taken this into consideration.

I don't think it's hollow at all. I have no sympathy for Roman Polanski at all but...

In California where they are giving state employees IOUs in order to pay their salary,  where they are cutting back state services, where they are canceling highway and infrastructure projects, in a city where there is huge unemployment and tons of foreclosures, where the tax base is shrinking and they can't even afford to fix the schools pursing something that happened thirty years ago when the victim doesn't want it pursued, something that is going to cost a bunch of dollars is ridiculous.

If it were a different time, then maybe, but for now just let it drop there's more important things to pay for.

Maybe if Polanski could swing some deal trading his release for some oil... sort of like the Lockerbie bomber guy.