[SimonH]

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Outcry over Polanski's detention

I was reading this today and it doesn't seem like Polanksi is actually arguing that he had sex with a 13 year old and gave her drugs.

If he wasn't a famous film director would anybody be making a song and dance about this ?

Seems like he commited a crime, was released on bail of some kind, did a runner and never came back.

Why should he be except , I can't imagine any normal Joe Blow would be.

[xit2050]

Already a thread: http://www.avforums.com/forums/movie...-arrested.html

[eric pisch]

Originally Posted by SimonH

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Outcry over Polanski's detention

I was reading this today and it doesn't seem like Polanksi is actually arguing that he had sex with a 13 year old and gave her drugs.

If he wasn't a famous film director would anybody be making a song and dance about this ?

Seems like he commited a crime, was released on bail of some kind, did a runner and never came back.

Why should he be except , I can't imagine any normal Joe Blow would be.

change his name to Gary Glitter and people would be volunteering to send him to the US

wow, never knew he was a convicted pedo

some of the comments defending him are amazing

[krish]

I saw Robert Harris defending him on Ch4 news yesterday, and was quite irate
- he was justifying Polanski's freedom from punishment on the basis that the then 13 year-old girl now doesn't want him to be prosecuted and was quite sexually active as a 13 year old, and that the judge threw away a plea bargain, so he had no choice but to flee
... so that's alright then, he should get away with giving quaaludes to clearly underage girl and then sodomising her

Hollywood doesn't generally seem to mind nonces, since they still award Polanski, and convicted paedophile Victor Salva churns out his Jeepers Creepers movies.

[ps3mad]

Sounds similar to another star getting away with having 14 year old boys in thier bed.People would be disgusted if it was just a normal bloke,but because they're famous

[scarty16]

send him back to the USA and let their prison system take care of him, lets see if what he did was really worth it in the end.

[krish]

Originally Posted by scarty16

send him back to the USA and let their prison system take care of him, lets see if what he did was really worth it in the end.

A secondary benefit of his conviction would be getting up the noses of types like the OP of that other thread in the movie forum ... why the frig should I be "extremely grateful" to Polanksi? I get a bit vexed when artsy-fartsy commentators put certain people upon a pedestal above others who've actually done a great deal for society and humanity.

[Hillskill]

So has he actually served time for this crime already ?

[Sonic67]

I've always found the whole Elvis Presley and Priscilla dodgy and Bill Wyman and Mandy Smith but some people can get away with it and others can't.

[loz]

Originally Posted by Hillskill

So has he actually served time for this crime already ?

no

[loz]

It is interesting that playing Gary Glitter or Jonathan King music on the radio has become a no-no in the UK since their convictions, and yet Polanksi's films are widely shown.

[krish]

@ Sonic .. Jerry Lee Lewis, Chuck Berry ....

@ Loz ... it's the artsy-fartsy / elitist brigade still getting their way

[Hillskill]

Originally Posted by Hillskill

So has he actually served time for this crime already ?

Originally Posted by loz

no

Read somewhere that he had. Just did a Google and found this:

Polanski was allowed to plead guilty to one of six charges, unlawful sexual intercourse, and was sent to prison for 42 days of evaluation.

Lawyers agreed that would be his full sentence, but the judge tried to renege on the plea bargain. Aware the judge would sentence him to more prison time and require his voluntary deportation, Polanski fled.

Link: Roman Polanski in Swiss Police Custody - CBS News

He needs to go back to face the music for sure. What I don't understand is admitted to drugging her but the charge is only one of "unlawful intercourse". Eitherway there appears to be enough holes in this case for a good legal team to get him out of it.

[Jenn]

Originally Posted by loz

no

As i understand it he was locked up for 42 days for psychological tests etc. and he changed his plea for a bargain for time served meaning he could have walked free but fled the country because the judge was going to reject it.

Edit: what Hillskill said.

[loz]

Originally Posted by Hillskill

Read somewhere that he had. Just did a Google and found this:

He needs to go back to face the music for sure. What I don't understand is admitted to drugging her but the charge is only one of "unlawful intercourse". Eitherway there appears to be enough holes in this case for a good legal team to get him out of it.

according to the guardian

Roman Polanski and the 31-year-old legal headache | David Thomson | Film | guardian.co.uk

In the legal negotiations that followed, Polanski never denied the charges, but they were dismissed under the terms of the plea bargain by which he pleaded guilty to unlawful sex with a minor. With a view to proper sentencing, the judge – Laurence Rittenband – ordered that Polanski be confined for psychiatric examination. That led to 42 days' confinement in the Chino State Prison over the 1977-8 period. In that examination Polanski was passed as fit to stand trial. It was the director's understanding that the 42 days in Chino would satisfy punitive instincts. There might be a fine, too, but he would be freed. Then, just before sentencing, Polanski heard that Rittenband was ready to break the agreement – because he feared public criticism of a verdict that seemed too lenient on Polanski. And so, fearing further imprisonment, Polanski broke bail and flew by British Airway

[SimonH]

Originally Posted by Sonic67

I've always found the whole Elvis Presley and Priscilla dodgy and Bill Wyman and Mandy Smith but some people can get away with it and others can't.

I think the issue isn't so much the age gap as the fact he apparently drugged a 13 year old and had sex with her against her wishes.

I might find Wyman a bit seedy but there's a big difference in the two scenarios, AFAIK, Wyman, Smith etc actually had a relationship , it was entirely consensual and I'm pretty sure Smith wasn't 13 was she ?

[Hillskill]

The case is a mess and Polanski must have been completely messed up over the Manson murders which were horrific. For him to commit such an evil act against a minor tho is in-excusable no matter how psychologically messed up nor master craftsman he is. Phil Spectors conviction shows that the US is no longer the nation that can be counted on to acquit its stars but there are simply to many holes in this case. A decent legal team will have a field day.

[Decadence]

He's a Paedo...get him into court and then get him into jail where he belongs, the man is a disgrace and I have never watched his films, dirty old pervert.

[krish]

Originally Posted by SimonH

I think the issue isn't so much the age gap as the fact he apparently drugged a 13 year old and had sex with her against her wishes.

I might find Wyman a bit seedy but there's a big difference in the two scenarios, AFAIK, Wyman, Smith etc actually had a relationship , it was entirely consensual and I'm pretty sure Smith wasn't 13 was she ?

I recall the press at the time going on about her being 13 or 14 when they started their relationship, and they married when she was 18. Even if it wasn't sexual before she was at the legal age of consent, it's just very very wrong. He'd definitely get the Gary Glitter treatment if the story broke in recent years.

Just checking Wiki ...

In 1989 Wyman married the eighteen-year-old Mandy Smith, whom he had been dating since she was thirteen; their relationship was the subject of considerable media attention. The marriage ended in spring 1991

[krish]

Originally Posted by Decadence

I have never watched his films, dirty old pervert.

You might have watched his Macbeth (with Cheggars) at school in English.

- I aint calling it The Scottish Play!!

[dazza74]

Not condoning what he's done but it's always come across as a one off in Polanski's case whereas the likes of Glitter are persistant offenders. I think he's a bit of an idiot personally putting the vanity of an award over potential prison, I'd bang him up for stupidity.

I'm personally more bothered by what's currently going on in Kenya in the coastal resorts. That really is frightening :

Western paedophiles target Kenya children for sex - Africa, World - The Independent

[wormvortex]

About time he was finally arrested for this. I find it disgusting that he got away with it so long and that countries allowed him in.

[SimonH]

Originally Posted by krish

I recall the press at the time going on about her being 13 or 14 when they started their relationship, and they married when she was 18. Even if it wasn't sexual before she was at the legal age of consent, it's just very very wrong. He'd definitely get the Gary Glitter treatment if the story broke in recent years.

Just checking Wiki ...

Yeah it's definatley very very wrong. However I still place somebody who drugs a 13 year old at a party and rapes her in a different catagory to somebody who's seeing somebody who essentially went out with a gal for nearly a decade and for whom sex was consensual.

Still wrong, just a different scenario for my money.

[Decadence]

Originally Posted by krish

You might have watched his Macbeth (with Cheggars) at school in English.

- I aint calling it The Scottish Play!!

Unfortunately I missed it...the only two films I ever remember watching at school were Wargames and Starchaser: The legend of Orin.

[krish]

Originally Posted by SimonH

However I still place somebody who drugs a 13 year old at a party and rapes her in a different catagory to somebody who's seeing somebody who essentially went out with a gal for nearly a decade and for whom sex was consensual.

I see how the former is worse than the latter ... but if sexual relations take place between an adult (and Wyman was certainly around middle-age when she was 13) and under-16 minor, it still isn't consensual legally, and he could have been tried had there been enough evidence; and non-sexual it's still very wrong as we agree.

[Jenn]

Nothing excuses what RP did with a 13 years old but one has to wonder where the hell were her parents or guardian or whoever was responsible for her when all that happens?
Or was it something "that happened" in these circles and he was the one who got caught?

[loz]

Originally Posted by Jenn

Nothing excuses what RP did with a 13 years old but one has to wonder where the hell were her parents or guardian or whoever was responsible for her when all that happens?
Or was it something "that happened" in these circles and he was the one who got caught?

I guess it needs to be seen in the context of the time and the place.

California, the '70s, "free love"

Nowadays its all very different, but in that context, I can guess there was a fair bit of it about...

[SimonH]

Originally Posted by Jenn

Nothing excuses what RP did with a 13 years old but one has to wonder where the hell were her parents or guardian or whoever was responsible for her when all that happens?
Or was it something "that happened" in these circles and he was the one who got caught?

I'm still trying to work out how she was even approached as a model at 13 and got a personal invite to jack nicholson's personal home where it happened.

I know we have advanced 13 year olds kicking around but still, a tall, advanced 13 year old might be able to bluff her way past a doorman at a squiffy nightclub but how did she manage to end up a JN's house at 13..

It does raise the question where the hell was somebody who was supposed to have her best interests at heart or perhaps the parents thought , well it's a major movie stars home, not some seedy strip club, she should be safe.

Hell perhaps, she snuck out and didn't even tell her parents..

Who knows....

[SimonH]

RP , may have a good lawyer and due to various factors may well be able to beat this rap but he's not up against somebody who gives a crap that he's a famous movie director.

Roman Polanski: profile of LA attorney who wants justice - Telegraph

[baldrick]

Here's my post from the other thread:

I'll chime in here and from the few things I've just read there is no doubt as to his guilt. He admitted it at the time and has subsequently talked about it in interviews : In subsequent interviews he even seemed mildly bemused by all the fuss; perhaps regarding it as an impossibly square, conservative response to a bit of harmless west coast hedonism.

To that end he is a self confesed rapist and peadophile so really how can anyone talk about 'mistakes' or 'errors of judgement'?

Yes he had some bad stuff happen in his life eg. surviving the Nazis in the Krakow Ghettos and having his wife and unborn child slaughtered by the Manson Gang but that does not excuse the drugging and raping of a child!

It is a fair point that the OP raises re. what would you do if your favourite director was convicted of the same crimes, would burn/erase any of their movies that you might own?

Also how is it that none of the film companies etc... have been charged with aiding and abetting a known fugitive when they have funded his films over the last 30 years?

The biggest problem now is that unless they throw the book at him everyone charged with similar crimes can appeal based on the premise that 'Roman Polanski did it....'.

I guess the question is that if you're child/neice/nephew etc... was ever drugged and raped by a middle aged man would you want them castrated and locked up or would you be prepared to write it off as 'doing a Roman'?