Roman Polanski

I was impressed that there really such a strong lobby for the guy. Seems like for Europeans and Hollywood stars he is "one of the gang" and hence beyond the reach of justice by definition.

I read an editorial written by an American Jesuit who proposed that we should just imagine that he was a priest and see if the same people would defend him.

(And why the heck was he never extradited to the US???)

Could it be because the French (at least those in power) find nothing wrong with raping and sodomizing a 13 year old girl?

Don't these "defenders" have a young girl as a family member (or at least know one)? If so how can this be excused? Should we give Hitler a break because he was a painter before he was a dictator? A stretch I know. This man is a criminal and a coward, I don't care if he directed the best movie ever.

They would just relativize it - Priests are supposed to not sodomize children; it's not like Polanski took a vow of celibacy, or something.

Or human decency apparently.

I doubt raping a 13 year old is accepted in France, but I do think the girl herself can ask to have the charges dropped if she wants to. This isn't a prude anglo-saxon culture we are talking about. Latin culture is (much) more liberal minded when it comes to sexual relations.

And please tell me why "sodomizing" is considered worse than just raping?!

So, my take is, it'd still be considered a crime, but a less horrible so than it is in the U.K. or USA (definetly USA, who is paradoxally both one of the most depraved and more prudish country in the world). Also, if you take into account that the girl wanted the charges dropped, and it happened so long ago, the mentality is even more flexible about the event.

Anyway. Personnally, I don't agree with that mindset, and I am kinda happy he been caught. But I am more upset that there are no extradition treaties in place between USA and France about molesters.

Mind you, I'm glad they picked him up, but the Swiss are not particularly famous for cooperating with the US on things like this, either.  The recent UBS business, now this - makes me wonder what's going on in the background.

I would hope so, but their silence speaks volumes. One way to get change is to voice displeasure with politicians. This seems not to be the case in France. Maybe they just don't like their citizens being raped by others, but if a Frenchmen does it abroad, that's OK, especially if he is famous.

A minor cannot drop the charges. That would be a pedophiles dream come true if they could. Polanski was charged and found guilty. He fled prior to being sentenced (also a crime). Makes no difference what the girl (woman now) says.

Certainly isn't. Especially if you conceder giving a minor booze and drugs in order to have sex as a "relationship".

I made no distinction between the vileness of the two in this case. If one likes sodomy then perhaps one would consider that a "treat". Hope this heals your sensibilities.

I guess it's easy to have a liberal attitude about such things as long as it isn't your family. Would telling all criminal that they are safe if they don't get hauled before justice after a certain period of time, make you feel better? Thank gawd most Americans identify themselves as conservatives...not liberals, what a hell hole this place would be.

France isn't a hell hole, as far as I can see.

The French are very comfortable about/with sex, an admirable thing in many respects.  I don't believe, however, that even they would ignore the drug-induced rape of a 13-year old, assuming anyone noticed besides the perp.

That's the thing. I really am wondering why France's legal apparatus hasn't cooperated with the U.S.'s about this. This isn't about France's population, but about their proceedings.

Didn't happen on their soil; no extradition treaty with the US.  I.E. - nothing to ignore... until he gets arrested elsewhere.

I know. And this is what bothers me. No treaty.

The issue is not as simple as it is made out to be. Polanski deserves tonnes of sympathy for the fact that the Mason gang cruelly killed his wife Sharon Tate who was carrying his chield at the time of his murder. Having saID THAT, i HASTEN TO ADD THAT he wilfully committed a serious crime in having consensual sex with a 13 year old. The fact that the victim herself has asked that the case be dismissed is not correct as we believe that law serves as an instrument of public jkustice not private retribution. The victim can forgive her alledged "rapist" but the law must be upheld. I think a suspended sentence is what will be given.

In the interest of fairness to Polanski, I propose this: One week in prison (with the general population). That should be long enough for him to experience the horror of forcible rape and reflect on what he did. Let him wear the picture included with this article, on his prison shirt along with the words "Child Molester" written below it. Who knows maybe he would be given a pass from his fellow inmates, unlike that young girl received from him.

Sympathy has nothing to do with it.  Give him all you want.  Only a moral relativist would even bring this up.

I would HASTEN TO ADD that you have your facts wrong - she was drugged and raped.  You can't have 'consensual sex' with a 13 year old, anyway, even if she's stone cold sober, and it was not a 'serious' crime, it was a heinous crime.  The worst kind of crime, short of murder, a human can commit.

It's not just a belief, it's a matter of law - she has no standing to request or direct that the charges be dismissed.

With that, I agree.  Except for the [alledged "rapist"] part - his guilt and the nature of his crime were determined long ago.

That would be a gross miscarriage of justice.

This is what I too had said. I do not think that the victim can call off the case. But the episode happened reons ago and I think the victim has a right not to have here privacy invaded one more time.

Even if one goes back to the 'anything' goes prevalent at that time, sexual relations with a 13 year old was not. I lived in Israel at the time, but that was never the norm in America. I sincerely hope that norm remains immutable.

Mr. Polanski is a Pedophile. That is illegal and immoral. The point is moot. He will face justice. It is only a matter of time until he runs out of appeals and will be put on trial. I am not saying he is not guilty. He most probably is, and has been convicted.

The question is whether the victim will be willing to tell the truth. Her request to dismiss the charges is understandable but not reassuring. Her inevitable exposure to the media will be distasteful in the extreme.

Of that we can be certain.

Doesn't matter.  Afraid she has no such right.  This is America, Bahu - victims have no rights here, remember?  Only perps have rights.

Anyway he was all ready convicted, he ran before being sentenced. The rape case has been decided so that point is moot. What is relevant is what he will get for it and the charge for fleeing justice (which is a whole other matter).