It's an odd one, and really, the law has the memory of an elephant with a filing system.
"Samantha Geimer, 45, was a starry-eyed innocent when Polanski asked her mother if he could photograph her for a fashion magazine at the Hollywood Hills home of Jack Nicholson in March 1977.
After plying the youngster with champagne and drugs and taking nude pictures of her in a hot tub, Polanski had sex with the teen despite her resistance and requests to be taken home."
[...]
"Polanski, famed for films such as Rosemary's Baby and Chinatown, fled the US in 1978 before being sentenced after his guilty plea to a charge of unlawful sexual intercourse with 13-year-old Samantha Geimer. He faced up to life in prison".
At this point I'm thinking it's the justice ghost of xmas past come back and claimed him. But here's the odd bit.
Outrage after Roman Polanski arrested on child sex charges
GOVERNMENT ministers, movie directors, writers and intellectuals have expressed shock and outrage after the detention of Oscar winning director Roman Polanski in Switzerland on three-decade-old child sex charges.
France and Poland are to ask the United States to drop the charges and consider a presidential pardon over the case, Poland's PAP news agency said overnight, though Polanski has already acknowledged he had sex with the 13-year-old girl in Los Angeles in 1977.
Someone tell me why there's outrage?. He was convicted and did the bolt before sentencing. Fairly black and white, to me.
Sunday 27 September 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Throw the fkn book at him. Committed crime, found guilty, did a bunk. If this was any more black and white it'd be a fkn zebra. Tack a few more years onto it for his troubles.
ReplyDeleteThe only question I have, is there a time limit for which charges have to be laid.
ReplyDeleteCertainly have no objection to him facing trial.
The outrage comes from people who are use to and expect privilege (private law) to apply to them and their friends.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe victim has expressed a desire to let it be, and in fact received an undetermined settlement from Polanski. This is just another case of the US wanting justice at any cost, as far as I'm concerned. The court had its chance to keep him and they didn't. I am not condoning what he did, but why is the US so determined to continue this case? The original judge was perhaps going to renege on his original sentence, and Polanki bolted.
ReplyDeleteWhen there is a statute of limitations on sufferring then I will he should not face the penalty.
ReplyDeleteIf he had any sort of pride then he would welcome the opportunity to pay the punishment for his crime.
The poms chased Ronnie Biggs for years and ended up jailing him eventually didn't they.
ReplyDeleteI can't see why he shouldnt go to jail over this when they are still chasing people over WW2 war crimes.
Barnes, he has been charged and tried. He just did a runner before sentencing. He did the crime he needs to do the time, and also face the music over his runner.
ReplyDeleteYeah, with Bangar on this. The other of it that it's beyond the plea of the victim for her and her family's well being. He's already been convicted.
ReplyDeleteThey still feel sorry for him because of all that Manson family/Sharon Tate business.
ReplyDeleteYeah, figured that was part of it.
ReplyDelete