They finally caught Roman Polanski

  • News
  • Thread starter gravenewworld
  • Start date
In summary: This is why the outcry in Europe is about Roman Polanski being allowed to return to the US to plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit.In summary, Roman Polanski was charged with raping a 13 year old girl, plead guilty to a plea bargain, and is now using his celebrity to assist in being a successful fugitive. He needs to be made to deal with the reality everyone else has to deal with.
  • #71
WhoWee said:
I guess you haven't been to the golf course lately?:confused: I'm not sure where you are going with your example - it is off topic.

1. Admittedly, it was. My point was in reply to the example about freedom of speech. When there are so many laws, even if a particular action is legally protected, authorities can always find some other law you may be breaking to discourage you.

The "loitering" example is a real phenomenon. I have never seen a police office order a crowd of white forty year olds to disperse simply for standing around, hanging out, but it happens all the time to other groups.


2. Why throw out a useful tool that can be beneficial to both the courts and the defendant just because it may be abused by some rather than root out the abuse itself which will likely just take a different form in absence of the particular tool?

In general, history has shown that a tool then can be abused WILL be abused. If you don't throw out cases for violations of some principle, authorities will routinely violate the principle because it doesn't matter. (Think about unreasonable searches. If evidence produced from an illegal search was admissible, law enforcement would just always search, there's no reason not to.)




Since this was a bit of tangent, I won't mention this further, but if you'd like to discuss the general concept I would reply to a new thread.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
TheStatutoryApe said:
Its because the law also accepts the view that having sex with a person who is unable to give informed or uninfluenced consent, although they may participate willingly, is also rape. So underage people who are influenced into having intercourse with an adult willingly through perhaps some form of subterfuge or implied threat is rape. And if you give someone a drug which renders them unable to use proper decision making skills but pliant and willing to have sex this is also rape. There is also rape by threat of violence as opposed to violence itself.

From the confessions of the victim that I have read (links posted by Lisab, although I don't think it was in this thread) I would say then that it was a rape, but not a violent rape.

Basically what I am aiming at is that I have a feeling word "violent" is being abused - and it is a more general problem, not limited to the Polański case. I have seen it in Polish, seems like it is also present in English.
 
  • #73
Galteeth said:
1. Admittedly, it was. My point was in reply to the example about freedom of speech. When there are so many laws, even if a particular action is legally protected, authorities can always find some other law you may be breaking to discourage you.

The "loitering" example is a real phenomenon. I have never seen a police office order a crowd of white forty year olds to disperse simply for standing around, hanging out, but it happens all the time to other groups.

2. Why throw out a useful tool that can be beneficial to both the courts and the defendant just because it may be abused by some rather than root out the abuse itself which will likely just take a different form in absence of the particular tool?

In general, history has shown that a tool then can be abused WILL be abused. If you don't throw out cases for violations of some principle, authorities will routinely violate the principle because it doesn't matter. (Think about unreasonable searches. If evidence produced from an illegal search was admissible, law enforcement would just always search, there's no reason not to.)

Since this was a bit of tangent, I won't mention this further, but if you'd like to discuss the general concept I would reply to a new thread.

I'm not disagreeing with the observation in total. However, I've observed the police engaging white 40 year-olds in a similar manner after sporting events, around the closing time at bars, at various street parties, etc. I do agree the police don't typically target 40 something white males. If you'd like to start a thread, I'll participate.
 
  • #74
Borek said:
From the confessions of the victim that I have read (links posted by Lisab, although I don't think it was in this thread) I would say then that it was a rape, but not a violent rape.

Basically what I am aiming at is that I have a feeling word "violent" is being abused - and it is a more general problem, not limited to the Polański case. I have seen it in Polish, seems like it is also present in English.

I understand. Its not a traditional usage of the term and it may seem to muddy the idea of what violence is. Legally it is used to distinguish between rape that is done without proper consent versus rape done to a person against their willful resistance (if not physical resistance) which easily makes sense to me. Not all legal definitions are quite the same as traditional definitions as Mav has suggested. At the same time I find it hard to not consider a person penetrating me anally against my wishes to be a form of violence. While it does not have the same seeming as punching, kicking, or stabbing and it seems to define sex as a form of violence itself I would have a difficult time finding another way to describe it.
 
  • #75
Statutory rape also applies when consent was obtained fraudulently, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2994417.stm"

In the state of Florida rape is defined as sex without consent, and since my consent was procured fraudulently it's not valid. The judge agreed and awarded me $27m
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #76
Count Iblis said:
Statutory rape also applies when consent was obtained fraudulently, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2994417.stm"

Ok, now that's just ridiculous.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #77
TheStatutoryApe said:
Ok, now that's just ridiculous.

That is way beyond ridiculous! I wonder why they say the US is a litigious society.
 
  • #78
Jasongreat said:
That is way beyond ridiculous! I wonder why they say the US is a litigious society.

There's no limit to the absurdity of litigation in the US. Read this:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...you-cant-sue-a-dream-but-you-can-sure-try.ars

People like this can act with impunity because of the unlimited right to sue and have your "day in court" without consequences for outrageous abuses of the system. I think this post is somewhat on topic since it deals with sexual misconduct (in the plaintiff's dream). Suites like this tie up courts and deny timely access to people with legitimate claims.
 
Last edited:
  • #79
SW VandeCarr said:
There's no limit to the absurdity of litigation in the US. Read this:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...you-cant-sue-a-dream-but-you-can-sure-try.ars

People like this can act with impunity because of the unlimited right to sue and have your "day in court" without consequences for outrageous abuses. I think this post is somewhat on topic since it deals with sexual misconduct (in the plaintiff's dream). Suites like this tie up courts and deny timely access to people with legitimate claims.

While I agree with our basic point, the example you provided is of a person who is literally delusional. Generally, people who are literally insane do in fact haver their lawsuits dismissed out of hand.

The dream thing was referring to the plaintiff's self-dismissal, esentially a recognition by the plaintiff that he had in fact imagined the whole thing.
 
  • #80
Galteeth said:
While I agree with our basic point, the example you provided is of a person who is literally delusional. Generally, people who are literally insane do in fact haver their lawsuits dismissed out of hand.

The dream thing was referring to the plaintiff's self-dismissal, esentially a recognition by the plaintiff that he had in fact imagined the whole thing.

Since it's drifting off topic, I won't belabor the point, but the the fact that a disturbed person can file bogus lawsuits against thousands without fear of consequences reveals a serious problem in the US system of justice. This person has been doing this for years and the system apparently can't stop him because of his "inalienable right to sue". Every suit activates the judicial machinery and requires victims to get lawyers and go to court to respond to the suit. Besides, in cases alleging sexual misconduct, it's not always clear the suit is without merit and can be dismissed.
 
Last edited:
  • #81
SW VandeCarr said:
Since it's drifting off topic, I won't belabor the point, but the the fact that a disturbed person can file bogus lawsuits against thousands without fear of consequences reveals a serious problem in the US system of justice. This person has been doing this for years and the system apparently can't stop him because of his "inalienable right to sue". Every suit activates the judicial machinery and requires victims to get lawyers and go to court to respond to the suit. Besides, in cases alleging sexual misconduct, it's not always clear the suit is without merit and can be dismissed.

Ok, just one thing, while i don't necessarily agree, the theory is that if you took away his right to sue, such an individual could routinely have his civil rights violated by others with no means of legal recourse.
 
  • #82
Galteeth said:
Ok, just one thing, while i don't necessarily agree, the theory is that if you took away his right to sue, such an individual could routinely have his civil rights violated by others with no means of legal recourse.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions :wink:
 
  • #83
Galteeth said:
Ok, just one thing, while i don't necessarily agree, the theory is that if you took away his right to sue, such an individual could routinely have his civil rights violated by others with no means of legal recourse.

Other countries do not have this problem. In Canada and the UK, the losing plaintiff pays court costs and sometimes the legal fees of the defendant if the suit is judged to be frivolous. This in no way denies the plaintiff future access to the courts. I would further say that victimizing innocent people with bogus lawsuits is also a violation of the rights of victim defendants de facto if not de jure.
 
Last edited:
  • #84
Does anyone know what kind of sentence Polanski could face for fleeing the country aside from the rape?
 
  • #85
SW VandeCarr said:
Other countries do not have this problem. In Canada and the UK, the losing plaintiff pays court costs and sometimes the legal fees of the defendant if the suit is judged to be frivolous. This in no way denies the plaintiff future access to the courts. I would further say that victimizing innocent people with bogus lawsuits is also a violation of the rights of victim defendants de facto if not de jure.
In the US you can counter sue for costs in many cases but not all. This depends on the specific laws in the state where you are being sued. Unfortunately it is not much of a deterrent for anyone who is broke and unstable. You may be ordered to pay the defendants costs but if you have no money its rather a moot point.

jambaugh said:
Does anyone know what kind of sentence Polanski could face for fleeing the country aside from the rape?
He could face charges of "fleeing prosecution" though I am unaware of the exact laws and charges this constitutes. In the news they usually just say "fleeing justice/prosecution".
 
  • #86
And, now he's free again.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100712/ap_on_en_mo/roman_polanski"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #87
If you are wealthy, famous, and popular, you can get away with anything. And be applauded while you do it. If he suddenly dies, we'll forget about what he has done, and give him poustumous cinematic awards for the remainder of the year.

Cite: Michael Jackson
 
  • #88
Pattonias said:
If you are wealthy, famous, and popular, you can get away with anything. And be applauded while you do it. If he suddenly dies, we'll forget about what he has done, and give him poustumous cinematic awards for the remainder of the year.

Cite: Michael Jackson
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Lindsay Lohan will soon be trading in her designer duds for a stiff cotton Los Angeles County Jail jumpsuit come her three-month sentence, likely to be served at the Century Regional Detention Facility in Lynwood, California.
Paris Hilton served 23 days of a 45-day sentence at the same jail for violating her probation in a DUI case and was sprung early for good behavior.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/celebrity.news.gossip/07/12/lindsay.lohan.ppl/?fbid=QMmnUQwG2Bx

Wiki said:
Ryder was convicted of grand theft and vandalism, but was acquitted on the third felony charge, burglary.[77] In December 2002, she was sentenced to three years' probation, 480 hours of community service, $3,700 in fines, $6,355 in restitution to the Saks Fifth Avenue store, and ordered to attend psychological and drug counseling.[78] After reviewing Ryder's probation report, Superior Court Judge Elden Fox noted that Ryder served 480 hours of community service and on June 18, 2004, the felonies were reduced to misdemeanors. Ryder remained on probation until December 2005.[79][80]


Michael Vick [NFL star quarterback ...] The admitted dog killer was transported from the federal prison in Leavenworth, Kansas, where he is serving a 23-month sentence for conspiracy.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/mvick2008mug1.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #89
The Justice Ministry also said that national interests were taken into consideration in the decision, and the wishes of the victim

I can understand the victim not wanting to pursue this any further, but national interests were taken into account? I can't fathom that.
 
  • #90
waht said:
I can understand the victim not wanting to pursue this any further, but national interests were taken into account? I can't fathom that.

I found the "national interests" statement to be odd when I read it also.
 
  • #91
i would think the biggest national interest of the swiss would be their banking industry, the level of discrete service their customers have come to expect, and the sort of legal precedents and perceptions that could be set by the swiss detaining arriving customers that the US has taken an interest in.
 
  • #92
Borg said:
And, now he's free again.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100712/ap_on_en_mo/roman_polanski"
Very disappointing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #93
mheslep said:
Sometimes yes, sometimes no...
None of those had the forethought to just move to a different country.

...though Polanski probably has a lot more pull overseas than they do.
 
  • #94
mheslep said:
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Those people are famous, not popular
 
  • #95
Office_Shredder said:
Those people are famous, not popular
NFL QB Vick? Winona Ryder? They're as popular as Polanski, I'd guess.
 
  • #96
mheslep said:
NFL QB Vick? Winona Ryder? They're as popular as Polanski, I'd guess.

I don't know much about Ryder, but after the allegations came out nobody liked Vick. That's kind of a side point though, my comment was mostly tongue-in-cheek
 
  • #97
Office_Shredder said:
I don't know much about Ryder, but after the allegations came out nobody liked Vick. That's kind of a side point though, my comment was mostly tongue-in-cheek
How could one like someone who fights dogs.

A child rapist on the other hand.:rolleyes:
 
  • #98
Well look at it this way, if Lindsay divulged her drinking habits 15 years from now instead of while actively using them we would heap sympathy on her and some would buy her book.

If Michael Vic had been accused of fighting dogs 5 years after he retired from football with 2 superbowl rings, he would make a tear filled apology for his wrongdoings toward animals and make a donation to an Animal rights group or start a foundation and then still make it in the hall of fame.

Speculating about careeer success asside we often look less harshly on things if they happened in the past to a celebrity.
(Mheslep I know what you meant :smile:)
 
  • #99
Pattonias said:
Well look at it this way, if Lindsay divulged her drinking habits 15 years from now instead of while actively using them we would heap sympathy on her and some would buy her book.

If Michael Vic had been accused of fighting dogs 5 years after he retired from football with 2 superbowl rings, he would make a tear filled apology for his wrongdoings toward animals and make a donation to an Animal rights group or start a foundation and then still make it in the hall of fame.

Speculating about careeer success asside we often look less harshly on things if they happened in the past to a celebrity.
(Mheslep I know what you meant :smile:)
These are not accusations that happened 5-15 years after the crime was committed (they happened the day after), your comparisons are completely irrelevant unless you are possibly arguing that if someone escapes before they go to jail and spend 10-15 years abroad society should forgive and forget .

people who might agree with you
James J. Bulger
Osama Bin Laden

people who have forgiven their perpetrators despite no monetary compensation
http://www.wsbt.com/news/local/44321787.html
http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=105968Regardless there are crimes that are forgive and forgotten by society hence statute of limitations

murder isn't one of these
anal rape of a drugged 13 year old is not one of them
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #100
j93 said:
anal rape of a drugged 13 year old is not one of them

Are you trying to argue that Polanski is not popular, or that there is not a large portion of society that has forgiven him?
 
  • #101
j93 said:
These are not accusations that happened 5-15 years after the crime was committed (they happened the day after), your comparisons are completely irrelevant unless you are possibly arguing that if someone escapes before they go to jail and spend 10-15 years abroad society should forgive and forget .

people who might agree with you
James J. Bulger
Osama Bin Laden

people who have forgiven their perpetrators despite no monetary compensation
http://www.wsbt.com/news/local/44321787.html
http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=105968


Regardless there are crimes that are forgive and forgotten by society hence statute of limitations

murder isn't one of these
anal rape of a drugged 13 year old is not one of them

Let me get this straight...
You are arguing that I am arguing that WE should forgive and forget BECAUSE he escaped for 5-15 years. I said nothing of the sort. Please reread both my posts. I do like your argument that IF I WAS arguing this that I am in the same category as James J. Bulger and Osama Bin Laden. You forgot to associate me with Adolf Hitler...

Please read all the posts. I was making a statement in regards to society as a whole. Not my personal feelings. I most certaintly was not trying to play advocate to Polanski.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #102
Why are they protecting this guy? Does extradition cost them a lot of money or something? All they have to do is send him back. How hard is that?
 
  • #103
Pattonias said:
Let me get this straight...
You are arguing that I am arguing that WE should forgive and forget BECAUSE he escaped for 5-15 years. I said nothing of the sort. Please reread both my posts. I do like your argument that IF I WAS arguing this that I am in the same category as James J. Bulger and Osama Bin Laden. You forgot to associate me with Adolf Hitler...

Please read all the posts. I was making a statement in regards to society as a whole. Not my personal feelings. I most certaintly was not trying to play advocate to Polanski.

Well from reading your posts there is either the original interpretation or your posts just pointed out that people tend not to view crimes equally as bad if they are not discovered until years after. If this is really the right interpretation even though it is true then how is that relevant (just as relevant as the sky being blue or the atom contains protons)when in this case it was discovered the day after. Trying to compare apples to apples instead of apples to steak. It was a choice between interpreting your posts as a random generalism or a wrong generally held but relevant belief. I gave you the benefit of the doubt.
Pattonias said:
I do like your argument that IF I WAS arguing this that I am in the same category as James J. Bulger and Osama Bin Laden. You forgot to associate me with Adolf Hitler...
Adolf Hitler was killed before being convicted of anything that wouldn't be an apple to apple comparison. The two examples are the most obvious examples of criminals who have been abroad after being convicted.
 
  • #104
leroyjenkens said:
Why are they protecting this guy? Does extradition cost them a lot of money or something? All they have to do is send him back. How hard is that?

To extradite someone you have to usually prove in your courts that it would serve justice as your laws see it to send the person to the other country. Things like unjuust sentences for the crime committed or possible political influence in the trial are amongst a number of examples of how an extradition attempt can fail
 
  • #105
leroyjenkens said:
Why are they protecting this guy? Does extradition cost them a lot of money or something? All they have to do is send him back. How hard is that?

This is a case where the US bungled a critical communication and the Swiss (not known for patience in these proceedings) did as their laws require.
 

Similar threads

R. I. P. Kris Kristofferson, dead at 88
Replies
1
Views
345
Who was Sponsian? Roman Emperor?
Replies
5
Views
1K
Police officer caught copying in law examination
Replies
2
Views
1K
Why Age-Related Memory Issues Can Be So Oddly Specific?
Replies
14
Views
2K
Calculating Heat Exchange: A Z80 Program with Real Weather Data
Replies
24
Views
2K
B Elastic collision - should final velocities be asymmetric?
Replies
17
Views
1K
News What's Happening Behind the Scenes at WWF?
Replies
5
Views
1K
News Dubai rape case Norwegian woman 'free to go'
Replies
25
Views
8K
News Extradition of Abu Hamza - is it even a news story in the USA
Replies
13
Views
3K
Are you a kind, benevolent Master?
Replies
24
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top