This is the thread where the fringster comes back with teeth

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Those DOJ types are wound just a little too tight, if you ask me.

Okay, well, let's just say their intended audience takes notice.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/vi...v=260431775537 (911call).

"I think we're dead."

[Jack Manfred]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Was there a bigger loss to music (good music) in the past 20 years than Bradley Nowell?

Jeff Buckley

I was never a big fan of Sublime.

[Jack Manfred]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

He didn't "fuck" her. He drugged her, raped her vaginally and then turned her over and forcibly sodomized her anally. Regardless of her age, she didn't consent to any of that.

I think his movies are very good, I feel terrible that his pregnant wife was killed, but he committed a crime, plead guilty to that crime and then fled the country before he served a day in jail. I don't give a fuck if he's already paid her off. I don't give a fuck that it's so unfair that he's had to live a life of exiled luxury in France. I don't give a fuck if he didn't get to pick up his Oscar personally. He raped a girl, and he was convicted of that rape. And he should go to jail.

2

One disturbing aspect of this case which has not been mentioned here is that the victim, who has forgiven Polanski, thinks that the American legal system has wronged Polanski and her over these past 30 years. The victim is wrong, and I'd like to explain why.

The American legal system did not force Polanski to be a fugitive for the past 30 years. Many on this board already have argued whether or not Polanski should have returned for his sentencing. Polanski had a choice. The victim, by definition, did not. That his fate has been unresolved for decades is not the fault of the American legal system. The blame must be laid squarely at the (hopefully-soon-to-be-shackled) feet of Polanski.

I understand why it is hard for the victim to see that. Others should realize that it will be better for everyone once this case is finally resolved.

I'm not saying what sentence he should receive. It appears that Polanski could still be sentenced to time served. I don't see any reason why the sentencing judge couldn't sentence Polanski to a misdemeanor instead of a felony (though if I was the prosecutor or the judge...)

Here's the scenario that intrigues me:
1) Polanski agrees not to fight extradition proceedings.
2) Polanski agrees not to withdraw his previously entered plea of guilty.
3) The judge sentences Polanski to felony probation, with credit for time served.
4) Polanski is deported.

Under this scenario, the matter is resolved. Polanski can never enter the United States legally again, under penalty of federal time. That holds some karmic appeal. No one has to testify. There is no show trial. The People of California do not have to spend a dime on his incarceration or probation. I am not sure whether he would have to register as a sex offender in Zurich, but someone could mashup google earth with the Megan's law website without much trouble.

Because I think #1 is even more unlikely than #2, I don't think this scenario will actually occur. Though if I were an Assistant District Attorney in LA, I would discuss the pros and cons of this scenario with my boss before things went much further.

If Polanski eventually is extradicted and sentenced to prison, I'm also fine with that result.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by Jack Manfred

The blame must be laid squarely at the (hopefully-soon-to-be-shackled) feet of Polanski.

France and its law against extradition shares just a bit of the blame.

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The man's a degenerate. But the sentence was supposed to be probation. My suggestion is actually harsher than what the original prosecutor recommended.

Is there a link for what the original prosecutor recommended? The transcript of the plea hearing didn't include that, just the official warnings on the record that the judge could decide the sentence.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Fugee

Is there a link for what the original prosecutor recommended? The transcript of the plea hearing didn't include that, just the official warnings on the record that the judge could decide the sentence.

No one's come up with this. I can't find anything concrete that says the prosecutor agreed to let him off with probation.

I realize I look at this in part through the eyes of someone who has just seen a horrid case at fairly close range. I live in a town where the son of the Principal of the Middle School raped or sexually assualted multiple 11, 12 and 13 year olds over a period of years at the school (he was a coach and special ed teacher), was shielded by his father, and is still getting supported by a not inconsiderable number of people in the town. It's pretty clear the DA is going easy on him because of this support he's getting. I know at least one of the kids involved.

Having role models out there like Polanski, people who do this crap, flaunt it, and get away with it, does indeed encourage it, and encourage people to treat it less seriously. My wife was telling me there's a blog up in town about it, that now has comments along the lines of "he shouldn't get anything worse than Roman Polanski". So I'd like to see Polanski get the full weight of the law thrown at him, and then this guy get the same as Polanski.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Jack Manfred

2

One disturbing aspect of this case which has not been mentioned here is that the victim, who has forgiven Polanski, thinks that the American legal system has wronged Polanski and her over these past 30 years. The victim is wrong, and I'd like to explain why.

The American legal system did not force Polanski to be a fugitive for the past 30 years. Many on this board already have argued whether or not Polanski should have returned for his sentencing. Polanski had a choice. The victim, by definition, did not. That his fate has been unresolved for decades is not the fault of the American legal system. The blame must be laid squarely at the (hopefully-soon-to-be-shackled) feet of Polanski.

I understand why it is hard for the victim to see that. Others should realize that it will be better for everyone once this case is finally resolved.

I'm not saying what sentence he should receive. It appears that Polanski could still be sentenced to time served. I don't see any reason why the sentencing judge couldn't sentence Polanski to a misdemeanor instead of a felony (though if I was the prosecutor or the judge...)

Here's the scenario that intrigues me:
1) Polanski agrees not to fight extradition proceedings.
2) Polanski agrees not to withdraw his previously entered plea of guilty.
3) The judge sentences Polanski to felony probation, with credit for time served.
4) Polanski is deported.

Under this scenario, the matter is resolved. Polanski can never enter the United States legally again, under penalty of federal time. That holds some karmic appeal. No one has to testify. There is no show trial. The People of California do not have to spend a dime on his incarceration or probation. I am not sure whether he would have to register as a sex offender in Zurich, but someone could mashup google earth with the Megan's law website without much trouble.

Because I think #1 is even more unlikely than #2, I don't think this scenario will actually occur. Though if I were an Assistant District Attorney in LA, I would discuss the pros and cons of this scenario with my boss before things went much further.

If Polanski eventually is extradicted and sentenced to prison, I'm also fine with that result.

Anything less than prison time is a joke. The scenario you lay out goes easy on him for rape and doesn't punish him for running. If you were an ADA and discussed the scenario with your boss, I'd hope you'd both identify all the cons.

[Sparklehorse]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Re line from Binkley. Sigh. I miss Bilmore.

I don't understand this reference and google was not helpful.

[1436]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

He didn't "fuck" her. He drugged her, raped her vaginally and then turned her over and forcibly sodomized her anally.

But on one of the morning shows today they said he had "sexual contact with a minor." It really sounded innocuous in a very disgusting way.

But this was topped by Debra Winger telling me that he was being brought back on a "technicality." I wonder if it would be a "technicality" if someone raped Debra Winger.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by 1436

But on one of the morning shows today they said he had "sexual contact with a minor." It really sounded innocuous in a very disgusting way.

But this was topped by Debra Winger telling me that he was being brought back on a "technicality." I wonder if it would be a "technicality" if someone raped Debra Winger.

No one's raping Debra Winger.

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

No one's come up with this. I can't find anything concrete that says the prosecutor agreed to let him off with probation.

I realize I look at this in part through the eyes of someone who has just seen a horrid case at fairly close range. I live in a town where the son of the Principal of the Middle School raped or sexually assualted multiple 11, 12 and 13 year olds over a period of years at the school (he was a coach and special ed teacher), was shielded by his father, and is still getting supported by a not inconsiderable number of people in the town. It's pretty clear the DA is going easy on him because of this support he's getting. I know at least one of the kids involved.

ETA: This is not to say I think Polanski should get a light sentence or time served with probation, but there are factors involved there that might make it different.

Having role models out there like Polanski, people who do this crap, flaunt it, and get away with it, does indeed encourage it, and encourage people to treat it less seriously. My wife was telling me there's a blog up in town about it, that now has comments along the lines of "he shouldn't get anything worse than Roman Polanski". So I'd like to see Polanski get the full weight of the law thrown at him, and then this guy get the same as Polanski.

As far as the comparisons, your local guy shouldn't be judged on the same basis as Polanski because (1) the times are different (these crimes are considered more serious now than they used to) and (2) he's got more victims.

I don't understand how anyone in your town could support someone who sexually assaulted multiple children like that. He's a predator, he's not going to change, and I'd want the DA to throw the book at him. You wonder if those people who support him getting a lenient sentence would allow their children to be alone with him.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Fugee

As far as the comparisons, your local guy shouldn't be judged on the same basis as Polanski because (1) the times are different (these crimes are considered more serious now than they used to) and (2) he's got more victims.

I don't understand how anyone in your town could support someone who sexually assaulted multiple children like that. He's a predator, he's not going to change, and I'd want the DA to throw the book at him. You wonder if those people who support him getting a lenient sentence would allow their children to be alone with him.

on a related note- anyone else notice less has started posting on the mom/dad boarD?

oh, and NSF/TCBing i admire the "helping poor women" argument.

[1436]

Originally Posted by 1436

But on one of the morning shows today they said he had "sexual contact with a minor." It really sounded innocuous in a very disgusting way.

But this was topped by Debra Winger telling me that he was being brought back on a "technicality." I wonder if it would be a "technicality" if someone raped Debra Winger.

And now the AP says it was "statutory rape" - well that's a relief. That's like "date rape" right? Not even a crime in France, I suppose.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090929/...rland_polanski

[Gattigap]

Originally Posted by Not Bob
Re line from Binkley. Sigh. I miss Bilmore.

Originally Posted by Sparklehorse

I don't understand this reference and google was not helpful.

It's okay.

Bilmore was an oldskooler on this board. Noted for pithy one-liners, grey pubes, and an affection for bee metaphors to combat terrorism. Has been absent for many months now, and occasionally is the subject of nostalgic rememberances when NotBob dips into the house chianti at the local diner.