Roman Polanski finally arrested

[thepaulo]

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=8684404

Roman has avoided making a deal since 1978

[sailor]

wonderful

[thepaulo]

The girl has always been very sympathetic to Polanski's situation.

[instrument]

The girl has always been very sympathetic to Polanski's situation.

oh, that's how you word it.

[IamFogHat]

Good. Fuck him.

[thepaulo]

oh, that's how you word it.

eh....it's a sticky wicket

[dino_electropolis]

Poor guy.

And with Yom Kippor right around the corner!

[frye hole]

How old is the kid now, 45?

[thepaulo]

...and he's had quite a career since 1978....enough for him to get the best director Oscar over Scorsese in 2003....so no one was really all that upset about it....though Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan got their revenge in Rush Hour 3

[SatCam]

having unlawful sex with her at a photographic shoot at Jack Nicholson's Hollywood home.


Did he get to watch?



http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Books/Pix/pictures/2009/01/07/shining460.gif


haha

[JimBeam]

From an article I read :

In Paris, Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand said he was "dumbfounded" by Polanski's arrest, adding that he "strongly regrets that a new ordeal is being inflicted on someone who has already experienced so many of them."

Those comments referred to the fact that Polanski, a native of France who was taken to Poland by his parents, escaped Krakow's Jewish ghetto as a child during World War II and lived off the charity of strangers. His mother died at the Nazis' Auschwitz death camp.

Yeah we really should let bygones be bygones.

Actually it's not a new ordeal. It's a continuing one.

The Swiss Directors Association sharply criticized authorities for what it deemed "not only a grotesque farce of justice, but also an immense cultural scandal."

Well if the Swiss & US can't take their guidance from the SDA how are we ever going to survive ?

Nobody wants a scandal and for some Swiss film festival to be disrupted due to bringing a pedophial to justice.

[DarkHippie]

this happened before most of us were even born. statute of limitations?

[dino_electropolis]

this happened before most of us were even born. statute of limitations?

That only applicable to the prosecution of a crime.....this clown was already convicted, and fled before sentencing.

[realmenhatelife]

...and he's had quite a career since 1978....enough for him to get the best director Oscar over Scorsese in 2003....so no one was really all that upset about it....though Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan got their revenge in Rush Hour 3

When you say noone you mean the artistic community, not the legal community or even the general public.

The girl wants this all to go away, she's expressed a desire for polanski to return to the us to settle it, and has tried to dismiss the charges. Although its not really up to her, this is a criminal issue. I really dont believe he only did this once, I just think it came up once.

The swiss dont necessarily have to extradite him, and I also wonder if this isn't a ruse to force the issue to have the case resolved.

It's undeniably despicable that a guy would force a 13 year old into sexual situations.

[Drunky McBetidont]

he is a pedophile and sexual predator. fuck him and his movies. i hope he rots in jail.

[Doogie]

this happened before most of us were even born. statute of limitations?

So we commute the sentance of all pedophiles?? Fuck him, he fled justice and didnt do his time. Even Mike Vick did his time...fuck this fleeing from crime mother fucker. I hope they give him a garrot on the way back to the US. And fuck any mother fucking piece of shit hollywood fucking faggot mother fucker that stands up for this piece of shit.

[furie]

Thank God they got him. now the streets are safe again

[A.J.]

It's too bad that Susan Atkins didn't live to see this maniac brought to justice.

[JimBeam]

Thank God they got him. now the streets are safe again

I hope that's in jest.

I don't care how much of a threat a criminal is on the street they should still be punished.

Because most of us aren't old enough to have known about or undersood this does that make the crime any less of a crime ?

[DarkHippie]

We should dig up John Phillips

[sailor]

I hope that's in jest.

I don't care how much of a threat a criminal is on the street they should still be punished.

Because most of us aren't old enough to have known about or undersood this does that make the crime any less of a crime ?

and it's no one's fault but his own (and the french) that he didn't serve the time when he was originally supposed to.

[foodcourtdruide]

Didn't he write the girl a big check? I don't know how anyone could defend someone who got a 13 year old drunk then fucked her, then left a country for 30 years to avoid sentencing. what the victim wants isn't the point. He was already found guilty. We don't rewrite laws because everyone liked Chinatown.

[JimBeam]

Exactly.

For all the whinning the artisitc community does about the inequities in justice between rich/poor and the races they seem to have no problem defending a rich white guy who fled from justice.

[thepaulo]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1157705/

A documentary from last year went into this in great detail focusing on the attempts to work out a deal.

Obviously, the main issue is that Polanski probably was always on the hunt for underage girls. One of his wives was under 18 if I remember correctly....Can he move to certain states and have less of a problem than he did in California?

[JimBeam]

Can he move to certain states and have less of a problem than he did in California?

For 13 year olds ?

I doubt it.

[Whitey]

Dirty Pedo-Jew

[Doogie]

We should dig up John Phillips

I hope you are going for that comedic element there, cause you honestly are not defending Polanski are you?? You're not standing up for a guy who fled the country to avoid justice for fucking a 14 year old?? Heaven forbid a relative of yours has is raped or someone has statutory rape with them...will you stand by as others say after years where the person was never tried, but held by a foreign country to say "Ohhh the statue of limitations is up anyway."

Tell me you are not being serious about this?? A child molester should be evicerated where they stand, and head put of a pike as a warning to others. Plain and simple. You think anyone who is of our "class disuassion" would have this sort of sympathy or leniency directed at us if it was one of us who committed this crime? Fuck no. No sympathy for this piece of shit either...

[DarkHippie]

Do you think that if he wasn't famous, the Feds would've spent 30 years hunting him down, and spending politcal captial to have him arrested.

If only we went through this much trouble to catch bin laden, we would've gotten somewhere

[thepaulo]

I hope you are going for that comedic element there, cause you honestly are not defending Polanski are you?? You're not standing up for a guy who fled the country to avoid justice for fucking a 14 year old?? Heaven forbid a relative of yours has is raped or someone has statutory rape with them...will you stand by as others say after years where the person was never tried, but held by a foreign country to say "Ohhh the statue of limitations is up anyway."

Tell me you are not being serious about this?? A child molester should be evicerated where they stand, and head put of a pike as a warning to others. Plain and simple. You think anyone who is of our "class disuassion" would have this sort of sympathy or leniency directed at us if it was one of us who committed this crime? Fuck no. No sympathy for this piece of shit either...

I for one didn't think much of The Pianist in 2003....I was more of a Gangs of New York guy.

[furie]

I hope that's in jest.

I don't care how much of a threat a criminal is on the street they should still be punished.

Because most of us aren't old enough to have known about or undersood this does that make the crime any less of a crime ?

of course it's in jest

if i was serious i would have said THANK GOD THEY GOT HIM!!! THE STREETS ARE SAFE AGAIN!!!

It all comes down to inflection really....

----------------
Now playing: Iron Maiden - The Fallen Angel (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/iron+maiden/track/the+fallen+angel)
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

[thepaulo]

Do you think that if he wasn't famous, the Feds would've spent 30 years hunting him down, and spending politcal captial to have him arrested.

If only we went through this much trouble to catch bin laden, we would've gotten somewhere

It's baby steps.....Polanski first....then Bin Laden.

[thepaulo]

of course it's in jest

if i was serious i would have said THANK GOD THEY GOT HIM!!! THE STREETS ARE SAFE AGAIN!!!

It all comes down to inflection really....

----------------
Now playing: Iron Maiden - The Fallen Angel (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/iron+maiden/track/the+fallen+angel)
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

I THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT IN THE FIRST PLACE.!!!!

[sailor]

Do you think that if he wasn't famous, the Feds would've spent 30 years hunting him down, and spending politcal captial to have him arrested.

If only we went through this much trouble to catch bin laden, we would've gotten somewhere

hunting him down? seriously?

[Doogie]

Do you think that if he wasn't famous, the Feds would've spent 30 years hunting him down, and spending politcal captial to have him arrested.

If only we went through this much trouble to catch bin laden, we would've gotten somewhere

So you are trying to downplay a crime because one is not as serious as the other? The guy has been allowed to CONTINUE in his livelihood after he escaped from justice. He wins awards, released by Hollywood production companies, in spite of the fact that he evaded justice. And you say because of those facts we shouldnt be "wasting resources", which by the way is an argument I love by many people to justify his guiltiness because we havent caught another criminal. Are all robbery cases or homicide cases the same in every single city?? No. So how can you equate the whereabouts of a known pedarists and an elusive terrorist? You just cant do that...it is idiotic to try and even say "resources need to spent more on one than the other." They are two completely seperate cases...plain and simple.

[thepaulo]

hunting him down? seriously?

They caught a lucky break catching him at a film festival honoring him.

[HBox]

All those films released by Poman Rolanski were the tip the cracked the case.

[DarkHippie]

So you are trying to downplay a crime because one is not as serious as the other? The guy has been allowed to CONTINUE in his livelihood after he escaped from justice. He wins awards, released by Hollywood production companies, in spite of the fact that he evaded justice. And you say because of those facts we shouldnt be "wasting resources", which by the way is an argument I love by many people to justify his guiltiness because we havent caught another criminal. Are all robbery cases or homicide cases the same in every single city?? No. So how can you equate the whereabouts of a known pedarists and an elusive terrorist? You just cant do that...it is idiotic to try and even say "resources need to spent more on one than the other." They are two completely seperate cases...plain and simple.

I think the point is "why go after an 80 year old creeper when they are far worse people on the run in other countries. What? are we afraid he's gonna strike again? He's 80! His dick probably looks like a used wad of chewing gum.

As for continuing his livelyhood, Rob lowe, R Kelly, Mick Jagger, Jimmy Page, Jerry Lee Lewis, Chuck Berry, Ted Nugent, Gary Glitter, and Pete Townsend are all still out there.

[A.J.]

I think the point is "why go after an 80 year old creeper when they are far worse people on the run in other countries. What? are we afraid he's gonna strike again? He's 80! His dick probably looks like a used wad of chewing gum.

As for continuing his livelyhood, Rob lowe, R Kelly, Mick Jagger, Jimmy Page, Jerry Lee Lewis, Chuck Berry, Ted Nugent, Gary Glitter, and Pete Townsend are all still out there.

For the same reason we go after 80/90 year old Nazi war criminals I suppose.

And don't forget Bill Wyman.

[DarkHippie]

For the same reason we go after 80/90 year old Nazi war criminals I suppose.

And don't forget Bill Wyman.

I knew I forgot one! Maybe we should just throw all of the Stones in there. And probably every boy band too. They got crazy amounts of underage poon.

[Doogie]

All those films released by Poman Rolanski were the tip the cracked the case.

"Lee Donowitz?? The Movie Producer?"

"He made coming home in a body bag..."

"Great fucking movie."

[red_red_red]

what bullshit, why arrest him now? fucking attention whore prosecutors, the statue of limitations should have run out on this shit. the girl he supposedly assaulted is in her damn 50's now

[Farmer Dave]

what bullshit, why arrest him now? fucking attention whore prosecutors, the statue of limitations should have run out on this shit. the girl he supposedly assaulted is in her damn 50's now

as stated before, he was convicted of the crime. He fled before serving his time for said crime. Fuck him.

[thepaulo]

here's a few more


Chuck Berry - In 1961, the great songwriter was convicted in St. Louis of transporting a 14-year-old girl across a state line

Don Johnson - At fourteen, Melanie Griffith left home to move in with the actor who was then
twenty-two.

Elvis Presley - Priscilla was only a 14-year-old ninth grader when Elvis began dating her in 1959
during his army tour in Germany.

Errol Flynn - Film star in of the 30's, 40's and 50's. Was acquitted for statutory rape charges involving two teenage girls in 1942, but the scandal only increased his popularity.

Jerry Seinfeld - His four-year relationship with Shoshanna Longstein began when she was still in high school.

Joey Buttafuoco - 1993 Nov 15, A judge in Mineola, N.Y., sentenced Joey Buttafuoco to six months in jail for the statutory rape of 16-year-old Amy Fisher, who shot and wounded Buttafuoco's wife, Mary Jo.

Kelsey Grammer - star of the Emmy-winning comedy "Frasier." In 1995, authorities in Arizona decided not to prosecute Grammer for statutory rape, and a New Jersey grand jury declined to indict him on the same charge.

Michael Kennedy - Bobby Kennedy's son, recently exposed for statutorily raping his children's
underage baby-sitter, and then attempting to destroy her when word got out.

Rob Lowe - TV and film star. Former brat packer. Back in 1988, during the Democratic National
Convention in Atlanta, Lowe taped himself in compromising positions with a 16-year-old girl and a young woman

Sergei Federov - Red Wings star with 16-year-old sweetheart, tennis player Anna Kournikova.

Sonny Bono - Singer-politician. In 1963, 28-year-old Bono met, and married, 16-year-old Cherilyn La Pierre, better known as Cher.

[HBox]

what bullshit, why arrest him now? fucking attention whore prosecutors, the statue of limitations should have run out on this shit. the girl he supposedly assaulted is in her damn 50's now


He was already convicted! There is no statute of limitations when you skip out on your sentence.

And how is this different from Michael Jackson? Everyone was all over him. And unlike him Polanski was convicted.

[GvacNoMore]

He got a 13 year old girl drunk, fed her quaaludes, and had sex with her when he was in his forties.

He never denied it, he claimed it was consensual.

Polanski is obviously deranged.

If someone did this to your 13 year old daughter and fled the country, would you say "ah, who cares" after 30 years passed?

[TheMojoPin]

I for one didn't think much of The Pianist in 2003....I was more of a Gangs of New York guy.

Of course you are.

[thepaulo]

Of course you are.

Daniel Day Lewis was robbed by that creep Adrian Brody

[TheMojoPin]

Daniel Day Lewis was robbed by that creep Adrian Brody

Now that I actually agree with, but outside of DDL Gangs is dogshit.

[thepaulo]

Now that I actually agree with, but outside of DDL Gangs is dogshit.

Sir we are here to lynch Polanski.


That fucker R. Kelly got off ...but that ain't happening with Polanski

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=akzzDmMlsXts

[furie]

Now that I actually agree with, but outside of DDL Gangs is dogshit.

you mean you werent captivated by Cameron Diaz's performance?


----------------
Now playing: R.E.M. - Final Straw (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/r.e.m./track/final+straw)
via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

[Doogie]

He was already convicted! There is no statute of limitations when you skip out on your sentence.

And how is this different from Michael Jackson? Everyone was all over him. And unlike him Polanski was convicted.

Exactly HBox...the statute of limitations is defined: The Statute of Limitations is the amount of time after a crime is comitted in which it can be prosecuted. His crime was prosecuted and reported within the time frame for the crime, which in this case the limitations were three years. He was convicted then skipped out on his conviction, hence he is a fugitive. The statute would only count if he was never tried or convicted. And acording to callifornia penal law...California § 261. 5(d), Any person 21 years of age or older who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is under 16 years of age is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony. Up to one year in a county jail or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years

This man never served his prison time, was convicted and fled as opposed to having served jail time. Their is no statute of limitations for him. He is a pedophile. He knowingly fucked a 14 year old. He knowingly fled the country knoing he would be convicted of fucking said 14 year old. He is an escaped felon, no different rom other felons. Plain and Simple.

[thepaulo]

I thought he paid for his crime by being in Rush Hour 3

[foodcourtdruide]

I don't understand the r kelly argument. Because some people have unfairly gotten away with crimes all should? Also, why are people painting the victim negatively? Polanski was CONVICTED of this crime. There is no supposedly. She was 13 for crying-out-loud!

[Doogie]

I thought he paid for his crime by being in Rush Hour 3

I thought we all paid by having to watch Gap at the Hard Rock...

Mehhh heee heee. We kid cause we love Paul-O.

[TheMojoPin]

It is pretty ridiculous that anyone would be defending Polanski in regards to what he was convicted of.

[thepaulo]

I don't understand the r kelly argument. Because some people have unfairly gotten away with crimes all should? Also, why are people painting the victim negatively? Polanski was CONVICTED of this crime. There is no supposedly. She was 13 for crying-out-loud!

we understand. He was convicted.

The documentary I mentioned earlier outlined the rather convoluted negotiations that led up to Polanski fleeing.

It really isn't as simple as it seems.

But fine....send him to jail...it's no skin off my nose.
But the Poles and the French don't like us now.

http://www.reuters.com/article/mediaNews/idUSLR13289620090927

[DarkHippie]

It is pretty ridiculous that anyone would be defending Polanski in regards to what he was convicted of.

is apathy really the same as defense?

[GvacNoMore]

is apathy really the same as defense?

Yes.

A convicted child rapist flees the country.

A warrant is put out for his arrest.

When he is finally arrested why would anyone be apathetic?

If someone murdered your parents 10 years ago and fled, when they were finally apprehended I have a hard time believing you'd say "eh, it's been 10 years. Who cares?"

[SatCam]

I say we let him make one more movie. It's like his one shot to redeem himself.... he has to give it his all........ give us a Godfather. If it's good enough we let him off. If it sucks we let the dogs loose on him.

[thepaulo]

I say we let him make one more movie. It's like his one shot to redeem himself.... he has to give it his all........ give us a Godfather. If it's good enough we let him off. If it sucks we let the dogs loose on him.

That seems fair

[Doogie]

It is pretty ridiculous that anyone would be defending Polanski in regards to what he was convicted of.

Thank you for being one of the few with sense about this...I love some of the earlier films Polanski has done. But it doesn't garner sympathy from me for what he has done in real life.

On a lighter note...I expected his capture to go something like how they captured William Wallace in Braveheart. Polanski arrives in town, waves to one of the dudes that is supposed to give him his award and then some kid comes down the road with a cart. He nods to someone Polanski doesnt see...then suddenly US officials are pouncing on him.

[DarkHippie]

Yes.


If someone murdered your parents 10 years ago and fled, when they were finally apprehended I have a hard time believing you'd say "eh, it's been 10 years. Who cares?"

Hypothetical arguments are dumb

[GvacNoMore]

Hypothetical arguments are dumb

So is apathy for an escaped convict being brought to justice.

[DarkHippie]

So is apathy for an escaped convict being brought to justice.

Now you're just being silly, to think that I should give a shit as to whether an old man goes to jail or not. I only hope that my asshole can hold back my delicious steak dinner as I contain my excitement. Squeeze, sphincter, squeeze.

[GvacNoMore]

Now you're just being silly, to think that I should give a shit as to whether an old man goes to jail or not.

So by your logic, if a convicted felon escapes the country before his sentencing and a reasonable amount of time goes by he should be forgiven?

I don't really understand what you're saying.

[DarkHippie]

So by your logic, if a convicted felon escapes the country before his sentencing and a reasonable amount of time goes by he should be forgiven?

I don't really understand what you're saying.

I'd care more if we caught someone that was on this continent, or who committed the crime in this century. His apprehension isnt going to change anything. Its not like he was a threat to anything.

I'm saying that its a bad thing that he is caught, but I feel that he isnt worth the effort. And don't give me that "bringing him to justice bullshit", we let criminals go all the time.

[MacVittie]

Now you're just being silly, to think that I should give a shit as to whether an old man goes to jail or not. I only hope that my asshole can hold back my delicious steak dinner as I contain my excitement. Squeeze, sphincter, squeeze.

So by your logic, if a convicted felon escapes the country before his sentencing and a reasonable amount of time goes by he should be forgiven?

I don't really understand what you're saying.

My feeling toward this apprehension are kind of in the middle. I'd be lying if I said I breathed a big sigh of relief when I heard this story. I guess I would consider it a "miscarriage of justice" if at the end of this Polanski goes free, but to be perfectly honest I was living a fairly normal life knowing that he had been free all of these year. Just because you don't care about the outcome of a trial doesn't mean it shouldn't take place. There are plenty of citizens who have waited a long time for Polanski to be brought to justice, and this is a great benchmark for them towards that end. But if we're talking about what's on MacVittie's radar right now, be assured that you won't find some old kid-touching Jew.

[foodcourtdruide]

I'd care more if we caught someone that was on this continent, or who committed the crime in this century. His apprehension isnt going to change anything. Its not like he was a threat to anything.

I'm saying that its a bad thing that he is caught, but I feel that he isnt worth the effort. And don't give me that "bringing him to justice bullshit", we let criminals go all the time.

I don't get it. By your logic, we should let Bernie Madoff go free, but just not let him have a bank account.

[DarkHippie]

I don't get it. By your logic, we should let Bernie Madoff go free, but just not let him have a bank account.

really? you don't see the difference?

[GregoryJoseph]

I saw an episode of "Forensic Files" last year where a man who brutally raped two girls and shot their boyfriends was brought to justice.

He committed the crime 50 years ago and the case was just recently solved.

When they arrested him he was 78 years old and lived a full life, with children and grandchildren.

He was stunned when the police showed up. He had put this so far behind him he figured it was ancient history.

Should they have let him go?

[foodcourtdruide]

really? you don't see the difference?

I mean, clearly they are extremely different. However, while I think our methods of punishing criminals is often idiotic and revenge driven, I do think that crimes need to at least ne ADDRESSED and no citizen should have the ability to illegally outwit the criminal justice system society has agreed upon.

[DarkHippie]

I saw an episode of "Forensic Files" last year where a man who brutally raped two girls and shot their boyfriends was brought to justice.

He committed the crime 50 years ago and the case was just recently solved.

When they arrested him he was 78 years old and lived a full life, with children and grandchildren.

He was stunned when the police showed up. He had put this so far behind him he figured it was ancient history.

Should they have let him go?

That's actually a good question. I suppose a better question would be "is incarceration there to punish criminals, rehabilitate criminals, or to protect the public?"

[foodcourtdruide]

That's actually a good question. I suppose a better question would be "is incarceration there to punish criminals, rehabilitate criminals, or to protect the public?"

Another reason prisons exist is so society as a whole can "right wrongs" and provide justice for victims.

Madoff is a good example for this.He will likely never commit a violent crime and taking away his ability to invest will likely make society as safe as putting him in prison. In the end though, we as a society are not letting his crimes go unpunished. Is that wrong?

[Doogie]

Another reason prisons exist is so society as a whole can "right wrongs" and provide justice for victims.

Madoff is a good example for this.He will likely never commit a violent crime and taking away his ability to invest will likely make society as safe as putting him in prison. In the end though, we as a society are not letting his crimes go unpunished. Is that wrong?

Ask the New York Mets this question....zing!!!!

I'm sure the Wilpon's would like to see Madoff executed as if he did rape and kill a bevy of 6 year olds.

[Gerald]

He should've just faced the music at the time. Even though the prosecutor and the judge were out to get him for political reasons, he would've been out earlier with good behavior and could've enjoyed the remainder of his adult life without any paranoid travel restrictions. Now he'll probably die in prison as a defeated old man if they tack extra time for the decades he spent evading the law onto the statuatory rape penalty. If the punishment parameters of 1978 for this crime have changed in any way, I wonder which guideline for sentencing will be ahered to.

[Gerald]

He is a pedophile. He knowingly fucked a 14 year old. He knowingly fled the country knoing he would be convicted of fucking said 14 year old. He is an escaped felon, no different rom other felons.

That might make him a bad person on some level.

[Willmore]

here's a few more


Chuck Berry - In 1961, the great songwriter was convicted in St. Louis of transporting a 14-year-old girl across a state line

Don Johnson - At fourteen, Melanie Griffith left home to move in with the actor who was then
twenty-two.

Elvis Presley - Priscilla was only a 14-year-old ninth grader when Elvis began dating her in 1959
during his army tour in Germany.

Errol Flynn - Film star in of the 30's, 40's and 50's. Was acquitted for statutory rape charges involving two teenage girls in 1942, but the scandal only increased his popularity.

Jerry Seinfeld - His four-year relationship with Shoshanna Longstein began when she was still in high school.

Joey Buttafuoco - 1993 Nov 15, A judge in Mineola, N.Y., sentenced Joey Buttafuoco to six months in jail for the statutory rape of 16-year-old Amy Fisher, who shot and wounded Buttafuoco's wife, Mary Jo.

Kelsey Grammer - star of the Emmy-winning comedy "Frasier." In 1995, authorities in Arizona decided not to prosecute Grammer for statutory rape, and a New Jersey grand jury declined to indict him on the same charge.

Michael Kennedy - Bobby Kennedy's son, recently exposed for statutorily raping his children's
underage baby-sitter, and then attempting to destroy her when word got out.

Rob Lowe - TV and film star. Former brat packer. Back in 1988, during the Democratic National
Convention in Atlanta, Lowe taped himself in compromising positions with a 16-year-old girl and a young woman

Sergei Federov - Red Wings star with 16-year-old sweetheart, tennis player Anna Kournikova.

Sonny Bono - Singer-politician. In 1963, 28-year-old Bono met, and married, 16-year-old Cherilyn La Pierre, better known as Cher.

That don't make them bad people.


Seriously, I'm not defending Polanski, but a 13 year old, I believe, is old enough to know what's going on. Ok, so he taking pictures of you, everything is cool, but when the wine and pills come out, don't you hightail your way out of there?

[Dude!]

too bad for Polanski that
Clinton is not still president

just fork over $100K
and get a pardon

[grlNIN]

The terms "fucking" and "having sex with" should really not be used here in any context, as this was not a consensual act of sex, it was rape.

[Doogie]

The terms "fucking" and "having sex with" should really not be used here in any context, as this was not a consensual act of sex, it was rape.

Thank you for correcting me on that...I was going for the point that a few supporters have tried to make it sound like though. Let's just agree that this mother fucker got what he deserved...

[zentraed]

The terms "fucking" and "having sex with" should really not be used here in any context, as this was not a consensual act of sex, it was rape.

He was convicted of statutory rape, not sexual assault, so the matter of consent was never a consideration.

[grlNIN]

He was convicted of statutory rape, not sexual assault, so the matter of consent was never a consideration.

The phrase statutory rape is a term used in some legal jurisdictions to describe consensual sexual relations that occur when one participant is below the age required to legally consent to the behavior

Although it usually refers to adults engaging in sex with minors under the age of consent, the age at which individuals are considered competent to give consent to sexual conduct, it is a generic term, and very few jurisdictions use the actual term "statutory rape" in the language of statutes Different jurisdictions use many different statutory terms for the crime, such as "sexual assault," "rape of a child," "corruption of a minor," "carnal knowledge of a minor," "unlawful carnal knowledge", or simply "carnal knowledge." Statutory rape differs from forcible rape in that overt force or threat need not be present. The laws presume coercion, because a minor or mentally challenged adult is legally incapable of giving consent to the act.

He coerced her into sex by use of drugs which resulted in hm being charged with: perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance (methaqualone) to a minor.

If anyone even tried to argue that a 13 year old (in the 70s no less) was mature enough to consent to sodomy and drug use with a 45 year old man is fucking crazy.

Even if she DID consent, it was undoubtedly under the influence of a substance, which makes it a void consent at that point.

He was 45, she was 13, he raped a child.

[thepaulo]

I'm still hung up on the fact that the girl/woman is stilll not looking for punishment....I'm curious on her take in more detail.....
That doesn't change the fact that at some point Polanski showed a preference for underage girls.
This brings to mind Woody Allen who developed a long commited relationship but was vilified for it.
It goes without saying that each situation is different and the easy solution is to standardize the laws.
After all ,some States as I mentioned allowed for different ages for marriage.
Then there's the whole matter of underaged boys having sex is looked on differently.
I find it stupid for people to break these kind of laws since they are so easy to follow, but I admit I don't understand why they do it. I assume it's some form of mental illness.

[Willmore]

People. People. Aren't we advance enough as a society to go beyond this. Let bygones be bygones. Live and let live. Peace be upon all people of this earth. It was an act of love, not war. Can't we forgive and forget?



Now, if he did it to a boy, then he should burn in the 9th circle of hell. Because that makes him gay, and that's the worst thing a person can be.

[TheMojoPin]

That doesn't change the fact that at some point Polanski showed a preference for underage girls.
This brings to mind Woody Allen who developed a long commited relationship but was vilified for it.
It goes without saying that each situation is different and the easy solution is to standardize the laws.
After all ,some States as I mentioned allowed for different ages for marriage.
Then there's the whole matter of underaged boys having sex is looked on differently.
I find it stupid for people to break these kind of laws since they are so easy to follow, but I admit I don't understand why they do it. I assume it's some form of mental illness.

What the fuck are you talking about?

There's almost a decade in age difference between the girl Polanski raped and the woman Allen married.

Allen's relationship was pretty screwy, but it's really not even in the same ballpark as what Polanski did.

[Doogie]

I'm still hung up on the fact that the girl/woman is stilll not looking for punishment....I'm curious on her take in more detail.....
That doesn't change the fact that at some point Polanski showed a preference for underage girls.
This brings to mind Woody Allen who developed a long commited relationship but was vilified for it.
It goes without saying that each situation is different and the easy solution is to standardize the laws.
After all ,some States as I mentioned allowed for different ages for marriage.
Then there's the whole matter of underaged boys having sex is looked on differently.
I find it stupid for people to break these kind of laws since they are so easy to follow, but I admit I don't understand why they do it. I assume it's some form of mental illness.

It doesnt matter that the she is not looking for justice...this mother fucker committed a crime. If you rob a bank to try and pay for medicine for a family member, escape to another country and 30 years later the bank system is like "Ohhh he is an old man now." Does that mean the charges get dropped?? Fuck no. You are a criminal on the lam. Plain and simple. Can we seriously stop defending the rapist here??

And Paul-o lets be honest here. If this were you. You get a lil drunk (of which we know you do from time to time) some chick is there seducing you, you fuck her/rape her what not. You think when the authorities hear about it they are going to be lenient on you?? I dont care if we use the argument "But this Paul-O the creator of 'Gap!' Let him go!!!" Fuck no. They would string you up by your balls. Lets say you do flee...the girl goes through YEARS of therapy and doesn't want to pursue it anymore. Should we just drop the charges cause of that?? No. You committed a crime, you will pay for it.

I cant believe people are on here defending a fucking rapist!!!!! What the fuck is wrong with this fucking place?!?!?!?!?!

[TheMojoPin]

And Paul-o lets be honest here. If this were you. You get a lil drunk (of which we know you do from time to time) some chick is there seducing you, you fuck her/rape her what not. You think when the authorities hear about it they are going to be lenient on you?? I dont care if we use the argument "But this Paul-O the creator of 'Gap!' Let him go!!!" Fuck no. They would string you up by your balls. Lets say you do flee...the girl goes through YEARS of therapy and doesn't want to pursue it anymore. Should we just drop the charges cause of that?? No. You committed a crime, you will pay for it.

I cant believe people are on here defending a fucking rapist!!!!! What the fuck is wrong with this fucking place?!?!?!?!?!

Who is defending him besides the lunatic you were just talking about?

Calm the fuck down.

[Willmore]

It doesnt matter that the she is not looking for justice...this mother fucker committed a crime. If you rob a bank to try and pay for medicine for a family member, escape to another country and 30 years later the bank system is like "Ohhh he is an old man now." Does that mean the charges get dropped?? Fuck no. You are a criminal on the lam. Plain and simple. Can we seriously stop defending the rapist here??

And Paul-o lets be honest here. If this were you. You get a lil drunk (of which we know you do from time to time) some chick is there seducing you, you fuck her/rape her what not. You think when the authorities hear about it they are going to be lenient on you?? I dont care if we use the argument "But this Paul-O the creator of 'Gap!' Let him go!!!" Fuck no. They would string you up by your balls. Lets say you do flee...the girl goes through YEARS of therapy and doesn't want to pursue it anymore. Should we just drop the charges cause of that?? No. You committed a crime, you will pay for it.

I cant believe people are on here defending a fucking rapist!!!!! What the fuck is wrong with this fucking place?!?!?!?!?!

Come one, let it out. You don't need to be strong for us. Show us where the uncle touched you.

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/3453/teddybearv.jpg

[foodcourtdruide]

I cant believe people are on here defending a fucking rapist!!!!! What the fuck is wrong with this fucking place?!?!?!?!?!

Lol calm down man, it's only a few people.

[Doogie]

Who is defending him besides the lunatic you were just talking about?

Calm the fuck down.

It's fucking sick that people want to defend this guy...it is just maddening. If this were a food server who did this to a girl in a middle school we would be calling for this guys head.

[Dude!]

It's fucking sick that people want to defend this guy...it is just maddening. If this were a food server who did this to a girl in a middle school we would be calling for this guys head.

Roman was calling for head too

[Doogie]

Roman was calling for head too

Ha!! Ok that made me laugh...ass. :tongue:

[thepaulo]

Who is defending him besides the lunatic you were just talking about?

Calm the fuck down.

Hey asshole, I'm the one who said we should lynch him

[Drunky McBetidont]

Hey asshole, I'm the one who said we should lynch him

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_jFJl2LhxnAE/RbvG0Hqg0KI/AAAAAAAAABc/Q2sPdk-jql4/s320/David_Lynch.bmp

[thepaulo]

What the fuck are you talking about?

There's almost a decade in age difference between the girl Polanski raped and the woman Allen married.

Allen's relationship was pretty screwy, but it's really not even in the same ballpark as what Polanski did.

It is simply impossible to have anormal conversation with you. I said every situation is different

Starting around 1980, Allen began a 12-year relationship with actress Mia Farrow, who had leading roles in several of his movies from 1982 to 1992. Farrow and Allen never married, but they adopted two children together: Dylan Farrow (who changed her name to Eliza and is now known as Malone) and Moshe Farrow (now known as Moses); they also had one biological child, Satchel Farrow (now known as Ronan Seamus Farrow). Allen did not adopt any of Farrow's other biological and adopted children, including Soon-Yi Farrow Previn (the adopted daughter of Farrow and André Previn, now known as Soon-Yi Previn). Allen and Farrow separated in 1992 after Farrow discovered nude photographs that Allen had taken of Soon-Yi. In her autobiography, What Falls Away (New York: Doubleday, 1997), Farrow says that Allen admitted to a relationship with Soon-Yi.

After Allen and Farrow separated, a long public legal battle for the custody of their three children began. During the proceedings, Farrow alleged that Allen had sexually molested their adopted daughter Dylan, who was then seven years old. The judge eventually concluded that the sex abuse charges were inconclusive,[52] but called Allen's conduct with Soon-Yi "grossly inappropriate." She called the report of the team that investigated the issue "sanitized and, therefore, less credible," and added that she had "reservations about the reliability of the report." Farrow ultimately won the custody battle over their children. Allen was denied visitation rights with Malone and could see Ronan only under supervision. Moses, who was then 14, chose not to see Allen.

In a 2005 Vanity Fair interview,[53] Allen estimated that, despite the scandal's damage to his reputation, Farrow's discovery of Allen's attraction to Soon-Yi Previn, by accidentally finding nude photographs of her, was "just one of the fortuitous events, one of the great pieces of luck in my life. [...] It was a turning point for the better." Of his relationship with Farrow, he said, "I'm sure there are things that I might have done differently. [...] Probably in retrospect I should have bowed out of that relationship much earlier than I did."



Soon-Yi Previn and Allen at the 2009 Tribeca Film Festival.After breaking his relationship from Farrow in 1992, Allen continued his relationship with Soon-Yi Previn. Even though Allen never married or lived with Farrow,[54] and was never Previn's legal stepfather, the relationship between Allen and Previn has often been referred to as a father dating his "stepdaughter," [55] since he had been perceived as being in the child's life in a father-like capacity since she was seven years old. For example, in 1991, The New York Times described Allen's family life by reporting, "Few married couples seem more married. They are constantly in touch with each other, and not many fathers spend as much time with their children as Allen does."[54] Despite assertions from Previn that Allen was never a father-figure to her,[56] the relationship became a cause célèbre. At the time, Allen was 56 and Previn was 22. Asked whether their age difference was conducive to "a healthy, equal relationship," Allen discounted the matter of equality and added this protestation: "The heart wants what it wants."[56]

Allen and Previn married on December 24, 1997, in the Palazzo Cavalli in Venice, Italy. The couple has adopted two daughters, naming them Bechet and Manzie[57] after jazz musicians Sidney Bechet and Manzie Johnson.

Allen and Farrow's only biological son, Ronan Seamus Farrow, said of Allen: "He's my father married to my sister. That makes me his son and his brother-in-law. That is such a moral transgression. I cannot see him. I cannot have a relationship with my father and be morally consistent.... I lived with all these adopted children, so they are my family. To say Soon-Yi was not my sister is an insult to all adopted children."[58]

[thepaulo]

Sir we are here to lynch Polanski.


That fucker R. Kelly got off ...but that ain't happening with Polanski

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=akzzDmMlsXts

from earlier in this thread

[thepaulo]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_jFJl2LhxnAE/RbvG0Hqg0KI/AAAAAAAAABc/Q2sPdk-jql4/s320/David_Lynch.bmp

now there is a normal guy who directs movies

[TheMojoPin]

It is simply impossible to have anormal conversation with you. I said every situation is different

Yes, hence why the situation you brought up in your ramblings had nothing to do with what Polanski did.

[TheMojoPin]

It's fucking sick that people want to defend this guy...it is just maddening. If this were a food server who did this to a girl in a middle school we would be calling for this guys head.

You seem so angry all the time.

[foodcourtdruide]

I think we all agree that what Woody Allen did was creepy, but it's sooooo far away from what Polanski did. He shouldn't be part of this conversation.

[thepaulo]

Yes, hence why the situation you brought up in your ramblings had nothing to do with what Polanski did.

Allen was probably attracted to Soon-yi when she was underage....I'm not making side by side comparisons but comenting on the impulse. It is a stupid thing to do in either situation. Yet highly respected and intelligent people do stupid things.

Now go ahead and lynch the motherfuckers.

[TheMojoPin]

It's like your brain just forever has the squirts.

[thepaulo]

It's like your brain just forever has the squirts.

If only I could get it to squirt on you.

[Doogie]

You seem so angry all the time.

Nahhh bro...I am usually very chill, but when it comes to issues like this I have zero tolerance for it. As I know 99% of people do. Maybe I should go play in the baseball threads for a while...ohhh wait, I am a Mets fan. I will go for a walk this gorgeous Monday...and then I will come back all centered.

[TheMojoPin]

If only I could get it to squirt on you.

Silly impotent Paul-O.

[thepaulo]

Silly impotent Paul-O.

crap

[JimBeam]

We've all done this bantering back and forth and there's still no news about when/if we are actually gonna extradite him ?

Didn't Dog The Bounty Hunter drag that dude back from Mexico in like a day ?

[Drunky McBetidont]

We've all done this bantering back and forth and there's still no news about when/if we are actually gonna extradite him ?

Didn't Dog The Bounty Hunter drag that dude back from Mexico in like a day ?

polanski isn't black.

[KnoxHarrington]

Dog the Bounty Hunter is rounding up scumbags who probably will end up getting public defenders.

Polanski is very, very rich and can afford very good lawyers. This will take months, if not years.

[AKA]

It doesnt matter that the she is not looking for justice...this mother fucker committed a crime. If you rob a bank to try and pay for medicine for a family member, escape to another country and 30 years later the bank system is like "Ohhh he is an old man now." Does that mean the charges get dropped?? Fuck no. You are a criminal on the lam. Plain and simple. Can we seriously stop defending the rapist here??

The basic point Paulo mentioned that has been shouted down essentually boils down to this - it's really difficult to get riled up about this when the victim doesn't want to see him punished anymore.

And yes - the guy has had a lifetime of punishment - his mother dying in a concentration camp and his wife murdered and unborn infant sliced out of the womb is worthy of a Jerzy Kozenski novel.

Does it make what he did right or justified? No - of course not - I can't even fathom the horror, shame and guilt that 13 year old child must have gone through back then then when she was raped, but I'm not going to pretend to feel her pain for her and work up hypotheticals if it were my sister or daughter, etc - but, as Paul said things in this case are a little less black and white when the victim, earlier this year, files charges in a Los Angeles court to have this whole thing thrown out (as Paul was saying about the documentary)

Finally, Paulo talking about celebs who have fixated and crossed the line in the past, exposing society's hypocritical obsession with the youth culture, does border on hebephilia - which is NOT pedophilia - was not him advocating the behavior of Woody Allen or the others - it was simply making a point that needs to be tossed into the bigger picture.

And Paul-o lets be honest here. If this were you. You get a lil drunk (of which we know you do from time to time) some chick is there seducing you, you fuck her/rape her what not. You think when the authorities hear about it they are going to be lenient on you?? I dont care if we use the argument "But this Paul-O the creator of 'Gap!' Let him go!!!"

This would depend on whether or not GAP was as good as CHINATOWN.


I cant believe people are on here defending a fucking rapist!!!!! What the fuck is wrong with this fucking place?!?!?!?!?!

You sound like me during most of the 90s whenever Michael Jackson made the news and seemed to get away with things - but yeah - the big difference is MJ never was convicted and Polanski was and slipped away....

Anyway...what's wrong is that not everyone in the world is going to get to the same level of passion or outrage over something that didn't happen to them - something that happened 40 years ago - and something where the victim is on the record multiple times saying "Enough is enough."

The villiagers with the pitchforks in this case are no different than Al Sharpton whenever he summons up his outrage over injustices that didn't directly happen to him, but are ones he can personally relate to based on his personal history or level of empathy.

[thepaulo]

Like AKA perceptively said.....nothing is ever simple.
What Polanski did is wrong. Beyond that, it just opens up endless questions.

The main question is, how do you go through life and not make stupid mistakes?

[TheMojoPin]

Like AKA perceptively said.....nothing is ever simple.
What Polanski did is wrong. Beyond that, it just opens up endless questions.

The main question is, how do you go through life and not make stupid mistakes?

Not drugging and raping a young girl and then fleeing after being convicted of said crime would be a great start.

Boy, that was easy.

[JimBeam]

Dog the Bounty Hunter is rounding up scumbags who probably will end up getting public defenders.

Polanski is very, very rich and can afford very good lawyers. This will take months, if not years.

Wasn't the guy that Dog brought back from Mexico a billionaire's heir ?

One of the cosmetics guys maybe ?

I saw some quotes from the French gov't in an article yesterday.

The used things terms like " sinister " and " disgrace " to describe the attempt to extradite him.

I guess the French don't have a problem w/ drugging and sodomiing a 13 year old.

Or at least they don't think it's sinister.

I know it's very trendy to hate on the French and to use the old " they'd be speaking German if it wasn't for the US " thought process but I really do despise them.

[Crispy123]

Not drugging and raping a young girl and then fleeing after being convicted of said crime would be a great start.

Boy, that was easy.

hey it may be many things but lets not go around saying its easy to not drug & rape 13 year olds.

[Contra]

hey it may be many things but lets not go around saying its easy to not drug & rape 13 year olds.

It takes all of my willpower

[thepaulo]

Not drugging and raping a young girl and then fleeing after being convicted of said crime would be a great start.

Boy, that was easy.

well we could definately start wuth the not drugging part

[thepaulo]

Wasn't the guy that Dog brought back from Mexico a billionaire's heir ?

One of the cosmetics guys maybe ?

I saw some quotes from the French gov't in an article yesterday.

The used things terms like " sinister " and " disgrace " to describe the attempt to extradite him.

I guess the French don't have a problem w/ drugging and sodomiing a 13 year old.

Or at least they don't think it's sinister.

I know it's very trendy to hate on the French and to use the old " they'd be speaking German if it wasn't for the US " thought process but I really do despise them.

viva la difference

[thepaulo]

viva la difference

The French and Swiss just don't get it

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/09/30/2009-09-30_french_life_of_luxury_for_fugitive_polanski.htm l

[realmenhatelife]

Like AKA perceptively said.....nothing is ever simple.
What Polanski did is wrong. Beyond that, it just opens up endless questions.

The main question is, how do you go through life and not make stupid mistakes?

In all probability, had things taken their course, we would be long passed the end of Polanski's punishment for this mistake (if thats what we're going to call it, it seems pretty methodical to me.) It obviously wouldn't have ended his life or career. It bothers me that apologists act like because he's dodged his punishment for so much longer than the punishment would've lasted, that he's somehow satisfied the conditions of the punishment.

[thepaulo]

at this point he will more be punished for fleeing than the original crime.

He's gonna be like Phil Spector....a casualty of his own mania

[TheMojoPin]

And of his desire to drug and rape children.

[realmenhatelife]

Poor Roman Polanski, maybe we should throw that girl in jail for getting all goofy on wine and downs and then saying "No Stop" while a middle aged creep sodomizes her.

[foodcourtdruide]

The French and Swiss just don't get it

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/09/30/2009-09-30_french_life_of_luxury_for_fugitive_polanski.htm l

I like how they interview 2 or 3 people, some of which seemed to be friends/business associates of Polanski and they act like that's what the entire country thinks.

[Aggie]

I'd care more if we caught someone that was on this continent, or who committed the crime in this century. His apprehension isnt going to change anything. Its not like he was a threat to anything.

I'm saying that its a bad thing that he is caught, but I feel that he isnt worth the effort. And don't give me that "bringing him to justice bullshit", we let criminals go all the time.

Just because he's old? Old people can do horrible things, too. Usually pedophiles never stop preying nor be rehabilitated. His M.O. may change but I don't see how you can say he's not a threat just because of his age. At what age did he STOP becoming a threat? I think that's an ignorant statement.

[hammersavage]

Just because he's old? Old people can do horrible things, too.

Gregory Joseph can read this, you know.

[grlNIN]

Originally Posted by DarkHippie
I'd care more if we caught someone that was on this continent, or who committed the crime in this century. His apprehension isnt going to change anything. Its not like he was a threat to anything.

I'm saying that its a bad thing that he is caught, but I feel that he isnt worth the effort. And don't give me that "bringing him to justice bullshit", we let criminals go all the time.

This reminds me of the kid who came up to me at school and started a conversation wherein he remarked that "girls who dress slutty and lead guys on deserve it when they get raped".

[JimBeam]

I like how they interview 2 or 3 people, some of which seemed to be friends/business associates of Polanski and they act like that's what the entire country thinks.

I read an article the other day that implied that the average French citizen, or at least those they interviewed, had a problem with the country's leadership protecting him.

They made reference to a disconnect with the cultural elite or something like that.

[TripleSkeet]

Ill be the first to say that statutory rape is an absolute bullshit charge. At 14-15-16 girls know what they want, and if the sex is consensual guys shouldnt have to go to jail for it. Its a charge to help make parents feel better about themselves so instead of having to believe their daughter is a whore they can simply say "he took advantage of her. She didnt know what she was doing." So men have to go to jail to help parents not feel like failures.

That being said, this case isnt statutory rape. Its real rape. The girl constantly said no and begged him to stop. He drugged her, raped her, and sodomized her. Hes not some poor shlub that fucked a willing underage girl and got caught up in shit because the parents made her press charges. So fuck him.

But I give him credit for staying out of jail for 30 years. If I comitted a crime and was looking at alot of time in jail Id take the fuck off too. Fuck sticking around. Guilty or not Im doing everything in my power to make sure I dont spend what little time Ive got on this planet sitting in a cage. I dont get how people can fault him for that. Only an idiot would willingly go to jail. Especially if they had the means to escape.

[Dude!]

Ill be the first to say that statutory rape is an absolute bullshit charge. At 14-15-16 girls know what they want, and if the sex is consensual guys shouldnt have to go to jail for it. Its a charge to help make parents feel better about themselves so instead of having to believe their daughter is a whore they can simply say "he took advantage of her. She didnt know what she was doing." So men have to go to jail to help parents not feel like failures.

huh?

i bet when that little girl
you're holding is 14
you would feel very differently
if she were willingly seduced
by a 40-year-old neighbor

sorry, but a 14-year old
is not old enough to make
an adult decision

[realmenhatelife]

huh?

i bet when that little girl
you're holding is 14
you would feel very differently
if she were willingly seduced
by a 40-year-old neighbor

sorry, but a 14-year old
is not old enough to make
an adult decision

Yeah that's what I was thinking. If you're an adult and you cant coerce a 14 year old into doing whatever you want them to you've got some serious problems. That's why we have these laws.

[thepaulo]

I sense that the complexities of this issue are getting dismissed.
Polanski is not the issue. His life has been fucked up almost since he was born and that's probably why he went down the twisted path he did.
Still it would be interesting to examine why intelligent people do stupid things.

[Doogie]

This reminds me of the kid who came up to me at school and started a conversation wherein he remarked that "girls who dress slutty and lead guys on deserve it when they get raped".

I 100% agree with where you are going with this statement. It's because of people defending pieces of shit like him that many real rape cases do get downplayed EVERYDAY.

"Well a lot of time has passed..." "The girl doesnt want to press this anymore." "He is not really a criminal like Osama."

And the worst part is since it is the "Hollywood elite" that are defending Polanski, there really will be pressure against this poor woman. I make that case because you can even hear it in the attitude of Dave today on the show..."She doesn't even want to pursue this anymore." That is not an excuse for someone to get away with a crime. He committed the crime and he must now pay.

Excusing one crime is as bad as excusing them all.

[realmenhatelife]

I sense that the complexities of this issue are getting dismissed.
Polanski is not the issue. His life has been fucked up almost since he was born and that's probably why he went down the twisted path he did.
Still it would be interesting to examine why intelligent people do stupid things.

I think you're trying to over intellectualize this. The system that society endorses to make the decision on whether or not he did what he was accused of, and whether or not what he did was wrong has already spoken and needs to be satisfied. It can't be concerned with the complexities of his life and how they contributed to the situation. When law does not apply equally to all of us it fails.

[grlNIN]

I sense that the complexities of this issue are getting dismissed.
Polanski is not the issue. His life has been fucked up almost since he was born and that's probably why he went down the twisted path he did.
Still it would be interesting to examine why intelligent people do stupid things.

Really?

Well, speaking as someone whose father was in jail for about 60% of their life and subsequently had A LOT of troubles in life, where is my free pass to be a fucked up individual, take it out on others?

There is none because one DOESN'T EXIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

His mom died in a concentration camp? Yeah that is a horrific thing to experience. Your wife and child were murdered? Yes, quite terrible. However, none of these validate crimes perpetrated on others, especially crimes inflicted on a child.

He is a disgusting, old, pedophile and i think Aggie said it, that this is ONE instance where he was caught. I will fucking bet anything that he has either raped before or after this incident.

Stop sounding so fucking stupid about this, Paul.

[~Katja~]

Really?

Well, speaking as someone whose father was in jail for about 60% of their life and subsequently had A LOT of troubles in life, where is my free pass to be a fucked up individual, take it out on others?

There is none because one DOESN'T EXIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

His mom died in a concentration camp? Yeah that is a horrific thing to experience. Your wife and child were murdered? Yes, quite terrible. However, none of these validate crimes perpetrated on others, especially crimes inflicted on a child.

He is a disgusting, old, pedophile and i think Aggie said it, that this is ONE instance where he was caught. I will fucking bet anything that he has either raped before or after this incident.

Stop sounding so fucking stupid about this, Paul.

not that I am giving him a free pass for what he did, but given that this happened 31 years ago (in his mid 40's), drugs and alcohol involved and he lived/ partied in a far from average scene, I can see how this happened and while he was convicted of the crime, the victim in question even said to let it go.
13 year olds in 1978 don't compare to 13 year olds these days, (just look at the fact that most parents these days would not leave their 13 year olds alone at a photoshoot, in fact they have to be present and sign papers)
I don't think he himself has even tried to excuse his actions by his families past during holocaust and the murders on his wife and kid.
The fact that he fled the country when he did, I doubt he thought he could get away with it for life, but it allowed him to continue making movies and live his life in his prime.
I don't feel bad for him if he actually serves time now, but I think he was "smart" about it.

[JimBeam]

... 13 year olds in 1978 don't compare to 13 year olds these days ...

Exactly.

They were much more innocent back then which makes what he did that much more horrific.

[~Katja~]

Exactly.

They were much more innocent back then which makes what he did that much more horrific.
I disagree, there were a lot of drugs going around and a lot of teenagers were wild.
Most women started families right out of high school. A 13 year old in the 70's was no less sexual then 13 year olds are today, if not even more.

[grlNIN]

not that I am giving him a free pass for what he did, but given that this happened 31 years ago (in his mid 40's), drugs and alcohol involved and he lived/ partied in a far from average scene, I can see how this happened and while he was convicted of the crime, the victim in question even said to let it go.

Saying that you're "not giving him a free pass" and then backing that sentiment up with a statement that is irreverently saying "Well, it's been 31 years and he came from a different social strata, i can see how it happened but maybe we should move on".-is contradictory.

Don't you think him being in a scene where he is heavily abusing drugs & alcohol makes it even worse? I don't see how that is acceptable.

[QUOTE]13 year olds in 1978 don't compare to 13 year olds these days, (just look at the fact that most parents these days would not leave their 13 year olds alone at a photoshoot, in fact they have to be present and sign papers)

I think 13 year olds today are far more sexually "advanced" than 13 year olds were in 1978, kids are growing up faster every year.

I don't think he himself has even tried to excuse his actions by his families past during holocaust and the murders on his wife and kid.

I was talking to what i quoted from Paul-O, i never stated that he tried to excuse his actions by throwing the Holocaust card in there, what i DID say it that it does not excuse his actions. That suffering that kind of trauma is not a series of reasons that could ever justify what he himself had done to the girl.

This whole idea of thinking he was 'smart" about it is seriously creepy on a whole different level. It's like you are saying that if it were you, you would do what he did, too.

[Dude!]

i cannot see how any parent
can even remotely try to justify
or rationalize this

she was 13 for chrissakes
and he drugged her
and forced her to have sex

i would kill someone who did that
to my kid

seriously

[~Katja~]

I did not say that it wasn't wrong what he did, I also think that his conviction was correct and I do think he should serve time.

People commit crimes intentional or not all the time and they need to be prosecuted. I do however see how it was easier or even more common to commit these crimes in the times that they happened.

[grlNIN]

I disagree, there were a lot of drugs going around and a lot of teenagers were wild.
Most women started families right out of high school. A 13 year old in the 70's was no less sexual then 13 year olds are today, if not even more.

Maybe in Germany.

The late '60s and '70s saw a huge boom with women going for secondary education, whether it was college or vocational training. Sure, there were women still having families after high school but i have a feeling that the way you're imagining it to be is nowhere near what it actually was.

Also, the drug culture of the '70s as it was reflected by the media didn't make it the "norm" for teenagers. I bet the most high schoolers were doing was drinking and smoking pot, i doubt anything even close to the lvel of Quaaludes, cocaine, etc.

Where are you getting these perceptions?

[EliSnow]

Maybe in Germany.

The late '60s and '70s saw a huge boom with women going for secondary education, whether it was college or vocational training. Sure, there were women still having families after high school but i have a feeling that the way you're imagining it to be is nowhere near what it actually was.

Also, the drug culture of the '70s as it was reflected by the media didn't make it the "norm" for teenagers. I bet the most high schoolers were doing was drinking and smoking pot, i doubt anything even close to the lvel of Quaaludes, cocaine, etc.

Where are you getting these perceptions?

I agree that a 13 year old in the '70's, and even the '80s in the US would not be the same as teenagers today in the US.

[grlNIN]

Originally Posted by ~Katja~ View Post
Most women started families right out of high school.

I also don't get what this has to do with the context of the situation. She wasn't 17 or 18 on the verge of High School graduation, she was 13.

What does women getting married after High School have to do with anything?

[~Katja~]

I agree that a 13 year old in the '70's, and even the '80s in the US would not be the same as teenagers today in the US.
teen pregnancy has decreased by far since the 60's and 70's. They are much lower today then they were back in those days.
They were more innocent than today's kids? I highly doubt it. I actually think that kids these days are more aware of sexuality and consequences then they were back in the 70's.

[~Katja~]

I also don't get what this has to do with the context of the situation. She wasn't 17 or 18 on the verge of High School graduation, she was 13.

What does women getting married after High School have to do with anything?
cause they usually were with their high school sweethearts since they were 13 or 14 years old.

[Crispy123]

if you want to talk about the sexuality of teenagers in the past, old enough to bleed has been the motto of many cultures for centuries much less decades.

If you remember correctly this happened after teenage hippy chicks butchered this dudes wife. Teenagers at this time, in the part of the country where this happened, in the "entertainment" industry didnt have the puritan values that you naive people are attributing to them. Jesus LSD was legal at the time!

No one is saying the guy shouldnt do his time or excusing his actions but he was a human and its not the "horrible" crime some in this thread would make it out to be.

lighten up Francis

[grlNIN]

teen pregnancy has decreased by far since the 60's and 70's. They are much lower today then they were back in those days.
They were more innocent than today's kids? I highly doubt it. I actually think that kids these days are more aware of sexuality and consequences then they were back in the 70's.

Yeah....contraception wasn't made legal to married couples until 1965 and it wasn't made legal for non-married women until 1972, and abortions weren't made legal until '73.

So....

[~Katja~]

Yeah....contraception wasn't made legal to married couples until 1965 and it wasn't made legal for non-married women until 1972, and abortions weren't made legal until '73.

So....
so they still were sexually active and not more innocent than kids today, who also often commit to abstinence.

[grlNIN]

cause they usually were with their high school sweethearts since they were 13 or 14 years old.

What?

This is frustrating, it seems like all your knowledge of the U.S. predating 2000 was learned from those shitty governmental 1950's films.

[JimBeam]

How is it not horrible ?

Dude she was 13 !!

And he sodomized her ?

[Dude!]

if you want to talk about the sexuality of teenagers in the past, old enough to bleed has been the motto of many cultures for centuries much less decades.

If you remember correctly this happened after teenage hippy chicks butchered this dudes wife. Teenagers at this time, in the part of the country where this happened, in the "entertainment" industry didnt have the puritan values that you naive people are attributing to them. Jesus LSD was legal at the time!

No one is saying the guy shouldnt do his time or excusing his actions but he was a human and its not the "horrible" crime some in this thread would make it out to be.

lighten up Francis


no, don't lighten up francis
have you even read how this
went down for the little girl?

this scumbag had it all planned out
and she was just a little girl

read this for a start:

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/roman-polanski/story?id=8705958

i hope a 50 year old man
gets your 13 year-old son
drunk and high
and then rapes him while
the kid keeps saying "no"

[grlNIN]

so they still were sexually active and not more innocent than kids today, who also often commit to abstinence.

They were still sexually active but had no means from which to protect themselves from teen pregnancy, thus making the statistical rate of pregnancies from the mid to late 1970's and henceforth comparatively lower.

"No more innocent" is really objective and biased, it seems as if you are just spitting out random sayings, facts and proverbs about marriage, teens and sex.

[PD]

I think 13 year olds today are far more sexually "advanced" than 13 year olds were in 1978, kids are growing up faster every year.being old, I was in HS in 1978.
while things are different today, I don't think that is accurate.
in 1977/78
a) the LEGAL drinking age was 18 in most places, so it was easier for those younger to get alcohol
b) the "studio 54" generation was still in big time, so Ludes, cocaine and pot were quite available.

I am not addressing his action, just correcting a perception that might be that kids then were somehow more innocent then than now.

[grlNIN]

being old, I was in HS in 1978.
while things are different today, I don't think that is accurate.
in 1977/78
a) the LEGAL drinking age was 18 in most places, so it was easier for those younger to get alcohol
b) the "studio 54" generation was still in big time, so Ludes, cocaine and pot were quite available.

I am not addressing his action, just correcting a perception that might be that kids then were somehow more innocent than now.

I didn't know 8 years of Studio 54 existing developed an entire "generation" of kids.

[PD]

They were still sexually active but had no means from which to protect themselves from teen pregnancy, thus making the statistical rate of pregnancies from the mid to late 1970's and henceforth comparatively lower..

no means to protect themselves?
condoms/"the pill"/IUD's/diaphrams were available then.

yes, 13 yr old today can get "protected" easier, but it wasn't the stone age, or even the 50s.

[PD]

I didn't know 8 years of Studio 54 existing developed an entire "generation" of kids.
no, but it doesnt make kids then more innocent than they are today.

on what do you base this idea?

edit.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not discussing the specifics of the case, more the concept that somehow 1977/1978 was puritan times.

[Crispy123]

How is it not horrible ?

Dude she was 13 !!

And he sodomized her ?

that could mean anything from she blew him to he ate her ass out.

The victim has come forth and said, "I think he's sorry, I think he knows it was wrong. I don't think he's a danger to society. I don't think he needs to be locked up forever and no one has ever come out ever — besides me — and accused him of anything. It was 30 years ago now. It's an unpleasant memory ... (but) I can live with it."

[Crispy123]

i hope a 50 year old man
gets your 13 year-old son
drunk and high
and then rapes him while
the kid keeps saying "no"

I hope I get the pleasure of meeting you in person someday so I can ask you to repeat this to my face instead of hiding behind a keyboard you fucking pussy ass douche.

[PD]

that could mean anything from she blew him to he ate her ass out. ,
actually the court transcripts show it was anal sex.

[Crispy123]

actually the court transcripts show it was anal sex.

Im sorry for your loss.

[grlNIN]

no means to protect themselves?
condoms/"the pill"/IUD's/diaphrams were available then.

yes, 13 yr old today can get "protected" easier, but it wasn't the stone age, or even the 50s.

Read some books about it, this isn't fabrication, sadly.

They held everything behind the counter and would refuse to sell it and they didn't have to by law. Couple that with the shame that most teenagers felt, a backlash because of the "stigma" created around sex.

And are you seriously suggesting that a 13 year old girl should have an IUD? Do you know how many girls don't even get their periods by the time they're 13?

[PD]

Read some books about it, this isn't fabrication, sadly.

?
read books? I lived then - I don't have to read books about it.

we aren't talking about the midwest; we are talking Los Angeles

and no, im not suggesting anyone, let alone a teenager should have an IUD.

I'm saying it was available, especially in NYC or southern california

[JimBeam]

Sodomy itself is the isertion of something, be it a body part or foreign object, anally.

And how the hell did Studio 54, in NY, spread its culture throughout the whole US ?

Kids as a whole are far less innocent today than they were 30 years ago.

The internet alone has changed things dramatically.

I remember having to sneak my fathers/brothers occasional porn mag to gte a glimpse of things like that.

Now all you need is an internet connection.

Our culture as a whole has changed and I'm not judging if that's good or bad but it has.

Howard Stern and his like are so much more of an influence.

Just the way kids talk in general.

Remember when it was almost a crime to say " sh*t " in front of your parents or any grown up ?

Now it's so much more accepted.

[grlNIN]

Don't get me wrong - I'm not discussing the specifics of the case, more the concept that somehow 1977/1978 was puritan times.

I'm not suggesting that the late '70s were in any way puritanical.

I think that we are in a debate where you being older telling me that kids your day weren't that innocent and me being young telling you that kids today are substantially less innocent than kids your days is a cyclical debate.

Did you know 12/13 year olds in the late 70's holding blow jobs parties and other things that i, myself being a grown woman don't even want to repeat?

Did you know that 20% of teenagers today become infected with HIV but don't actually know it until they're in their 20s and symptoms start to show?

I would argue that the 'teenage" years have probably dropped down to beginning around 10 or 11 now, which implies a huge disconnect with innocence.

As an aside i can give a very specific example of the mind frame of a 13/14 year old today. My boyfriend and i live in central/shore NJ and while walking into a fair we overheard a 14 year old girl on her cell phone screaming to her friend "I COULD BE AT HOME FUCKING MY BOYFRIEND!" besides the sexual implication it was a total shock in the fact that there were GROWN UPS all around her, walking in to the fair as well.

Teens today are a totally new species.

[grlNIN]

read books? I lived then - I don't have to read books about it.

we aren't talking about the midwest; we are talking Los Angeles

and no, im not suggesting anyone, let alone a teenager should have an IUD.

I'm saying it was available, especially in NYC or southern california

I think you should read some books about, it wasn't an insult, im being serious.

Living through a period of time in a specific place does not give you infinite and total knowledge of the country you lived in during that time.

Progressive areas like cities are not accurate sources for demographics and statistics because they completely skewed.

[PD]

I'm not suggesting that the late '70s were in any way puritanical.

I think that we are in a debate where you being older telling me that kids your day weren't that innocent and me being young telling you that kids today are substantially less innocent than kids your days is a cyclical debate.

Did you know 12/13 year olds in the late 70's holding blow jobs parties and other things that i, myself being a grown woman don't even want to repeat?

Did you know that 20% of teenagers today become infected with HIV but don't actually know it until they're in their 20s and symptoms start to show?

I would argue that the 'teenage" years have probably dropped down to beginning around 10 or 11 now, which implies a huge disconnect with innocence.

if you wish to discuss the overall morals of the country, maybe.
Yes, there are things that are more common today than there were then -
If you are talking about the overall country. I thnk the biggest reason for this is the internet, but that is a different discussion. There is also a lot more "talk" now then there was then.

People always think that morals are more off now than before. There was plenty of pornography / kinky sex way before - it just wasn't as well talked about - and maybe not as "popular" because of that.


This did not take place in Iowa, or for that matter Sacramento.
It took place in Los Angeles in the home of Jack Nicholson.
I just think its a spurious argument to think that a 13 yr old in that time and place is by default more innocent than today. It is no "evidence" but there have been Lolita stories for years, and remember Taxi Driver came out in 1976.

I think it is more fundamental to say that any 13 yr old should not be taken advantage of by a 40+yr old.

[PD]

I think you should read some books about, it wasn't an insult, im being serious.

Living through a period of time in a specific place does not give you infinite and total knowledge of the country you lived in during that time.

Progressive areas like cities are not accurate sources for demographics and statistics because they completely skewed.

maybe I took that a bit much, but I know that most of the country was not as I saw it, growing up in NYC. I am well aware - trust me- of the idea that for example, you didn't just go into a walmart to pick up a box of condoms- but that doesn't make the times more innocent.

All of this however is really a side discussion to the specifics of this "case" and more appropriate in its own thread.

Yes, things are more public now. I will even cede the argument that kids across the country think they are more "grown up" - and as such have lost innocence. - again something for a more detailed discussion away from the specifics of Polanski.

[Crispy123]

Sodomy itself is the isertion of something, be it a body part or foreign object, anally.

Also applies to oral there Webster

[HBox]

I hope I get the pleasure of meeting you in person someday so I can ask you to repeat this to my face instead of hiding behind a keyboard you fucking pussy ass douche.

Lighten up Francis. It's not like what he said was anything "horrible," right?

[GregoryJoseph]

It's so ironic how women bought the "sexual revolution" hook, line, and sinker.

[JohnCharles]

It's so ironic how women bought the "sexual revolution" hook, line, and sinker.

So, I need to start saying something else?

[JimBeam]

Also applies to oral there Webster

Touche, but do we really think he was giving her oral ?

[Crispy123]

Lighten up Francis. It's not like what he said was anything "horrible," right?

No it was a personal attack. I pussy internet tough guy attack but an attack none the less.

I was just expressing my hopes since he was allowed to express hisl.

[Crispy123]

Touche, but do we really think he was giving her oral ?

no pd pointed out that he (Polanski) rammed her pooper

[~Katja~]

Touche, but do we really think he was giving her oral ?
yes, he was:

she testified, then "went down and he started performing cuddliness (sic)." When the district attorney asked Geimer what "cuddliness" meant, she clarified, "he placed his mouth on my vagina."

[Dude!]

Lighten up Francis. It's not like what he said was anything "horrible," right?

LOTD !

[Crispy123]

The lighten up francis was in response to the false outrage of a crime that was commited 31 years ago, in a thread less than a week old, by people who got their outrage fed to them by watching TMZ.

The attack by the pussy Dude! occured today. Again Im betting dollars to donuts he wouldnt express this if we were having a face to face discussion of the matter.

[Dude!]

i don't need TMZ
to tell me that drugging
and raping a 13 year old girl
is wrong

[Crispy123]

i don't need TMZ
to tell me that drugging
and raping a 13 year old girl
is wrong


I can tell you have great concern for this 13 year old girl. You waited 31 years to post about what bullshit happened to her on a message board about a radio show that endorses the gloriousness of sodomy.

let me guess, you're all eaten up about the daddies in this world raping their nineteen year old daughters on their wedding night too?

pussy

[thepaulo]

I still can't understand theoretically why an adult would willingly put themselves at risk by breaking a law that is so easy to convict. It is an act of insanity that serves no purpose whatsoever. It is not possible to believe he did not know he was breaking the law.
Perhaps Polanski believed that sex with underaged starlets and Hollywood wannabes was commonplace and he didn't think he was doing anything unusual.

[Contra]

I still can't understand theoretically why an adult would willingly put themselves at risk by breaking a law that is so easy to convict. It is an act of insanity that serves no purpose whatsoever. It is not possible to believe he did not know he was breaking the law.
Perhaps Polanski believed that sex with underaged starlets and Hollywood wannabes was commonplace and he didn't think he was doing anything unusual.

Yeah I'm sure the copious amounts of drugs had no effect on his judgement whatsoever.

[thepaulo]

That sounds like a defense.
"Your honor, I was doing copious amounts of drugs. I have no knowledge of doing anything wrong."

[SatCam]

That sounds like a defense.
"Your honor, I was doing copious amounts of drugs. I have no knowledge of doing anything wrong."

"It was like............ wow"



http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/blog/large_CHRIS-BROWN-BOWTIE-LARRY-KING.JPG

[Contra]

That sounds like a defense.
"Your honor, I was doing copious amounts of drugs. I have no knowledge of doing anything wrong."

I thought you were looking for a reason, not a defense.

[grlNIN]

she testified, then "went down and he started performing cuddliness (sic)." When the district attorney asked Geimer what "cuddliness" meant, she clarified, "he placed his mouth on my vagina."

I am 98% certain that she thought "cuddliness" was how you say "cunnilingus" in her 13 y/o brain.

I'm just putting that out there.

[CruelCircus]

Did you know that 20% of teenagers today become infected with HIV but don't actually know it until they're in their 20s and symptoms start to show?


Wait. Are you saying that 20% of all teenagers have AIDS?!
Or that 20% of people who have AIDS got it when they were teens?

[grlNIN]

Wait. Are you saying that 20% of all teenagers have AIDS?!
Or that 20% of people who have AIDS got it when they were teens?

The number for teenagers who are infected with HIV is/or has risen 20%. They usually don't know they are infected until the symptoms of AIDS start to occur.

[Tenbatsuzen]

The number for teenagers who are infected with HIV is/or has risen 20%. They usually don't know they are infected until the symptoms of AIDS start to occur.

[citation needed]

[Tall_James]

[citation needed]

Here you go. Glad to be of help.

http://www.americanmuscleonline.com/images/1985%20Chevy%20Citation/IMAG0014.JPG

[Tenbatsuzen]

Here you go. Glad to be of help.

http://www.americanmuscleonline.com/images/1985%20Chevy%20Citation/IMAG0014.JPG

fuck you tall boston man for making me laugh I had to bite my tongue as not to wake up the wife

[grlNIN]

[citation needed]

It's in 1 of two books that i just read. (Moral Panics, Sex Panics or When Sex Goes to School)

I couldn't find it in the one and i can't look through the other but i don't see why i would make up a statistic like that and i remember reading it (a couple of weeks ago) and being so horrified that it stuck with me.

[Tenbatsuzen]

It's in 1 of two books that i just read. (Moral Panics, Sex Panics or When Sex Goes to School)

I couldn't find it in the one and i can't look through the other but i don't see why i would make up a statistic like that and i remember reading it (a couple of weeks ago) and being so horrified that it stuck with me.

Because unless it's straight data from the CDC and not anecdotal evidence, it's probably skewed somehow to make a point. All data can (and will be) distorted.

Was that factoid in the US or worldwide? It's a little more believable if it's worldwide.

[grlNIN]

Because unless it's straight data from the CDC and not anecdotal evidence, it's probably skewed somehow to make a point. All data can (and will be) distorted.

Was that factoid in the US or worldwide? It's a little more believable if it's worldwide.

I honestly don't believe it was skewed. It was U.S. specific but one book was also a case study of over 20 years, so it is most likely over that time period.

[Tenbatsuzen]

I honestly don't believe it was skewed. It was U.S. specific but one book was also a case study of over 20 years, so it is most likely over that time period.

Case study over 20 years is 89 (when teen AIDS rate was zero or close to it) to now.

20% of zero or close to zero is still a pretty low number.

Hence, skewed data.

[grlNIN]

Case study over 20 years is 89 (when teen AIDS rate was zero or close to it) to now.

20% of zero or close to zero is still a pretty low number.

Hence, skewed data.

If it's even from that specific book and it was amongst teenagers alone.

Can you go and pick apart someone else's posts from this thread? There is plenty of bait for you elsewhere.

[Tenbatsuzen]

If it's even from that specific book and it was amongst teenagers alone.

Can you go and pick apart someone else's posts from this thread? There is plenty of bait for you elsewhere.

Sorry, your bait smelled the fishiest.

[Tenbatsuzen]

Age (Years) Estimated # of AIDS Cases in 2007 Cumulative Estimated # of AIDS Cases, Through 2007*

Ages 13-14 80 1,169
Ages 15-19 455 6,089

That's right folks. Since the CDC has been keeping tabs on this, 7200 teens have AIDS.

OMGWE'REALLGONNADIE.

I'll show my work too:

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#aidsage

The numbers for 0-13 are a little more sobering, mainly AIDS babies, but the triple cocktail has reduced those numbers drastically.

[TheMojoPin]

Age (Years) Estimated # of AIDS Cases in 2007 Cumulative Estimated # of AIDS Cases, Through 2007*

Ages 13-14 80 1,169
Ages 15-19 455 6,089

That's right folks. Since the CDC has been keeping tabs on this, 7200 teens have AIDS.

OMGWE'REALLGONNADIE.

I'll show my work too:

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#aidsage

The numbers for 0-13 are a little more sobering, mainly AIDS babies, but the triple cocktail has reduced those numbers drastically.

Those are the numbers for the age of diagnosis, not the age of infection. A significant number of the people diagnosed in their early 20's were likely infected by HIV as a teenager, hence her point of teenagers with HIV not being diagnosed until years after the fact.

[Tenbatsuzen]

Those are the numbers for the age of diagnosis, not the age of infection. A significant number of the people diagnosed in their early 20's were likely infected by HIV as a teenager, hence her point of teenagers with HIV not being diagnosed until years after the fact.

Unless they know exactly when they got infected, the evidence becomes anecdotal.

[Tenbatsuzen]

Those are the numbers for the age of diagnosis, not the age of infection. A significant number of the people diagnosed in their early 20's were likely infected by HIV as a teenager, hence her point of teenagers with HIV not being diagnosed until years after the fact.

OK, I'll humor you:

Ages 20-24 1,927 38,175
Ages 25-29 3,380 120,464

So there's been approx. 160,000 people in their 20s with HIV as of 2007. CDCs been keeping the numbers since "the start of the epidemic", so let's call it 1982.

160,000 / 25 = 6400.

HIV cases documented in 2007 - 5307.

Numbers still don't jive.

[TheMojoPin]

OK, I'll humor you:

Ages 20-24 1,927 38,175
Ages 25-29 3,380 120,464

So there's been approx. 160,000 people in their 20s with HIV as of 2007. CDCs been keeping the numbers since "the start of the epidemic", so let's call it 1982.

160,000 / 25 = 6400.

HIV cases documented in 2007 - 5307.

Numbers still don't jive.

Why are you dividing 160,000 by 25?

[Tenbatsuzen]

Why are you dividing 160,000 by 25?

160K cumulative cases in 2007 since the "epidemic began". CDC classified AIDS in 1982. 2007-1982 = 25

Edit: to get an average number of AIDS cases since 1982.

[Dude!]

Why are you dividing 160,000 by 25?

2007 -1982 = 25 years

that's what he meant
but it is very faulty logic

[TheMojoPin]

2007 -1982 = 25 years

that's what he meant
but it is very faulty logic

Yeah, that's what I figured, but like you said that's faulty.

What we need are annual HIV infection estimates by age or age groups to see if there's a rising pattern, but I can't find those from the CDC or anywhere else at the moment.

[TripleSkeet]

huh?

i bet when that little girl
you're holding is 14
you would feel very differently
if she were willingly seduced
by a 40-year-old neighbor

sorry, but a 14-year old
is not old enough to make
an adult decision

Im not a hypocrite. As a parent I will hopefully teach my daughter about how older men try to use younger naive girls for sex and do my best to make sure shes not hanging out with guys even 10 years older then her, let alone 30.

But if shes 15 and I find out shes having consensual sex with an 18 year old guy shes been seeing Im not going to have the fucking guy arrested and ruin his life because of a decision that millions of teenagers make every day. According to the "laws" not only would I have been labeled a sex offender but about 60% of the people I know would too.

How many guys do you know have had sex with girls under 18 when they were 18 or 19 years old? I guess its a weird question on this forum considering how many of the fucking guys here still havent gotten laid.

[HBox]

Im not a hypocrite. As a parent I will hopefully teach my daughter about how older men try to use younger naive girls for sex and do my best to make sure shes not hanging out with guys even 10 years older then her, let alone 30.

But if shes 15 and I find out shes having consensual sex with an 18 year old guy shes been seeing Im not going to have the fucking guy arrested and ruin his life because of a decision that millions of teenagers make every day. According to the "laws" not only would I have been labeled a sex offender but about 60% of the people I know would too.

How many guys do you know have had sex with girls under 18 when they were 18 or 19 years old? I guess its a weird question on this forum considering how many of the fucking guys here still havent gotten laid.

I have not a clue how this relates to Roman Polanski.

[TripleSkeet]

I have not a clue how this relates to Roman Polanski.

Go back 3 pages, and read the first thing I posted, and the reply. This was my reply to that.

[HBox]

Go back 3 pages, and read the first thing I posted, and the reply. This was my reply to that.

Yeah, I still don't get it. 18,19,20 year old guys are one thing. Polanski was 50 when he did this. I'm all for leeway in the cases you described but a 50 year old man who has sex with a 13 year-old can only be described in one way: a pedophile.

[PapaBear]

Yeah, I still don't get it. 18,19,20 year old guys are one thing. Polanski was 50 when he did this. I'm all for leeway in the cases you described but a 50 year old man who has sex with a 13 year-old can only be described in one way: a pedophile.
Forty four year old man. But just as bad.

[TripleSkeet]

Yeah, I still don't get it. 18,19,20 year old guys are one thing. Polanski was 50 when he did this. I'm all for leeway in the cases you described but a 50 year old man who has sex with a 13 year-old can only be described in one way: a pedophile.

Well if you actually read what I posted you wouldve seen that in one paragraph I was explaining my view on statutory rape, and then I pretty much explained that this case wasnt even statutory rape, it was plain rape. I wasnt defending Polanski.

[Doogie]

I will say this in several languages and hopefully this will shut you all the fuck up:

This guy is a rapist of 13 year olds...

Ill try it again in languages people understand

Ce gars est un violeur de 13 an olds

Again...

Dieser Kerl ist ein Vergewaltiger von 13 Jahren alt

Again...

Este tipo é estuprador de 13 anos

again...

Этот парень - насильник 13 лет

again...

Este tipo es un violador de 13 años

Shut the fuck up now...

[RoseBlood]

.

[RoseBlood]

The girl has always been very sympathetic to Polanski's situation.

It's common for victims to sympathize with their perpetrators to the point they feel sorry for them and even excuse their behavior. I can't speak for her, but it serves as a defense mechanism of sorts; a way to lesson the pain and reality of what was done to them because feeling anger of that magnitude is paralyzing.

I'm still hung up on the fact that the girl/woman is stilll not looking for punishment....I'm curious on her take in more detail.....

My guess is she just doesn't want to rehash anything again. He was convicted.

If she spent the last 30 years holding onto anger, looking to bring him to justice, where would that leave her? She needed to forgive if she had any hope of living a normal life and I'm glad she's been able to move on with her life, as she should considering he's moved on with his. :dry:


I won't comment further on the matter as so many have already posted my thoughts (doogie, mojo, grlnin, gvac, foodcourtdruid, hbox etc).


Lighten up Francis. It's not like what he said was anything "horrible," right?

FACE!
This post made this thread worth reading. :thumbup:

Ill be the first to say that statutory rape is an absolute bullshit charge. At 14-15-16 girls know what they want, and if the sex is consensual guys shouldnt have to go to jail for it. Its a charge to help make parents feel better about themselves so instead of having to believe their daughter is a whore they can simply say "he took advantage of her. She didnt know what she was doing." So men have to go to jail to help parents not feel like failures.

Im not a hypocrite. As a parent I will hopefully teach my daughter about how older men try to use younger naive girls for sex and do my best to make sure shes not hanging out with guys even 10 years older then her, let alone 30.

But if shes 15 and I find out shes having consensual sex with an 18 year old guy shes been seeing Im not going to have the fucking guy arrested and ruin his life because of a decision that millions of teenagers make every day. According to the "laws" not only would I have been labeled a sex offender but about 60% of the people I know would too.

How many guys do you know have had sex with girls under 18 when they were 18 or 19 years old? I guess its a weird question on this forum considering how many of the fucking guys here still havent gotten laid.

I don't know how the law works where you come from, but in NY your statements are false.

It is only considered statutory rape if she's under 15 and he's 18 or older...

OR

he's at least 21 and she's under 17.

If the offender is less than 4 years older than the victim it's not statutory rape.

If the victim is under 13 and the offender at least 18 than it's a 1st degree sexual offense.

If the victim is under 15 and the perpetrator is at least 18, this constitutes a 2nd degree sexual offense.

However, if the defendant is less than 4 years older than the victim, this may constitute an affirmative defense. Affirmative defenses are those in which the defendant introduces evidence which negates criminal liability.

So, if your daughters 15 and having consensual sex with her 18 yr old boyfriend:

NO he's not going to be considered a pedophile,
NO he's not going to jail,
NO he's not going to be put on a sexual offender registry.

If he's 21 and she's 16, YES he can be considered a sexual offender.

These laws and guidelines are there to protect children and help parents, don't twist the facts. Your ideology on parenting doesn't always work, but I hope for your child's sake they do. You can't always babysit your 15 yr old daughter. So stop making the parents feel guilty for crimes predators commit.

[realmenhatelife]

I still can't understand theoretically why an adult would willingly put themselves at risk by breaking a law that is so easy to convict. It is an act of insanity that serves no purpose whatsoever. It is not possible to believe he did not know he was breaking the law.
Perhaps Polanski believed that sex with underaged starlets and Hollywood wannabes was commonplace and he didn't think he was doing anything unusual.


I wouldn't say it serves no purpose, it serves a very obvious and direct purpose. Then there are issues of control. He's in a career where he is afforded complete control and associating with someone he can completely dominate mentally, physically, and professionally and further exacerbates that with alchohol and drugs. Huge tragedy in Polanski's life has come from being powerless.

I think it was probably very easy for him to rationalize he wasn't doing anything wrong. It was a non violent act and he was steeped in a culture where everyone got away with life style crimes. He almost certainly has banged other girls in similar scenerios with no trouble at all, so this was probably pretty surprising.

I'm surprised that anyone famous campaigning for his exoneration isn't being a little more careful about how they're doing it. The whole thing, especially if it works, is going to come off like class war. The privelaged have decided that one of their own does not need to answer for a crime against a pleb, eat shit and live with it. Their gestures need to get a whole lot more articulate or I think this is going to breed a lot of ill will.

[thepaulo]

I wouldn't say it serves no purpose, it serves a very obvious and direct purpose. Then there are issues of control. He's in a career where he is afforded complete control and associating with someone he can completely dominate mentally, physically, and professionally and further exacerbates that with alchohol and drugs. Huge tragedy in Polanski's life has come from being powerless.

I think it was probably very easy for him to rationalize he wasn't doing anything wrong. It was a non violent act and he was steeped in a culture where everyone got away with life style crimes. He almost certainly has banged other girls in similar scenerios with no trouble at all, so this was probably pretty surprising.

I'm surprised that anyone famous campaigning for his exoneration isn't being a little more careful about how they're doing it. The whole thing, especially if it works, is going to come off like class war. The privelaged have decided that one of their own does not need to answer for a crime against a pleb, eat shit and live with it. Their gestures need to get a whole lot more articulate or I think this is going to breed a lot of ill will.

One of the more perceptive posts in the thread and certainly getting to the root causes. These crimes can't be prevented if we don't understand why they happen.

The obvious simple answer to this question is that adults should never allow themselves to engage in the frequently mysterious world of adolescent sexuality.
Obviously drugging a girl is a far worse transgression of this simple rule.
I'm trying to identify the problem so these kinds of stupid mistakes don't happen.
It's easy to condemm and dismiss but then you really don't solve anything.

The temptation to violate this simple rule is probably a widely felt impulse and it really needs to be identified and controilled.

[Willmore]

I will say this in several languages and hopefully this will shut you all the fuck up:

This guy is a rapist of 13 year olds...

Ill try it again in languages people understand

Ce gars est un violeur de 13 an olds

Again...

Dieser Kerl ist ein Vergewaltiger von 13 Jahren alt

Again...

Este tipo é estuprador de 13 anos

again...

Этот парень - насильник 13 лет

again...

Este tipo es un violador de 13 años

Shut the fuck up now...

Using google translate isn't like saying it in different languages.

[thepaulo]

and then there are the legal complexities

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-polanski-legal1-2009oct01,0,1100452.story

[TheMojoPin]

One of the more perceptive posts in the thread and certainly getting to the root causes. These crimes can't be prevented if we don't understand why they happen.

The obvious simple answer to this question is that adults should never allow themselves to engage in the frequently mysterious world of adolescent sexuality.
Obviously drugging a girl is a far worse transgression of this simple rule.
I'm trying to identify the problem so these kinds of stupid mistakes don't happen.
It's easy to condemm and dismiss but then you really don't solve anything.

The temptation to violate this simple rule is probably a widely felt impulse and it really needs to be identified and controilled.

How is this applicable to finding some kidn of "root cause" as to why "these crimes" happen? realme was thinking about why this might have occured in THIS instance and certainly not why underage sexual assault occurs in general. The circumstances surrounding this case are relatively very unique in terms of trying to examine the general phenomenon of underage sexual assault given both Polanski's background and his station in life as an adult. Trying to extrapolate some "greater meaning" from this case for sex crimes as a whole seems to be a largely fruitless exercise. It's like you're actually trying to place an even greater weight on what occured, like this is some kind of special insight or opportunity to "crack the code" of sexual assault. It's not.

[JimBeam]

I can tell you have great concern for this 13 year old girl. You waited 31 years to post about what bullshit happened to her on a message board about a radio show that endorses the gloriousness of sodomy.

let me guess, you're all eaten up about the daddies in this world raping their nineteen year old daughters on their wedding night too?

pussy

I actually read the story through a link on Yahoo and posted in here once it was being discussed.

How can you have outrage for something you may not be aware of ?

Granted I may have heard some rumblings in the past about this guy being a creep but until this story broke I had no idea about the details.

Should I be any less shocked/disgusted by the nature of that he did because I'm just now finding out the whole story ?

So if we find out 20 years from now that cell phones do in fact cause brain tumors should we not be pissed just because it's only speculation and there's no real proof ?

Not a perfect analogy but I'd think you could see my point.

[JimBeam]

and then there are the legal complexities

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-polanski-legal1-2009oct01,0,1100452.story

I'm no legal scholar but is what the original judge illegal or was it just not standard ?

Don't a lot of judges come up w/ their own punishments for things ? ( Cases where people who try and get out of jury duty end up working in the clerks office shuffling papers instead or people who steal having to weat sandwich boards saying that they are thieves. )

Can he renig on a deal even if it does come off as being " unfair " ?

I find it hard to believe that any elected judge would throw out this sentence. Not unless he no longer wanted to be a judge.

I hope he does withdraw his initial plea because he's gonna spend the time behind bars as there's no way he's getting bail.

Then maybe he gets convicted on all 6 accounts and dies in prison after being sodomized by Adebsi.

[thepaulo]

How is this applicable to finding some kidn of "root cause" as to why "these crimes" happen? realme was thinking about why this might have occured in THIS instance and certainly not why underage sexual assault occurs in general. The circumstances surrounding this case are relatively very unique in terms of trying to examine the general phenomenon of underage sexual assault given both Polanski's background and his station in life as an adult. Trying to extrapolate some "greater meaning" from this case for sex crimes as a whole seems to be a largely fruitless exercise. It's like you're actually trying to place an even greater weight on what occured, like this is some kind of special insight or opportunity to "crack the code" of sexual assault. It's not.

It does shine a light on the issue

[TheMojoPin]

How?

[thepaulo]

How?

It's a high profile case with wide ranging implications that gets discussed in the media.

[TheMojoPin]

How does this offer any greater insight into anything over the litanty of other high profile celebrity crime cases?

This is the equivalent of a late summer rerun at best.

[TripleSkeet]

These laws and guidelines are there to protect children and help parents, don't twist the facts. Your ideology on parenting doesn't always work, but I hope for your child's sake they do. You can't always babysit your 15 yr old daughter. So stop making the parents feel guilty for crimes predators commit.

I didnt know the 4 year rule, so thats definitely a plus, even thoughI think the age of consent should be at least 16.

And Im not "trying" to make parents feel guilty, if they do feel guilty, maybe its because they have a reason to. I know you cant control everything your kid does, but the fact remains that alot of parents refuse to take responsibility that the reason their kid is fucked up or put in a fucked up position is their own fault. They have no time for their kids and take no interest in what they do, and as soon as something fucked up happens they run out and point fingers at everyone except themselves, and as a parent I think its a fucking disgrace.

The girl in question for example, her fucking mother is as much to blame as Roman Polansky as far as Im concerned. Pushing a total stranger to hang out with your kid, not knowing that he may have alcohol or drug problems and giving him time with your child because you hope to make her famous? If there was true justice the guilt of what happened to her daughter wouldve caused that women to hang herself.

[realmenhatelife]

How is this applicable to finding some kidn of "root cause" as to why "these crimes" happen? realme was thinking about why this might have occured in THIS instance and certainly not why underage sexual assault occurs in general. The circumstances surrounding this case are relatively very unique in terms of trying to examine the general phenomenon of underage sexual assault given both Polanski's background and his station in life as an adult. Trying to extrapolate some "greater meaning" from this case for sex crimes as a whole seems to be a largely fruitless exercise. It's like you're actually trying to place an even greater weight on what occured, like this is some kind of special insight or opportunity to "crack the code" of sexual assault. It's not.

Yeah, this is a pretty extraordinary case. If you were going to prevent the things that have fucked up Roman Polanski you wouldn't be preventing them because of this sexual assault case, you'd be preventing them because they're murder and the holocaust.

If we had to take something societally from this I'd say that we cant indulge these kind of lifestyle crimes because they do lead to other crimes or atleast furnish a casual attitude towards other crimes. But I think we've already done that, or atleast the laws we proudly subvert arent the same as in the 70s. The excess and decadence isn't accepted with the same attitude. And the notion of "The Broken Window Effect" has been recognized and is considered in the approach to lesser crimes.

I think by fleeing the country Polanski subverted the transformation he needed to follow the American conciousness to today. Take a guy like Nicholson who had his excess and now is a parody of himself as an old man. We allow him his excess because he will self depricate and validate that our time now is better, and the time then was worse. We made the right decision with where we've gone. Polanski hasn't changed and represents the excess with no attrition which is especially insulting to the rest of us who have to pay our own debts.

But this is played off of the law, which is supposed to be objective and clinical. I feel like Polanski apologists are often making very subjective arguments against what should be a very objective process.

[TheMojoPin]

Yeah, this is a pretty extraordinary case. If you were going to prevent the things that have fucked up Roman Polanski you wouldn't be preventing them because of this sexual assault case, you'd be preventing them because they're murder and the holocaust.

If we had to take something societally from this I'd say that we cant indulge these kind of lifestyle crimes because they do lead to other crimes or atleast furnish a casual attitude towards other crimes. But I think we've already done that, or atleast the laws we proudly subvert arent the same as in the 70s. The excess and decadence isn't accepted with the same attitude. And the notion of "The Broken Window Effect" has been recognized and is considered in the approach to lesser crimes.

I think by fleeing the country Polanski subverted the transformation he needed to follow the American conciousness to today. Take a guy like Nicholson who had his excess and now is a parody of himself as an old man. We allow him his excess because he will self depricate and validate that our time now is better, and the time then was worse. We made the right decision with where we've gone. Polanski hasn't changed and represents the excess with no attrition which is especially insulting to the rest of us who have to pay our own debts.

But this is played off of the law, which is supposed to be objective and clinical. I feel like Polanski apologists are often making very subjective arguments against what should be a very objective process.

Good points, especially on how he's effectively "taking the fall" for that generation of Hollywood. That's not saying he's being treated unfairly, but I highly doubt he's the only one who was into this kind of shit: he's just the one that got caught. Nicholson, Hopper and Beatty et al are probably all wiping their brows and thinking, "better him than me." Even just reading something like Peter Biskind's Easy Riders, Raging Bulls shows how rampantly 70's Hollywood were fucking, snorting and shooting everything that moved with little care of the consequences.

Hell, it's not even just Hollywood. The attempts to compare this to Woody Allen earlier in the thread didn't really work, but what about someone like Jimmy Page? At the height of Led Zep's popularity he was basically keeping an underage girl prisoner to do whatever the fuck he wanted to her, yet now it seems like people just laugh it off like, "oh, THOSE were the days!" The fuck? Page could easily be in this position right now if someone had just made a phone call.

[~Katja~]

I will say this in several languages and hopefully this will shut you all the fuck up:

This guy is a rapist of 13 year olds...

Ill try it again in languages people understand

Ce gars est un violeur de 13 an olds

Again...

Dieser Kerl ist ein Vergewaltiger von 13 Jahren alt

Again...

Este tipo é estuprador de 13 anos

again...

Этот парень - насильник 13 лет

again...

Este tipo es un violador de 13 años

Shut the fuck up now...


no offense, but there is only ONE case that is known and he was prosecuted for, do you know something we all don't know about other cases?








and I see where skeet is coming from with his comments that he will teach his daughter about older men and protect her from things like this happening.

Given the scene she was in at the time and her age her going back a second time with him after she already felt uncomfortable about the first photoshoot, where the hell were her parents in this? Reading the testimony it seems she was never forced to take off her clothes for the pictures, she was asked and she did it on the first shoot felt uncomfortable about it, yet went on the second one as well. (same with taking drugs and alcohol she was offered)
She also was not a little innocent girl playing with barbie dolls not knowing about boys, she stated she told her boyfriend about the incident and that's how her mom found out. She knew that the topless pictures would cause her trouble with her mom, so she hid it from her, so she did know that taking them in the first place could be trouble.
Just a wild guess, but given the area she lived in and her taking off her clothes and posing nude for pictures in hopes of getting her acting career going, she had a good sense of sexuality and how it could "help" her.

Of course all of this does NOT excuse the rape and he was prosecuted and SHOULD serve his time, even after all this time and her forgiveness.

[TheMojoPin]

Given the scene she was in at the time and her age her going back a second time with him after she already felt uncomfortable about the first photoshoot, where the hell were her parents in this? Reading the testimony it seems she was never forced to take off her clothes for the pictures, she was asked and she did it on the first shoot felt uncomfortable about it, yet went on the second one as well. (same with taking drugs and alcohol she was offered)
She also was not a little innocent girl playing with barbie dolls not knowing about boys, she stated she told her boyfriend about the incident and that's how her mom found out. She knew that the topless pictures would cause her trouble with her mom, so she hid it from her, so she did know that taking them in the first place could be trouble.
Just a wild guess, but given the area she lived in and her taking off her clothes and posing nude for pictures in hopes of getting her acting career going, she had a good sense of sexuality and how it could "help" her.

Of course all of this does NOT excuse the rape and he was prosecuted and SHOULD serve his time, even after all this time and her forgiveness.

So then what's the point of you breaking it down like it somehow matters in terms of what Polanski did? You put that disclaimer at the end, but everything before it sounds like the equivalent of those "well, anyone who dresses like that is asking for it" arguments.

[thepaulo]

Yeah, this is a pretty extraordinary case. If you were going to prevent the things that have fucked up Roman Polanski you wouldn't be preventing them because of this sexual assault case, you'd be preventing them because they're murder and the holocaust.

If we had to take something societally from this I'd say that we cant indulge these kind of lifestyle crimes because they do lead to other crimes or atleast furnish a casual attitude towards other crimes. But I think we've already done that, or atleast the laws we proudly subvert arent the same as in the 70s. The excess and decadence isn't accepted with the same attitude. And the notion of "The Broken Window Effect" has been recognized and is considered in the approach to lesser crimes.

I think by fleeing the country Polanski subverted the transformation he needed to follow the American conciousness to today. Take a guy like Nicholson who had his excess and now is a parody of himself as an old man. We allow him his excess because he will self depricate and validate that our time now is better, and the time then was worse. We made the right decision with where we've gone. Polanski hasn't changed and represents the excess with no attrition which is especially insulting to the rest of us who have to pay our own debts.

But this is played off of the law, which is supposed to be objective and clinical. I feel like Polanski apologists are often making very subjective arguments against what should be a very objective process.


I think a lot of the elite might have a feeling that they have been there or might have been there. It is harder to judge someone who is respected and intelligent than a faceless degenerate. It makes us all question ourselves a little more which creates a ripple effect throughout society.

[Dude!]

Originally Posted by ~Katja~
Given the scene she was in at the time and her age her going back a second time with him after she already felt uncomfortable about the first photoshoot, where the hell were her parents in this? Reading the testimony it seems she was never forced to take off her clothes for the pictures, she was asked and she did it on the first shoot felt uncomfortable about it, yet went on the second one as well. (same with taking drugs and alcohol she was offered)
She also was not a little innocent girl playing with barbie dolls not knowing about boys, she stated she told her boyfriend about the incident and that's how her mom found out. She knew that the topless pictures would cause her trouble with her mom, so she hid it from her, so she did know that taking them in the first place could be trouble.
Just a wild guess, but given the area she lived in and her taking off her clothes and posing nude for pictures in hopes of getting her acting career going, she had a good sense of sexuality and how it could "help" her.

Of course all of this does NOT excuse the rape and he was prosecuted and SHOULD serve his time, even after all this time and her forgiveness.


dear baby jesus
i just can't take this any more

she was a CHILD of THIRTEEN
there is a reason CHILDREN can't
vote or drive or sign contracts

they have no life experience,
no judgement, and are taught to
do as they are told by adults in
postions of authority

this CHILD was not complicit
in any way whatsoever
and i wish people would not suggest
that she was

[~Katja~]

So then what's the point of you breaking it down like it somehow matters in terms of what Polanski did? You put that disclaimer at the end, but everything before it sounds like the equivalent of those "well, anyone who dresses like that is asking for it" arguments.
no, I am disagreeing with the claims that she was an innocent little girl that could compared to a 13 year old living out in the country in the 70's
And I am wondering why her parents were not more involved in her life, would any of you let your daughters go to a photoshoot with an older man? Highly doubt it.

[thepaulo]

I think a lot of the elite might have a feeling that they have been there or might have been there. It is harder to judge someone who is respected and intelligent than a faceless degenerate. It makes us all question ourselves a little more which creates a ripple effect throughout society.

It is just one of the many sins/laws. We all sin and we all break laws so we must constantly be taught to be on guard. The only good that comes out of something like this is that it forces us to examine what is right and wrong. In just the one area of sexual relations, do we all feel we understand what is right and what is wrong?

[thepaulo]

dear baby jesus
i just can't take this any more

she was a CHILD of THIRTEEN
there is a reason CHILDREN can't
vote or drive or sign contracts

they have no life experience,
no judgement, and are taught to
do as they are told by adults in
postions of authority

this CHILD was not complicit
in any way whatsoever
and i wish people would not suggest
that she was

That's the law. We understand.

[~Katja~]

dear baby jesus
i just can't take this any more

she was a CHILD of THIRTEEN
there is a reason CHILDREN can't
vote or drive or sign contracts

they have no life experience,
no judgement, and are taught to
do as they are told by adults in
postions of authority

this CHILD was not complicit
in any way whatsoever
and i wish people would not suggest
that she was
and where were this CHILD's parents when she went with an adult stranger

[Dude!]

It is just one of the many sins/laws. We all sin and we all break laws so we must constantly be taught to be on guard. The only good that comes out of something like this is that it forces us to examine what is right and wrong. In just the one area of sexual relations, do we all feel we understand what is right and what is wrong?

quoting and responding to yourself?
odd

[Dude!]

and where were this CHILD's parents when she went with an adult stranger

i don't know
but they should have been there

the bad behavior of the parents
does not make the child complicit

[thepaulo]

quoting and responding to yourself?
odd

It happens....the thought wasn't finished.

[A.J.]

no, I am disagreeing with the claims that she was an innocent little girl that could compared to a 13 year old living out in the country in the 70's
And I am wondering why her parents were not more involved in her life, would any of you let your daughters go to a photoshoot with an older man? Highly doubt it.

I understand what you're saying to a point. At the beginning of this thread, there was a list of rock stars who were involved in jailbait. When Jimmy Page was 28 he started "dating" a 14 year old. He even introduced himself to the girl's mother and said that he hoped she didn't mind he was seeing her daughter.

Attitudes seem to have been somewhat more lax back then -- for whatever reason. If you look back at all the rock stars who were mentioned earlier in the thread, there's no way that today they'd get away with what they did back in the 60s and 70s.

[thepaulo]

We all remember the case of Don Vito(Vincie Margera)

who went down a long legal road for groping a girl at a public signing event.
He fits the bill a little better as someone who doesn't know how to draw the line.

[TheMojoPin]

no, I am disagreeing with the claims that she was an innocent little girl that could compared to a 13 year old living out in the country in the 70's
And I am wondering why her parents were not more involved in her life, would any of you let your daughters go to a photoshoot with an older man? Highly doubt it.

Who is claiming she's some "innocent little girl?" That is irrelevant. Where the parents were is irrelevant to what Polanski chose to do. None of that has any bearing on Polanski making the choices on his part to drug and rape a 13-year-old.

[~Katja~]

Who is claiming she's some "innocent little girl?" That is irrelevant. Where the parents were is irrelevant to what Polanski chose to do. None of that has any bearing on Polanski making the choices on his part to drug and rape a 13-year-old.
as a parent I happen to think it is NOT irrelevant where the parents were, they have a legal obligation to protect their child as well. Polanski raping her was a terrible crime and he should serve time for it, yet parents are prosecuted these days if they don't properly supervise their children.

and for the record, Dude! has been claiming over and over that she was just an innocent child, a little girl. My comment was directed at him.


(and I am sure some of you will think that my opinions are in defense of Polanski's actions, which I assure you, they are not.)

[Dude!]

and for the record, Dude! has been claiming over and over that she was just an innocent child, a little girl.

correctly claiming

[~Katja~]

It seems that in the past and now the victim has said that the publicity and media was more traumatic than the rape itself. I don't know where she has found the forgiveness she has granted very early on after the conviction, some people probably have the ability to put negative experiences behind them better than others. I think the media attention to the case all these years after is probably going to add another level of stress and trauma to her life and family now that she will have to cope with.

[AKA]

a 50 year old man who has sex with a 13 year-old can only be described in one way: a pedophile.

Can it? How about a more accurate term "Hebephilia"

dear baby jesus
i just can't take this any more

she was a CHILD of THIRTEEN
there is a reason CHILDREN can't
vote or drive or sign contracts

they have no life experience,
no judgement, and are taught to
do as they are told by adults in
postions of authority

this CHILD was not complicit
in any way whatsoever
and i wish people would not suggest
that she was

Are you this consistent and passionate over the stories of the hot teachers who fuck 13 year old male CHILDREN????

I'm not debating the drugging and raping, because there is nothing to debate there, but the double standards some people are showing when talkiing about a girl having sex with a adult man vs. when a boy has sex with an adult woman - if one is a child, then they are all children, and should be protected and defended as such.

[JimBeam]

And it's not like this guy's being singled out.

Look at what the creep Joe Francis has been tried/sued for recently.

Girls, that were underage, willingly took off their tops and/or made out w/ other chicks, thousands of people bought the videos or watched them online, yet now everybody's acting like it's the most disgusting thing to happen.

I have no problem w/ pursuing him legally if it was a crime but I do think there's some difference if a sober person does something like this and then after the shame/dollar signs, decides they were victimized.

[AKA]

It seems that in the past and now the victim has said that the publicity and media was more traumatic than the rape itself. I don't know where she has found the forgiveness she has granted very early on after the conviction, some people probably have the ability to put negative experiences behind them better than others. I think the media attention to the case all these years after is probably going to add another level of stress and trauma to her life and family now that she will have to cope with.

I had a very pointed discussion with a friend in college who confided in me that she had been raped when she was 14 or 15. At one point the talk got around to regrets in life, and if we could do anything over again, would we, and she said no - not even the rape. She didn't necessarily find peace with it, but she viewed her life from that moment forward and couldnt imagine not being the person she had become - which was a positive.

I also had another friend who as a boy had been molested by a family friend when he was 10 or 11, and years later, through all of his problems with his teen years, he decided the only thing he could do was confront and forgive his abuser. It didn't magically "free" him, but he was able to pull his life together, and is now very happily married with kids and whole 9 yards.

Finally, I know someone else who was abused by a family member, and it has clouded and shadowed her entire life in a very dark way. She's in her late 30s now - divorced and with a really troubled daughter herself, and she still can't get her way out of it - to the point that it has pushed all of her friends and family away, and there's really no way to look at her with anything other than pity. She's tried everything, including "forviging," but the emotional wounds are just too deep.

Bottom line is I just think it's how you are hard wired to begin with, and the environement you were raised in, on whether or not you can find it within yourself to move on by forgiving the abuser.

[Dude!]

Can it? How about a more accurate term "Hebephilia"



Are you this consistent and passionate over the stories of the hot teachers who fuck 13 year old male CHILDREN????

if they drug and rape them
yes, of course

[thepaulo]

And it's not like this guy's being singled out.

Look at what the creep Joe Francis has been tried/sued for recently.

Girls, that were underage, willingly took off their tops and/or made out w/ other chicks, thousands of people bought the videos or watched them online, yet now everybody's acting like it's the most disgusting thing to happen.

I have no problem w/ pursuing him legally if it was a crime but I do think there's some difference if a sober person does something like this and then after the shame/dollar signs, decides they were victimized.

To a certain small degree we are all implicated when we are titilated by movies or porn.

[Crispy123]

I actually read the story through a link on Yahoo and posted in here once it was being discussed.

How can you have outrage for something you may not be aware of ?

Granted I may have heard some rumblings in the past about this guy being a creep but until this story broke I had no idea about the details.

Should I be any less shocked/disgusted by the nature of that he did because I'm just now finding out the whole story ?



Its a 31 year old story. The victim has said let it go. Men having sex with teenage girls has been going on a lot longer than cell phones; it happens all the time, probably in your town and at the very least in your state, within the last month Id be willing to bet.

So for you to get outraged about this is false outrage, because we in America worship celebrities and this guy is a celebrity and is on your TV and computer.

Ryan Seacrest is telling you its bad and you put down your big mac and are so fired up, what do you do? You come on a message board and bitch about what happened.


You dont fly to California to demonstrate or try to get legislation passsed or form neighborhood watches or invent an all new & improved chastity belt, no because its false outrage.

Furthermore, for you to be so outraged that you would wish my kids get raped, besides making you a classic internet pussy talking trash you would never do face to face, makes you a brainwashed tool and a creep.