Roman Polanski finally arrested
Roman Polanski’s fugitive days are over. The Academy Award-winning director is under arrest in Switzerland and vowing to fight extradition to California to face charges in connection with a 1977 sex crime involving a 13-year-old girl. Swiss police arrested Polanski Saturday when he arrived in Zurich for a film festival, where he was to receive an honorary award.
The 76-year-old had been living in France for decades to avoid U.S. authorities. You may recall, he declined to attend the Academy Awards in 2003, when he won Best Director for “The Pianist.” That’s because he would have been arrested once he set foot on U.S. soil.
Let’s rewind to 1977. That’s when Polanski pleaded guilty to having sex with a minor. He was 43 at the time. The incident happened during a photo shoot at actor Jack Nicholson’s home. Nicholson was not at home. Polanski fled before he could be sentenced.
There have been several attempts over these past three decades to settle the sex case, but Polanski has always refused to come back to the U.S.
The movie director started a new life in France. He got married and is the father of two children.
Do you think Polasnki should fight extradition or face justice in California?
Prosecutors have argued it would be a miscarriage of justice to allow a man to go free who “drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl.”
He also has a lot of supporters who think the case should be dropped, including the victim.
Now 45, married and known as Samantha Geimer, she made her identity public years ago, because she said she was disturbed at how the criminal case was being handled.
She sued Polanski in civil court, which led to an undisclosed settlement. In court documents filed earlier this year, she said, “I am no longer a 13-year-old child… Every time this case is brought to the attention of the court, great focus is made of me, my family, my mother and others. That attention is not pleasant to experience and is not worth maintaining over some irrelevant legal nicety, the continuation of this case.”
taken from -http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/28/evening-buzz-fugitive-filmmaker-arrested-fighting-back/
Another perspective-
She was not drugged but given some champagne.
She was a fully developed model, and he was her photographer.
She consented
She wasn't a virgin to begin with
Anjelica Huston, who was Nicholson's g/f at the time thought the girl was 20.
further details here -http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/free-roman-polanski-wtf/
The 76-year-old had been living in France for decades to avoid U.S. authorities. You may recall, he declined to attend the Academy Awards in 2003, when he won Best Director for “The Pianist.” That’s because he would have been arrested once he set foot on U.S. soil.
Let’s rewind to 1977. That’s when Polanski pleaded guilty to having sex with a minor. He was 43 at the time. The incident happened during a photo shoot at actor Jack Nicholson’s home. Nicholson was not at home. Polanski fled before he could be sentenced.
There have been several attempts over these past three decades to settle the sex case, but Polanski has always refused to come back to the U.S.
The movie director started a new life in France. He got married and is the father of two children.
Do you think Polasnki should fight extradition or face justice in California?
Prosecutors have argued it would be a miscarriage of justice to allow a man to go free who “drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl.”
He also has a lot of supporters who think the case should be dropped, including the victim.
Now 45, married and known as Samantha Geimer, she made her identity public years ago, because she said she was disturbed at how the criminal case was being handled.
She sued Polanski in civil court, which led to an undisclosed settlement. In court documents filed earlier this year, she said, “I am no longer a 13-year-old child… Every time this case is brought to the attention of the court, great focus is made of me, my family, my mother and others. That attention is not pleasant to experience and is not worth maintaining over some irrelevant legal nicety, the continuation of this case.”
taken from -http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/28/evening-buzz-fugitive-filmmaker-arrested-fighting-back/
Another perspective-
She was not drugged but given some champagne.
She was a fully developed model, and he was her photographer.
She consented
She wasn't a virgin to begin with
Anjelica Huston, who was Nicholson's g/f at the time thought the girl was 20.
further details here -http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/free-roman-polanski-wtf/
16 Comments
videosiftbannedmeShe was not drugged but given some champagne.
She was a fully developed model, and he was her photographer.
She consented
She wasn't a virgin to begin with
Anjelica Huston, who was Nicholson's g/f at the time thought the girl was 20.
^All irrelevant.
Was she under age? Yes
Did he stick his dick in her? Yes
Case closed.
dystopianfuturetodayI'm sure 13 year old girls round the world will sleep easier tonight.
rottenseedWhile I often question the sex laws here when it comes to who is physically and mentally capable of making the decision to have it, there has to be a line drawn somewhere. You can't just have pedos running around saying "she was mature for her age" and shit like that. That being said, I think it's different between an 18 year old and a 16 year old than it is between a 43 year old and a 13 year old, obviously.
If I'd be arrested and put in jail for what he did, why shouldn't he have to face the same reality?
longdeI don't condone what he did. There are, however, alot of things you could be arrested for in the US, but not elsewhere, like smoking a dubee.
kronosposeidonHe anallly raped her after putting a quaalude in her champagne. She told him no but he did it anyway. The guy's a creep.
gwiz665^according to her. Don't be so quick to side with her because she was young and has lady-bits. If I've learned anything lately, it's that memory can change pretty quickly if you want it to.
Still a 30 year difference is just waay too much and even if she had been 20 it would still have been a bit weird. The fact that he fled the country is a much bigger indicator that he was/is guilty and he does deserve to be put in front of a trial for it.
But, as it seems, if both he and her have put it behind them, then I don't see the reason in ripping up the old wounds again for the sake of the law. He could face justice for fleeing the country in the middle of a trial, but other than that if both parties don't want this, then why do it again?
yourhydraThank god I live in Canada. Both of my serious relationships were with older men and I was "underage." I know girls who don't sexually stabilize till they are fucking 20, I was sexually mature when I was quite young. And with both guys I initiated it. SO should they go to jail because I'm supposedly "too young" and can't make my own decisions? I had 2 beautiful meaningful relationships with them and am still with one of them. Of course her case IS different...30 years and shady circumstances, but im speaking in general at this point. ALL I'm saying is...NO ITS NOT as clear cut as "shes underage so charge him." Its a law that is in place so that men who do seduce "children" don't get away with it, but I'm sorry, if you're done puberty, you are not a child. In fact, you're biologically supposed to be having sex once you get your period (not counting the fat 6 year olds who get theirs because they eat too much beef), and if you can't figure out with whom and how to safely....that's natural selection.
It makes me sick that a 17 year old girl can fuck a 21 year old in America, he dumps her, she gets mad, and files stagetory rape against him. It happens more often than you can imagine.
gwiz665^In Denmark the sexual limit is 15, so there are no statutory rape if both parties are above that.
volumptuousNot that long ago, it was legal to marry a 13 yr old in many parts of the US.
ponceleonInteresting article with the victim's perspective in this case:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/29/polanski.victim.profile/index.html
RyjkyjThe real story here is that Polansky initially cooperated. He submitted a guilty plea based on a plea bargain that the fame-hungry judge then reneged on. It's a great example of our justice system going snafu.
EDIT: We love to make a big deal about how he was "Finally Arrested" when in fact, he voluntarily gave himself over the first time!
Sagemind"As of May 6th 2007 the Age of Consent in Canada was raised from 14 to 16 years old (bringing Canada into line with most states and European countries. We used to have the lowest age of consent of any of the developed nations.)
However, the new bill also carries a "near-in-age exception" that allows teenagers to engage in consensual sex below the legal age limit with a person no more then 5 years older then them."
http://www.advicenators.com/qview.php?q=492163
gwiz665^That makes sense, Sagemind. It seems rather foolish to be guilty of statutory rape if a 14/15 or 17/18 (etc.) couple had sex.
Farhad2000I LOVE YOUNG PUSSY.
/PEDOBEAR
gwiz665Roman bought the first printing of my Tee-shirt design.
kulpims>> ^Ryjkyj:
The real story here is that Polansky initially cooperated. He submitted a guilty plea based on a plea bargain that the fame-hungry judge then reneged on. It's a great example of our justice system going snafu.
EDIT: We love to make a big deal about how he was "Finally Arrested" when in fact, he voluntarily gave himself over the first time!
indeed. the case was already in court, polanski admitted to everything and both parties settled, then the asshole judge changed his mind and wanted to crucify him, which made polanski run to france
and, btw, where the fuck is the victim's mother in all this - she left the girl (with full knowledge of everything) at the party cause she wanted her daughter to get into movie business ... she should be on trial as well, if you ask me
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.