|
On October 02 2009 05:31 jetpower wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2009 04:40 s_side wrote:I think the Swiss are also trying to court some favor (which is smart) during this whole UBS private banking scandal. It's a win-win, really. Help Swiss-American relations and put a scumbag behind the bars he should have been behind 30 years ago. Cheers to you and your countrymen!  EDIT: Oh, and are their any online Swiss food shops that sell Laeckerle (sp??)? We have a family friend who lives in Zurich and brings them every time she comes, but they never last more than a day. I think the word scumbag is a bit over the top. Unless you're joking, one shouldn't judge a man based on one action. You know, he has a family, kids. He avoided scandals. Many people in the movie industry who he worked with actually defend him now. Doesn't anybody think his life must have sucked in many ways all this time because of what he did 30 years ago? I am amazed how he could continue a successful career after that.
If that one action is drugging, raping and sodomizing a 13-year-old, I think that term befits that individual quite well.
And as for his life sucking since then, are you nuts? I'm sure he's spent many sorrowful nights crying into a martini at his ski chalet.
|
United States41470 Posts
On October 02 2009 05:31 jetpower wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2009 04:40 s_side wrote:I think the Swiss are also trying to court some favor (which is smart) during this whole UBS private banking scandal. It's a win-win, really. Help Swiss-American relations and put a scumbag behind the bars he should have been behind 30 years ago. Cheers to you and your countrymen! EDIT: Oh, and are their any online Swiss food shops that sell Laeckerle (sp??)? We have a family friend who lives in Zurich and brings them every time she comes, but they never last more than a day. I think the word scumbag is a bit over the top. Unless you're joking, one shouldn't judge a man based on one action. You know, he has a family, kids. He avoided scandals. Many people in the movie industry who he worked with actually defend him now. Doesn't anybody think his life must have sucked in many ways all this time because of what he did 30 years ago? I am amazed how he could continue a successful career after that.
Yeah... He's the victim in this... As an adult he has responsibility for his actions. You can say we shouldn't judge him by one action a long time ago but when that action is the rape of a minor I disagree.
|
Well, people who actually KNOW him tend to defend him. The victim doesn't want him prosecuted also. That's some hint i guess.
|
On October 02 2009 06:01 jetpower wrote:
Well, people who actually KNOW him tend to defend him. The victim doesn't want him prosecuted also. That's some hint i guess.
I, like many others, could care less about what his Hollywood buddies think. His artistic talents are obvious and brilliant, but before the law, he should be held just as accountable as any old schlub.
This is about society and the laws of society. Laws do not exist solely for avenging victims. Society deems rape of minors a serious offense and one which is punishable by incarceration. He plead guilty to this crime and then fled to avoid serving his sentence. That is the issue at hand. Not his admittedly tragic past nor his impressive work in film.
Few things in life are simple, shades of grey and whatnot, but this couldn't be any more cut and dried. The audacity of prominent entertainment figures to think that he should be treated differently because of his work is extraordinarily offensive and serves as a great reminder of just how disconnected Hollywood is from reality and how little credence their views on topics other than hip night clubs, tiny dogs and red carpet "fashion" should be given.
|
United States41117 Posts
|
On October 02 2009 06:45 s_side wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2009 06:01 jetpower wrote:
Well, people who actually KNOW him tend to defend him. The victim doesn't want him prosecuted also. That's some hint i guess. I, like many others, could care less about what his Hollywood buddies think. His artistic talents are obvious and brilliant, but before the law, he should be held just as accountable as any old schlub. This is about society and the laws of society. Laws do not exist solely for avenging victims. Society deems rape of minors a serious offense and one which is punishable by incarceration. He plead guilty to this crime and then fled to avoid serving his sentence. That is the issue at hand. Not his admittedly tragic past nor his impressive work in film. Few things in life are simple, shades of grey and whatnot, but this couldn't be any more cut and dried. The audacity of prominent entertainment figures to think that he should be treated differently because of his work is extraordinarily offensive and serves as a great reminder of just how disconnected Hollywood is from reality and how little credence their views on topics other than hip night clubs, tiny dogs and red carpet "fashion" should be given.
I mostly disagree about calling Mr. Polanski 'a scumbag' and similar by people who obviously know shit about him. (His 'hollywood buddies' were maybe there in the 70s. Now he's definitely an European director with little connection to the US. So no, no night club parties with chihuahuas and Paris Hilton lol)
I think there's misunderstanding - nobody is saying it's because he has done nice movies he should be free or his talents make him above the law. The thing is, if he was, say, a construction worker that wouldn't affect his life much BUT since he was a famous guy EVERYONE got to know what he did. His co-workers, family, friends, the lady in grocery store etc and of course the general public. This is A punishment, no one can deny.
There's still issue for me if he should be put in jail now and for how long exactly.
|
Guilty, should be jailed. End of thread
|
On October 02 2009 07:43 jetpower wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2009 06:45 s_side wrote:On October 02 2009 06:01 jetpower wrote:
Well, people who actually KNOW him tend to defend him. The victim doesn't want him prosecuted also. That's some hint i guess. I, like many others, could care less about what his Hollywood buddies think. His artistic talents are obvious and brilliant, but before the law, he should be held just as accountable as any old schlub. This is about society and the laws of society. Laws do not exist solely for avenging victims. Society deems rape of minors a serious offense and one which is punishable by incarceration. He plead guilty to this crime and then fled to avoid serving his sentence. That is the issue at hand. Not his admittedly tragic past nor his impressive work in film. Few things in life are simple, shades of grey and whatnot, but this couldn't be any more cut and dried. The audacity of prominent entertainment figures to think that he should be treated differently because of his work is extraordinarily offensive and serves as a great reminder of just how disconnected Hollywood is from reality and how little credence their views on topics other than hip night clubs, tiny dogs and red carpet "fashion" should be given. I mostly disagree about calling Mr. Polanski 'a scumbag' and similar by people who obviously know shit about him. (His 'hollywood buddies' were maybe there in the 70s. Now he's definitely an European director with little connection to the US. So no, no night club parties with chihuahuas and Paris Hilton lol) I think there's misunderstanding - nobody is saying it's because he has done nice movies he should be free or his talents make him above the law. The thing is, if he was, say, a construction worker that wouldn't affect his life much BUT since he was a famous guy EVERYONE got to know what he did. His co-workers, family, friends, the lady in grocery store etc and of course the general public. This is A punishment, no one can deny. There's still issue for me if he should be put in jail now and for how long exactly.
Yeah, if he were a construction worker, it wouldn't affect his life that much....
except for the fact that a construction worker would have been punished to the fullest extent of the law and put in jail for years, not given celebrity treatment and offered a ridiculously lenient plea bargain. The construction worker would be then required to register as a sex offender anywhere he/she moves. Also, criminal history must be disclosed for employment in the United States.
I have a feeling that Polanski will somehow get out of this without ever returning to the U.S., but the notion that his celebrity status actually worked against him in all of this is absurd. Regular people do serious time for drugging and raping children.
|
On October 02 2009 07:43 jetpower wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2009 06:45 s_side wrote:On October 02 2009 06:01 jetpower wrote:
Well, people who actually KNOW him tend to defend him. The victim doesn't want him prosecuted also. That's some hint i guess. I, like many others, could care less about what his Hollywood buddies think. His artistic talents are obvious and brilliant, but before the law, he should be held just as accountable as any old schlub. This is about society and the laws of society. Laws do not exist solely for avenging victims. Society deems rape of minors a serious offense and one which is punishable by incarceration. He plead guilty to this crime and then fled to avoid serving his sentence. That is the issue at hand. Not his admittedly tragic past nor his impressive work in film. Few things in life are simple, shades of grey and whatnot, but this couldn't be any more cut and dried. The audacity of prominent entertainment figures to think that he should be treated differently because of his work is extraordinarily offensive and serves as a great reminder of just how disconnected Hollywood is from reality and how little credence their views on topics other than hip night clubs, tiny dogs and red carpet "fashion" should be given. I mostly disagree about calling Mr. Polanski 'a scumbag' and similar by people who obviously know shit about him. (His 'hollywood buddies' were maybe there in the 70s. Now he's definitely an European director with little connection to the US. So no, no night club parties with chihuahuas and Paris Hilton lol) I think there's misunderstanding - nobody is saying it's because he has done nice movies he should be free or his talents make him above the law. The thing is, if he was, say, a construction worker that wouldn't affect his life much BUT since he was a famous guy EVERYONE got to know what he did. His co-workers, family, friends, the lady in grocery store etc and of course the general public. This is A punishment, no one can deny. There's still issue for me if he should be put in jail now and for how long exactly.
I'm willing to bet if a construction worker raped a 13 year old, then the neighborhood would know about it. The idea that having the crime be public knowledge is enough of a punishment is pretty laughable. I'm sure all the other rapists in prison right now would love to have gotten off that easy.
|
Read up on sex offender registration laws. In some states the laws are so harsh about registered sex offenders being near schools that they literally have no where to live, except as homeless people under bridges.
Yes, Roman Polanski has really suffered, living in Europe with his model wife and his money, going to parties with the rich and famous.
|
On October 02 2009 07:35 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
wow, this sinks to new lows..
|
France has dropped their official support for Polanski, and are now saying that "nobody should be above or below the law"
|
On October 02 2009 07:43 jetpower wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2009 06:45 s_side wrote:On October 02 2009 06:01 jetpower wrote:
Well, people who actually KNOW him tend to defend him. The victim doesn't want him prosecuted also. That's some hint i guess. I, like many others, could care less about what his Hollywood buddies think. His artistic talents are obvious and brilliant, but before the law, he should be held just as accountable as any old schlub. This is about society and the laws of society. Laws do not exist solely for avenging victims. Society deems rape of minors a serious offense and one which is punishable by incarceration. He plead guilty to this crime and then fled to avoid serving his sentence. That is the issue at hand. Not his admittedly tragic past nor his impressive work in film. Few things in life are simple, shades of grey and whatnot, but this couldn't be any more cut and dried. The audacity of prominent entertainment figures to think that he should be treated differently because of his work is extraordinarily offensive and serves as a great reminder of just how disconnected Hollywood is from reality and how little credence their views on topics other than hip night clubs, tiny dogs and red carpet "fashion" should be given. I mostly disagree about calling Mr. Polanski 'a scumbag' and similar by people who obviously know shit about him. (His 'hollywood buddies' were maybe there in the 70s. Now he's definitely an European director with little connection to the US. So no, no night club parties with chihuahuas and Paris Hilton lol) I think there's misunderstanding - nobody is saying it's because he has done nice movies he should be free or his talents make him above the law. The thing is, if he was, say, a construction worker that wouldn't affect his life much BUT since he was a famous guy EVERYONE got to know what he did. His co-workers, family, friends, the lady in grocery store etc and of course the general public. This is A punishment, no one can deny. There's still issue for me if he should be put in jail now and for how long exactly.
You disagree with the nomenclature? Again, he drugged and raped a child. If anything, scumbag isn't a strong enough word.
Furthermore, if he was just some regular Joe who was convicted of this crime yesterday, not only would Joe Q. Average be serving more than ten times the sentence that Polankski fled from, but he would be a registered sex offender and everyone in his neighborhood would most certainly know.
One could argue, had he done the time, that he had served his debt to society and no one should make anymore stink about it. It's not an argument I would make, because I find sexual predation of children to be a particularly heinous crime. Most lawmakers in the US agree with me, and therefore sex offenders are registered in public databases and prohibited from living in certain areas and working in certain jobs.
You're saying his punishment is undeniably tougher on him because he's famous? Bullshit. Average people don't have the means to go live like kings in Europe while on the lam from child rape charges. Furthermore, while his conviction was big news, an overwhelming number of his colleagues supported and continue to support him! Do you think that would happen with Joe the construction worker? Would his fellow bricklayers be signing petitions and writing op-eds decrying his unfair treatment? Of course not.
|
On October 02 2009 09:15 s_side wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2009 07:43 jetpower wrote:On October 02 2009 06:45 s_side wrote:On October 02 2009 06:01 jetpower wrote:
Well, people who actually KNOW him tend to defend him. The victim doesn't want him prosecuted also. That's some hint i guess. I, like many others, could care less about what his Hollywood buddies think. His artistic talents are obvious and brilliant, but before the law, he should be held just as accountable as any old schlub. This is about society and the laws of society. Laws do not exist solely for avenging victims. Society deems rape of minors a serious offense and one which is punishable by incarceration. He plead guilty to this crime and then fled to avoid serving his sentence. That is the issue at hand. Not his admittedly tragic past nor his impressive work in film. Few things in life are simple, shades of grey and whatnot, but this couldn't be any more cut and dried. The audacity of prominent entertainment figures to think that he should be treated differently because of his work is extraordinarily offensive and serves as a great reminder of just how disconnected Hollywood is from reality and how little credence their views on topics other than hip night clubs, tiny dogs and red carpet "fashion" should be given. I mostly disagree about calling Mr. Polanski 'a scumbag' and similar by people who obviously know shit about him. (His 'hollywood buddies' were maybe there in the 70s. Now he's definitely an European director with little connection to the US. So no, no night club parties with chihuahuas and Paris Hilton lol) I think there's misunderstanding - nobody is saying it's because he has done nice movies he should be free or his talents make him above the law. The thing is, if he was, say, a construction worker that wouldn't affect his life much BUT since he was a famous guy EVERYONE got to know what he did. His co-workers, family, friends, the lady in grocery store etc and of course the general public. This is A punishment, no one can deny. There's still issue for me if he should be put in jail now and for how long exactly. You disagree with the nomenclature? Again, he drugged and raped a child. If anything, scumbag isn't a strong enough word. Furthermore, if he was just some regular Joe who was convicted of this crime yesterday, not only would Joe Q. Average be serving more than ten times the sentence that Polankski fled from, but he would be a registered sex offender and everyone in his neighborhood would most certainly know. One could argue, had he done the time, that he had served his debt to society and no one should make anymore stink about it. It's not an argument I would make, because I find sexual predation of children to be particularly heinous crime. Most lawmakers in the US agree with me, and therefore sex offenders are registered in public databases and prohibited from living in certain areas and working in certain jobs. You're saying his punishment is undeniably tougher on him because he's famous? Bullshit. Average people don't have the means to go live like kings in Europe while on the lam from child rape charges. Furthermore, while his conviction was big news, an overwhelming number of his colleagues supported and continue to support him! Do you think that would happen with Joe the construction worker? Would his fellow bricklayers be signing petitions and writing op-eds decrying his unfair treatment? Of course not.
If he was just Joe Q then only the people in his neighbourhood would care. Yet everyone that cares to watch the news or is in any way remotely plugged to the tv or internet knows about the great asshole that this Polanski guy really is. Yes its a pretty bad crime but, as you have said, an award winning director goes a long way in giving back to society dont you think? And isnt that the point of judicial punishment? The lady doesnt want to press charges either it seems. So lets just leave it up to her and stop all the bickering with something that doesnt even concern us.
|
On October 02 2009 09:20 Cloud wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2009 09:15 s_side wrote:On October 02 2009 07:43 jetpower wrote:On October 02 2009 06:45 s_side wrote:On October 02 2009 06:01 jetpower wrote:
Well, people who actually KNOW him tend to defend him. The victim doesn't want him prosecuted also. That's some hint i guess. I, like many others, could care less about what his Hollywood buddies think. His artistic talents are obvious and brilliant, but before the law, he should be held just as accountable as any old schlub. This is about society and the laws of society. Laws do not exist solely for avenging victims. Society deems rape of minors a serious offense and one which is punishable by incarceration. He plead guilty to this crime and then fled to avoid serving his sentence. That is the issue at hand. Not his admittedly tragic past nor his impressive work in film. Few things in life are simple, shades of grey and whatnot, but this couldn't be any more cut and dried. The audacity of prominent entertainment figures to think that he should be treated differently because of his work is extraordinarily offensive and serves as a great reminder of just how disconnected Hollywood is from reality and how little credence their views on topics other than hip night clubs, tiny dogs and red carpet "fashion" should be given. I mostly disagree about calling Mr. Polanski 'a scumbag' and similar by people who obviously know shit about him. (His 'hollywood buddies' were maybe there in the 70s. Now he's definitely an European director with little connection to the US. So no, no night club parties with chihuahuas and Paris Hilton lol) I think there's misunderstanding - nobody is saying it's because he has done nice movies he should be free or his talents make him above the law. The thing is, if he was, say, a construction worker that wouldn't affect his life much BUT since he was a famous guy EVERYONE got to know what he did. His co-workers, family, friends, the lady in grocery store etc and of course the general public. This is A punishment, no one can deny. There's still issue for me if he should be put in jail now and for how long exactly. You disagree with the nomenclature? Again, he drugged and raped a child. If anything, scumbag isn't a strong enough word. Furthermore, if he was just some regular Joe who was convicted of this crime yesterday, not only would Joe Q. Average be serving more than ten times the sentence that Polankski fled from, but he would be a registered sex offender and everyone in his neighborhood would most certainly know. One could argue, had he done the time, that he had served his debt to society and no one should make anymore stink about it. It's not an argument I would make, because I find sexual predation of children to be particularly heinous crime. Most lawmakers in the US agree with me, and therefore sex offenders are registered in public databases and prohibited from living in certain areas and working in certain jobs. You're saying his punishment is undeniably tougher on him because he's famous? Bullshit. Average people don't have the means to go live like kings in Europe while on the lam from child rape charges. Furthermore, while his conviction was big news, an overwhelming number of his colleagues supported and continue to support him! Do you think that would happen with Joe the construction worker? Would his fellow bricklayers be signing petitions and writing op-eds decrying his unfair treatment? Of course not. If he was just Joe Q then only the people in his neighbourhood would care. Yet everyone that cares to watch the news or is in any way remotely plugged to the tv or internet knows about the great asshole that this Polanski guy really is. Yes its a pretty bad crime but, as you have said, an award winning director goes a long way in giving back to society dont you think? And isnt that the point of judicial punishment? The lady doesnt want to press charges either it seems. So lets just leave it up to her and stop all the bickering with something that doesnt even concern us.
A crime has been committed, a guilty plea has been accepted, justice is to be done. No apologies of yours will change that.
Let the hammer drop.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
Why are we focusing on Polanski so much with all of the rumors and allegations that Glenn Beck RAPED AND KILLED A GIRL IN 1990?
|
On October 02 2009 11:16 motbob wrote:
Why are we focusing on Polanski so much with all of the rumors and allegations that Glenn Beck RAPED AND KILLED A GIRL IN 1990?
Lol from reddit?
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On October 02 2009 11:56 BalliSLife wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2009 11:16 motbob wrote:
Why are we focusing on Polanski so much with all of the rumors and allegations that Glenn Beck RAPED AND KILLED A GIRL IN 1990? Lol from reddit?
I don't know why you're laughing. Allegations of RAPE AND MURDER should never be taken lightly.
|
On October 02 2009 12:00 motbob wrote:Why are we focusing on Polanski so much with all of the rumors and allegations that Glenn Beck RAPED AND KILLED A GIRL IN 1990?
Because this is a thread about Roman Polanski. Someone else (allegedly) doing something doesn't erase a crime
On October 02 2009 12:00 motbob wrote:
I don't know why you're laughing. Allegations of RAPE AND MURDER should never be taken lightly.
Except when they are specious. This is a pretty shitty thread derail. I doubt TL.net is meant to be used for google-bombing
|
On October 02 2009 12:00 motbob wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2009 11:56 BalliSLife wrote:On October 02 2009 11:16 motbob wrote:
Why are we focusing on Polanski so much with all of the rumors and allegations that Glenn Beck RAPED AND KILLED A GIRL IN 1990? Lol from reddit? I don't know why you're laughing. Allegations of RAPE AND MURDER should never be taken lightly.
K clearly you don't know what I was referring to
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://d.yimg.com/a/p/umedia/20090930/largeimage.57337fcf8b24e3e48fd9b7526f3c4217.gif)
