diamond
ONE love, blood, life
with the
icon, in conjunction with the statement at hand, a caveman would be able to decipher my original intent."jest"-say it.
<>
I'm glad Roman Polanski finally got caught!
- Thread starter Flying FuManchu
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
with the
icon, in conjunction with the statement at hand, a caveman would be able to decipher my original intent."jest"-say it.
<>
Jive Turkey
ONE love, blood, life
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
- Messages
- 13,645
Diamond, you are this forums Ray Comfort. Some of the crap you say angers me to no end, but when I take a step back, you really dont seem like a bad dude 
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
believe it or not, i am one of diamond's biggest fans.
and not least because he flirts with me to no end.
and not least because he flirts with me to no end.
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
Diamond, you are this forums Ray Comfort. Some of the crap you say angers me to no end, but when I take a step back, you really dont seem like a bad dude
thanks guys, glad we got things worked out..
*hugs*
<>
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
i would like to point out that diamond has stated, clearly, that marriage is subjected to cultural norms and historical context and it's meaning and composition changes over the centuries. what we might have recognized in Missouri or Utah in the mid 19th century as a marriage would not be so today.
just wanted to point that out.
thank you.
just wanted to point that out.
thank you.
BonosSaint
Rock n' Roll Doggie
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2004
- Messages
- 3,566
touche.
CTU2fan
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- May 21, 2004
- Messages
- 5,366
What kills me about this whole thing, from a purely personal standpoint, is these H-wood types coming out and vocally supporting Polanski are actually forcing me to agree with some pretty unpleasant right-wing types. Frankly it pisses me off...my wife is watching Nancy Grace and Nancy's just tearing into Debra Winger, and I'm agreeing with her. Ugh
Will you 2 get a room?
You're making me jealous.
Will you 2 get a room?
You're making me jealous.
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
Good God. I'll say this in my less than perfect French: that's fucking idiotic.
Vincent Vega
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
I petition for film festivals in many places all year 'round. How else should the persecuted artists feel safe?
DrTeeth
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Tilda Swinton is breaking my heart here 
Could it be that the man plead guilty, and the wrong is pretty damn clear for everyone?
I am amazed that this has turned into a left verses right issue.
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
I'm not sure he should be extradited, for two reasons:
1. I don't think the U.S. is going after him now for the right reasons. The girl, who is now an adult woman, has gone on the record saying that she doesn't think he should be locked up:
This woman clearly would rather put the whole thing behind her than to have to re-live the whole thing again in a trial and to have her family be put through it. In my opinion, and it is my opinion, and you may think I'm 100% wrong, if the victim doesn't feel strongly about prosecuting anymore, than the justice system shouldn't go after the perpetuator too strongly. Not just for this case, for any case. If the victim doesn't want to prosecute - and this woman has said she doesn't - that's it. That's the ballgame. When a crime is committed, no one's opinion matters more than the victim(provided the victim is of sound mind); not the lawyers, not the judges, not the government officials, not the victim's family, not the accused, not the public, no one - if the victim says she doesn't want to prosecute, then the one true right reason to prosecute any crime - to get justice for the victim - is weakened. I've heard some suggestions that if he's extradited, whatever DAs/judges/other people of power are involved could conspire to sentence him to something like fifty years in prison - essentially a life sentence for him, and the diametric opposite of the victim's feeling that he doesn't need to be locked up forever - simply to make an example of him, and to be a notch in somebody's belt. In fact, from what I read, it seems like the reason he ran in the first place was because the DA at the time had conspired with/coerced/encouraged/pushed the judge at the time to hand down a much harsher sentence than the one Polanski thought he was getting when he plead guilty, likely because the DA wanted to make an example. The DA admitted as much in a documentary a few years ago, and is now on CNN claiming he lied in the documentary and that he never interfered with the case. How much you wanna bet that someone in power gave him a call and 'encouraged' him to go on TV and recant his statements from that documentary? How much? It is patently obvious to me that the U.S. is going after Polanski for all the WRONG reasons right now, and that pisses me off. These are the WRONG reasons to go after someone. The only RIGHT reason is to get justice for the victim, and it's harder to play the 'we're getting justice for Samantha' card when Samantha doesn't seem particularly interested in it anymore and has flat out said she doesn't want to prosecute.
2. This is a philosophical thing, and I know for a fact that a lot of people disagree with me, but I believe that the primary purpose of prison is to quarantine those criminals who are an ongoing threat to society, so that they can't harm innocent people again; this is as opposed to the idea that the primary purpose of prison is to punish the criminal. It's been 30 years since this incident, and there has been no sign of Roman Polanski doing anything else even remotely approaching what he did then in those last 30 years. This doesn't excuse him of the crime he committed, but it does make a convincing argument that he isn't an ongoing threat to society. If he was sick, out of control, a threat, he would've done this more than one time. Now, this is a matter that is wholly one of personal opinion, but I believe that, especially given the current overcrowded state of our prisons, if a criminal is not an ongoing threat to society, he/she does not need to go to prison. I believe Polanski regrets what he did, and it appears his victim believes that as well.
To sum up: I'm not sure Polanski should be extradited because The U.S. is going after him for the wrong reasons, the victim doesn't even want to prosecute him anymore, he doesn't appear to be a threat to society, and the DA may have coached the judge.
Finally, I need to make two things absolutely clear: I am not in any defending what Polanski did 30 years ago, and I am not in any way blaming the victim for what was done to her. These two things seem to have ignited the most anger in this tread, rightfully so, and I am not doing either. And let me also make this clear: if the victim, Samantha Geimer, felt strongly about wanting to prosecute Polanski today, then I would say he should be extradited, because then it would be for the right reason. I just don't want to see powerful people manipulate a situation for their benefit and not the victim's.
1. I don't think the U.S. is going after him now for the right reasons. The girl, who is now an adult woman, has gone on the record saying that she doesn't think he should be locked up:
wikipedia said:
This woman clearly would rather put the whole thing behind her than to have to re-live the whole thing again in a trial and to have her family be put through it. In my opinion, and it is my opinion, and you may think I'm 100% wrong, if the victim doesn't feel strongly about prosecuting anymore, than the justice system shouldn't go after the perpetuator too strongly. Not just for this case, for any case. If the victim doesn't want to prosecute - and this woman has said she doesn't - that's it. That's the ballgame. When a crime is committed, no one's opinion matters more than the victim(provided the victim is of sound mind); not the lawyers, not the judges, not the government officials, not the victim's family, not the accused, not the public, no one - if the victim says she doesn't want to prosecute, then the one true right reason to prosecute any crime - to get justice for the victim - is weakened. I've heard some suggestions that if he's extradited, whatever DAs/judges/other people of power are involved could conspire to sentence him to something like fifty years in prison - essentially a life sentence for him, and the diametric opposite of the victim's feeling that he doesn't need to be locked up forever - simply to make an example of him, and to be a notch in somebody's belt. In fact, from what I read, it seems like the reason he ran in the first place was because the DA at the time had conspired with/coerced/encouraged/pushed the judge at the time to hand down a much harsher sentence than the one Polanski thought he was getting when he plead guilty, likely because the DA wanted to make an example. The DA admitted as much in a documentary a few years ago, and is now on CNN claiming he lied in the documentary and that he never interfered with the case. How much you wanna bet that someone in power gave him a call and 'encouraged' him to go on TV and recant his statements from that documentary? How much? It is patently obvious to me that the U.S. is going after Polanski for all the WRONG reasons right now, and that pisses me off. These are the WRONG reasons to go after someone. The only RIGHT reason is to get justice for the victim, and it's harder to play the 'we're getting justice for Samantha' card when Samantha doesn't seem particularly interested in it anymore and has flat out said she doesn't want to prosecute.
2. This is a philosophical thing, and I know for a fact that a lot of people disagree with me, but I believe that the primary purpose of prison is to quarantine those criminals who are an ongoing threat to society, so that they can't harm innocent people again; this is as opposed to the idea that the primary purpose of prison is to punish the criminal. It's been 30 years since this incident, and there has been no sign of Roman Polanski doing anything else even remotely approaching what he did then in those last 30 years. This doesn't excuse him of the crime he committed, but it does make a convincing argument that he isn't an ongoing threat to society. If he was sick, out of control, a threat, he would've done this more than one time. Now, this is a matter that is wholly one of personal opinion, but I believe that, especially given the current overcrowded state of our prisons, if a criminal is not an ongoing threat to society, he/she does not need to go to prison. I believe Polanski regrets what he did, and it appears his victim believes that as well.
To sum up: I'm not sure Polanski should be extradited because The U.S. is going after him for the wrong reasons, the victim doesn't even want to prosecute him anymore, he doesn't appear to be a threat to society, and the DA may have coached the judge.
Finally, I need to make two things absolutely clear: I am not in any defending what Polanski did 30 years ago, and I am not in any way blaming the victim for what was done to her. These two things seem to have ignited the most anger in this tread, rightfully so, and I am not doing either. And let me also make this clear: if the victim, Samantha Geimer, felt strongly about wanting to prosecute Polanski today, then I would say he should be extradited, because then it would be for the right reason. I just don't want to see powerful people manipulate a situation for their benefit and not the victim's.
Salome
you are what you is
I do wonder if the justice system would have went through the same trouble decades later if this had not involved a celebrity
it should have, but still
it should have, but still
Vincent Vega
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Well, it may be hard to accept, but here the opinion of the victim doesn't play any role. She may have forgiven him, and she may want him to go free, but that's entirely her opinion. The legal system is not setup to accommodate the wishes of the victim. Otherwise, if she wished the plague on him the sentence would have to be accordingly in order to go with the victim's feelings. But it needs to be neutral to that.
There is a lot of speculation that Switzerland is trying to make good weather with the US after the UBS debacle and such. Whatever the underlying reasons are that they suddenly decided they would act on the US's international warrant, and it's pretty certain they had their reasons, in the end his past caught him and well, now he has to deal with it.
There is a lot of speculation that Switzerland is trying to make good weather with the US after the UBS debacle and such. Whatever the underlying reasons are that they suddenly decided they would act on the US's international warrant, and it's pretty certain they had their reasons, in the end his past caught him and well, now he has to deal with it.
BoMac
Self-righteous bullshitter
I don't see it as a right vs. left issue. I'm a liberal, and I think he should have to pay for what he did, which I think was wrong on so-ooo many levels.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
corianderstem
Blue Crack Distributor
What trial? He was already convicted.
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
You're right. I was thinking of potential future legal proceedings concerning his having run from the charges.
But still, she has said that just having the details of all of this being reported ad nauseam by the media harms her family, and the longer Polanski is in the news, so, by association, is she and her family. She doesn't want that.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
by your logic
the more heinous the crime the better
a 43 year old man anally raping a 13 year old girl as she is crying and begging him to stop, might be the way to go, because she won't want to testify to the graphic details
at least when some time past, Polanski had some time to think about his behavior
two years later in 1979, 45 year old Polanski said "If I had killed somebody, it wouldn't have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But … fucking, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to fuck young girls. Juries want to fuck young girls. Everyone wants to fuck young girls!"
the more heinous the crime the better
a 43 year old man anally raping a 13 year old girl as she is crying and begging him to stop, might be the way to go, because she won't want to testify to the graphic details
at least when some time past, Polanski had some time to think about his behavior
two years later in 1979, 45 year old Polanski said "If I had killed somebody, it wouldn't have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But … fucking, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to fuck young girls. Juries want to fuck young girls. Everyone wants to fuck young girls!"
coolian2
Blue Crack Supplier
with the
"jest"-say it.
<>
in that case, kudos to you sir. i don't think anyone else could joking call other members of the forum pedophiles and get away with it. 'tis a fine testament to your wit that you're capable or doing that
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
I'm pleased that the majority of FYMers have common sense about this issue.
I did look hard at this list and found no Right Wingers on it.:
If there is a conservative in this mix let me know.
<>
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
namkcuR
ONE love, blood, life
Way to twist my words. I never ever condoned what he did. Never. And not wanting to testify wasn't the only reason she gave - I'm not even sure it's a reason she gave at all; she said that she believed he was sorry(though that's a bit harder to believe given the quote below) and that she didn't think he should be locked up forever.
That's pretty disgusting. But it was still only two years later. Is it possible he could've had a change of heart in the 30 that followed? Yes. Could he have not had a change of heart and still believe today what he said there? Yes. I have no way of knowing how he feels about it now, and I don't think you do either.
None of this changes the fact that it seems like the powers that be are doing this for the wrong reasons or the fact that the woman has shown zero interest in digging this up again all these years later.
OP
OP
Flying FuManchu
New Yorker
I'm gonna save my money and buy a chateau in France, commit a crime in the US, and before my sentencing, flee to France. At least, let's encourage all American criminals to do the same. I would love to have the ability to do that, and not have to suffer "real" consequences for my actions. Hopefully, over time, the US would forget about my crime because of the length of time I was on the run. I will definitely have had a change of heart after many years have passed so that forgiving me would be even much easier on the conscience. Let's encourage the image that some people can get away with rape and fleeing the authorities and while other citizens can't.
OP
OP
Flying FuManchu
New Yorker
That Polanski quote makes me think of him as total scum. Scum + infinity.
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
in that case, kudos to you sir. i don't think anyone else could joking call other members of the forum pedophiles
Where did I jokingly or otherwise call any member of this forum that word?
What I did was point out that watering down what Polanski did any degree would be wrong.
<>
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
So if a man rapes a mentally retarded person with an IQ of 3 yr old, the rapist gets an easier sentence or does it depend on how intelligent the person is to merit what type of prosecution and penalty society should pursue?
Let us know.
<>
