Roman Polanski

L

LouisLaLoope

Registered User
Messages
122
Can someone please explain the international outrage at the arrest of Roman Polanski? Whatever he was charged with, my understanding is that he fled before sentencing, is a fugitive and has evaded punishment. Why shouldn't he be arrested and extradited? I'm really not understanding why a lot of people are so appalled by it.

Please enlighten me!
 
LouisLaLoope said:
Can someone please explain the international outrage at the arrest of Roman Polanski? Whatever he was charged with, my understanding is that he fled before sentencing, is a fugitive and has evaded punishment. Why shouldn't he be arrested and extradited? I'm really not understanding why a lot of people are so appalled by it.

Please enlighten me!
Click to expand...

I don't know if there is International Outrage. France are annoyed because he is a French Citizen but I think most people are glad he going back.
 
But load of Hollywood "stars" have expressed their disgust at his arrest and possible extradition. Debra Winger made some speech, Whoopi Goldberg spoke complete rubbish. It's just bizarre, in my view.
 
LouisLaLoope said:
But load of Hollywood "stars" have expressed their disgust at his arrest and possible extradition. Debra Winger made some speech, Whoopi Goldberg spoke complete rubbish. It's just bizarre, in my view.
Click to expand...

I didn't read them to be honest. I agree with you. Just because he made some great films doesn't mean the law doesn't apply to him.
 
LouisLaLoope said:
That's all I needed to hear! Thanks! I just thought I was losing my mind...
Click to expand...

Was wondering that too. I wondered in what world there can be outrage at the arrest of a man accused of plying a 13 year old with drink, tranquilisers and then engaging in several acts with her.

The same man who has made a point of avoiding any country whereby the warrant could be served (except his legal team missed this one).

Good films: yes. Very hard life (childhood, WWII and murder of his wife): yes. Valid excuses for him not to face these charges: No.
 
I cant understand how people can stand up and defend paedophilia. Why is he any different to Gary Glitter?
 
csirl said:
I cant understand how people can stand up and defend paedophilia. Why is he any different to Gary Glitter?
Click to expand...

I agree completely. He should still stand trial.
I can't help but think that the Swiss are using this as a way to appease the States after the tax furore of the last 6 months. Is it bad to be that cynical??
 
'

I have heard various arguments in favour of this guy.
The murder of his wife
The victim herself has expressed forgiveness numerous times & in does not want a trial which would hurt her family according to her.
The argument that he did not know her age
According to him it was consensual sex

The facts are, he is guilty of statutory rape, you can't have consensual sex with a drugged up drunk child. He fled the country and has been avoiding justice all these years, the fact that Whoopi Goldberg and all of the other eejits are supporting him is staggering! What was it she said " I know it was rape but it wasn't rape-rape!" - For such an advocator of feminist issues what a message to put out there! - Mind you have heard her numerous times in the past defending Michael Jacksons actions as well so.......................
 
I think the curiousity in this case is why it's happening now. He's been to Switzerland many times (he even has a home there) and has been to many other countries from where he could have been extradited if there was a will. AFAIK, the US authorities have never pressed for his extradition before now.

There seems to be some additional factor at play now that didn't exist previously. He should have been in prison years ago but now it seems that, aged 76, they want him to return to the US for what is effectively a life sentence. It seems a bit odd that the authorities weren't equally assertive at any point over the last 30 years.

Not that hes deserves any sympathy, but there seems more to this than meets the eye.
 
Staples said:
I think the curiousity in this case is why it's happening now. He's been to Switzerland many times (he even has a home there) and has been to many other countries from where he could have been extradited if there was a will. AFAIK, the US authorities have never pressed for his extradition before now.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? I thought the only two Countries he really visited were France and Poland where the US couldn't get him. The reason they acted now was that the his arrival in Switzerland was advertised on the film festival website so the US could arrange for him to be arrested. To be fair, they tried to get him from France but they don't extradite their own citizens.
 
He has a home in GStaad (where Peter Ustinov and Peter Sellers also had homes - just a bit of trivia). Apparently he is only under house arrest here at his home in Gstaad and the US have 4 months to act on the arrest. The big question here too is "why now?"
 
casiopea said:
He has a home in GStaad (where Peter Ustinov and Peter Sellers also had homes - just a bit of trivia). Apparently he is only under house arrest here at his home in Gstaad and the US have 4 months to act on the arrest. The big question here too is "why now?"
Click to expand...

So my cynical mind may not be too far from the truth. The Swiss have gotten a bad press recently in the U.S. for systemic tax evasion. Perhaps this is just one way to appease the American justice department.
 
casiopea said:
The big question here too is "why now?"
Click to expand...

I hear what you're saying, but I suppose my very black-and-white angle is, "why not now?" Whilst there may be other issues at play here that we're unaware of, it is lawful for him to be arrested and extradited, right?
 
Re: '

ney001 said:
- Mind you have heard her numerous times in the past defending Michael Jacksons actions as well so.......................
Click to expand...
dont think you can really compare the two...one was found not guilty by a court of law...the other did not stand trial!
 
Re: '

One excuse that has been made for him is that he is a film genius, therefore should not be detained. Like a film maker should not be subjected to the law. :rolleyes:
The guy is guilty.
However, the victim has made her wishes known. If he did show up in court it would likely be dismissed on that basis. But he needs to show up.
 
It's not for victims to decide on the guilt or otherwise of alleged offenders.

His crime was against society as well as the unfortunate child whon despite everything seems to have moved on successfully.

It isn't right that child sex offenders who evade justice should be let off on the basis of their age and/or the current disposition of the victims.
 
I totally agree. The victim seems to have moved on with her life and all credit to her for that. But if the justice system put victims in a position where they can pardon the offender, they'd be open to intimidation and the like. Not cool.

I don't care if he receives no further punishment (I think he served some time pre-trial). I believe that the justice system should run its course, and if the case is dismissed, fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top