Started by modage, June 26, 2003, 01:44:22 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Quote from: modage on September 27, 2009, 11:56:45 PM
I thought they were supposed to stay neutral!  :doh:

With enemies you know where they stand, but with neutrals? Who knows! It sickens me...


it also sickens me that they do good for one, I always hated switzerland, and enjoyed doing it.


I don't think Polanski really sodomized her. I think sodomy was just a term used for all kinds of things that wasn't just missionary style.
Falling in love is the greatest joy in life. Followed closely by sneaking into a gated community late at night and firing a gun into the air.


NY Times

LOS ANGELES — The sudden move by Swiss authorities to arrest Roman Polanski for possible extradition to the United States after 31 years as a fugitive – and countless visits to Switzerland in the interim – has roused diplomats, offended supporters of the filmmaker and left more than a few onlookers asking themselves the same question.

Why now?

Law enforcement officials here have said it was a simple matter of opportunity. "He just showed up at a time and a place where we knew he would be available," Sandi Gibbons, a spokeswoman for Los Angeles County district attorney Stephen L. Cooley, said on Monday.

But supporters of Mr. Polanski point out that this has been true countless times since he fled the U.S. in 1978 to escape sentencing in a sex-crimes case. "He has traveled openly and transparently," said Jeff Berg, the chairman of International Creative Management, who is Mr. Polanski's agent. In Switzerland, where Mr. Polanski owns a home, he is a frequent visitor.

Asked on Monday why the Oscar-winning director hadn't been picked up earlier, Ms. Gibbons – who had said the prosecutors did make earlier attempts to apprehend the fugitive, when they had advance knowledge of his whereabouts – said: "It's not our business to be gumshoes."

In fact, Mr. Polanski's lawyers, as recently as an August appellate court filing, maintained that the district attorney's office had deliberately avoided attempts at extradition, which might have triggered hearings at which judicial misconduct would have been raised as an issue.

A July ruling by that appellate court has opened the door to a potentially volatile round of argument as early as next month over whether lawyers for Mr. Polanski should be permitted, even without the director's presence in the courtroom, to offer evidence that the case against him was hopelessly tainted.

The question rises, in part, out of a documentary about the case released last year in which a deputy district attorney in the case described how he had coached the now-deceased judge about Mr. Polanski's sentencing.

For three decades, Los Angeles prosecutors have argued that Mr. Polanski forfeited his rights by fleeing, and has no standing to challenge his treatment unless he returns to face punishment. Mr. Polanski's representatives have argued that the need to remedy corrupt justice in Los Angeles supersedes any requirement that Mr. Polanski return.

Precisely how Mr. Polanski came to be picked up so shortly before the crucial hearing remains unclear. Ms. Gibbons said the appellate court ruling had nothing to do with the extradition request, which, she said, was handled by David Walgren, a deputy district attorney assigned to Mr. Polanski's case.

Both Mr. Dalton and Chad Hummel, who have represented Mr. Polanski in his appeal, declined to discuss Mr. Polanski's extradition, in which he is to have a new legal team based in Europe and perhaps Washington.

While Mr. Polanski has lived a fairly open life in Europe, he has avoided visits to Britain, where he feared extradition would be easier. When in Germany directing his latest film, "The Ghost," Mr. Polanski occasionally avoided the set, directing through a remote communications set-up and leading some members of the cast and crew to believe that he was trying to make apprehension more difficult, according to a person who was briefed on the shoot and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Hervé Temime, Mr. Polanski's lawyer in Paris, told France Info radio that "there is no reason, either in law or in fact, nor on the terrain of the most elementary justice, to keep Roman Polanski in prison for even one day." Mr. Temime, citing "the extravagant circumstances" of Mr. Polanski's arrest as he arrived late Saturday at Zurich's airport on the way to being honored at a local film festival, asked for the director's release and said he intended to fight extradition.

The reaction throughout Europe on Monday appeared to be one of astonishment.

Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, described Mr. Polanski's arrest as "a bit sinister," and said he and the Polish foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikorski, were jointly writing a letter expressing their concern to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Nearly 100 entertainment industry professionals, including the movie directors Pedro Almodovar, Wong Kar Wai and Wim Wenders called in a petition for Mr. Polanski's release, saying: "Filmmakers in France, in Europe, in the United States and around the world are dismayed by this decision."

Ronald Harwood, who won an Oscar as screenwriter of "The Piano," which Mr. Polanski directed, said: "It's really disgraceful. Both the Americans and the Swiss have miscalculated."

Jack Lang, a former French culture minister, said that for Europeans the development showed that the American system of justice had run amok.

"Sometimes, the American justice system shows an excess of formalism," Mr. Lang said, "like an infernal machine that advances inexorably and blindly."

Mr. Polanski, 76, was taken into custody on a provisional arrest warrant after Swiss authorities received an official request from the U.S. Justice Department, which was acting on a request from the Los Angeles district attorneys office. He had originally been charged with six counts, including rape and sodomy, involving an incident with a 13-year-old girl. He eventually pleaded guilty to just one count, having sex with a minor, spent 42 days in state prison under psychiatric evaluation, and fled on the eve of his sentencing after he became convinced that the judge was going to backtrack on a plan to let him off without further jail time.

The victim in the case, Samantha Geimer, has long since publicly identified herself and expressed forgiveness for Mr. Polanski.
Quote from: Pas Rap on April 23, 2010, 07:29:06 AM
Obviously what you are doing right now is called (in my upcoming book of psychology at least) validation. I think it's a normal thing to do. People will reply, say anything, and then you're gonna do what you were subconsciently thinking of doing all along.

children with angels

Quote from: NY Times on September 28, 2009, 06:25:48 PM
Ronald Harwood, who won an Oscar as screenwriter of "The Piano," which Mr. Polanski directed


"Should I bring my own chains?"
"We always do..."


Quote from: Gold Trumpet on September 28, 2009, 11:59:56 AM
I never said he shouldn't go to court, but I said I hope they pardon him. Yes, he did something bad (I address that) and he skipped out when it wasn't legal for him to do so, but the pressing matter is that the judge went back on his word. They still may get him for fleeing, but he should be absolved in the original matter for that. All I am falling is the rule of the law.

The "judge's word" is not legally binding.  Until the moment the judge files the actual sentence, no deals or handshakes or whatever happened behind the scenes have any actual legal bearing.  In other words, the judge has every right to change his mind, no matter how unfair the defendant might think it is.  So to review the facts, Roman Polanski raped a 13-year-old girl, and the judge didn't follow through on the plea bargain.  Only one of these things is illegal.  Here's a clue: it's the one that involves sodomizing a child after drugging her with champagne and quaaludes.  It doesn't matter how old he is now, it doesn't matter how good a director he is, it doesn't matter what happened to his parents at the hands of the Nazis or to his wife at the hands of the Manson family, and it doesn't matter that the victim has since forgiven him.  He committed a very serious crime and he dodged justice.  He'll have his day in court and the chips will fall where they may, but there is no reason he should be automatically absolved for what he's done.
My house, my rules, my coffee


thank you, polka.

for god's sake why is the international community getting behind this guy.


Quote from: Pas Rap on September 29, 2009, 07:15:07 AM
thank you, polka.

for god's sake why is the international community getting behind this guy.



cinemarkissed.. sweden ≠ switzerland.

pas.. sodomy ≠ anal rape, necessarily. the term is used generally to refer to illegal sex of any kind.

polanski.. holocaust survivor + murdered wife + amazing films (60s and 70s) ≠ get out of jail free card.

i doubt he'll do time. apparently if he'd gone to jail in the 70s he would only have been in for a few years, now the sentence is higher. who knows the legal bullshit surrounding the case, the fact most ppl here have let their emotions be the judge judy and executioner pretty much invalidates us from trying to speak reasonably as the law intended.

personally, i think the dude is alrite,. even murderers are forgiven sometimes. but then there's some of you saying he's probably continued to do worse things whilst in exile. umm.. you just made that up. unless you're referring to The Ninth Gate, the dude has not been raping and pillaging his way across the wild, lawless european continent for the last 3 decades only to find his run of amazing luck come to an end now.
under the paving stones.


Quote from: :P on September 30, 2009, 07:02:27 AM
pas.. sodomy ≠ anal

oh is that right. Strange. It explains that scene I found so creepy in Capturing the Friedmans where they accused him of oral sodomy. I thought it was some sick ass-to-mouth thing haha

Quote from: :P on September 30, 2009, 07:02:27 AM
be the judge judy and executioner

typo or pun? haha. But seriously though, he's guilty of a crime that if a everyday normal guy would commit everyone would be ready to chop off his balls and now he's a victim of evil America, that's my beef with the whole thing


Quote from: :P on September 30, 2009, 07:02:27 AM
even murderers are forgiven sometimes.

The law is the law, and heck if I'm gonna break it. But if you can forgive someone... Well, that's the tough part. What can we forgive?
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.


Quote from: :P on September 30, 2009, 07:02:27 AM
unless you're referring to The Ninth Gate,

Still awaiting the trial for this.
it's not the wrench, it's the plumber.


Quote from: Stefen on September 28, 2009, 03:12:31 PM
I don't think Polanski really sodomized her. I think sodomy was just a term used for all kinds of things that wasn't just missionary style.

That is true, but in this case, it means exactly what it sounds like.  He raped her in the ass, as she states herself (direct quote: "He put his penis in my butt") on page 32 of her grand jury testimony, which can be perused here.  I recommend any Polanski apologists out there give that a good read.  If you don't feel dirty by page 5, I don't think we can be friends.
My house, my rules, my coffee


I feel sorry for him and the woman, mostly for the woman, who has been asking repeteadly for years that this matter is left alone simply because she doesn't want her name all over the papers again concerning this horrible thing. that's why i never liked the idea of the wanted and desired documentary, no matter what it proved or what was it's thesis on the subject was. and that's also one of the reasons I don't see what realistic purpose could this whole debacle serve to anyone except the d.a.'s office.


did anyone else read this? I'm sure trying to recall this event tragic to her,

i mean really as sick as all this is, it all sounds very discomforting in the situational sense. so why didn't she stop, she said it was a little weird the first time he took pictures, and so she goes back?  she gave this testimony shortly after, so it's still fresh, but understandably when you get raped, i'm sure you block things out of your memory.  However, she can identify the text on a pill that was broken into 3 pieces, but she can't recall how many glasses she drank of one bottle of champagne?  and it's not weird to be completely nude in front of the guy, then you're all the sudden freaked out? I mean, a 13 yr old probably couldn't comprehend a lot of what is going on, i'm just saying this sounds sketch.

keep in mind this is a 13 yr old who has had sex twice before this incident?  Not judging, just pointing out the facts, and she said she'd tried Quaalude's before.  I tried pot at a young age, so i'm not looking down on it, i'm just saying i did that kind of shit when i was young and my motives weren't 100% out of curiosity.

"i was going to ask if some of my friends could come, but he was in too big of a hurry."

"he told me to take off my underwear before i got in the jacuzzi"

[talking about being raped] no one was around, so i didn't do anything?  i guess this illogical thought would have been what goes through a 13 yr olds head. i don't know.

and all the sudden she can recall him asking about her period, and whether or not  she is on the pill, the rest of the talk while the intercourse is going on is shit she was blocking out, or couldn't hear?

I have no clue what would go through a woman's  mind when she is getting raped, so i can't really comment entirely on her actions, but not yelling (if you feel you're in danger of getting butt fucked) for help is just something i can't understand.

It's obvious what polka said about the guy who at the time was in his 40's fucking sodomized a 13 yr old is just wrong for lack of better words, and he deserves whatever he gets, but still this shit all sounds so fucking weird.

I mean, what came of this in brief because in polanski's briefing it says  He is a "mentally disordered sex offender" meaning that "he is a person who, by reason of mental defect, disease or disorder..." is that just a nice way of saying he's a fucking creep?  Kinda like anyone who rapes a 13 yr old is mentally unstable?

What i'm saying polka is, obviously its creepy by page 5, so this early on, as she states, it was weird in the first photography session.  What in the fuck is her problem?  Was she hoping to be famous? I just can't identify with rape on any level, so maybe i'm trying to apply logic in a situation where that doesn't work.  As far as being a Polanski apologist, that's just not the case for me, i mean the guy pleaded guilty, there is no apology for that. But, in a situation like this, do you really try and justify fucking a 13 yr old even if it was consensual?  Either way the law is broken, and there is no need to drag it out and say it was consensual because it's still sex with a minor i way off here?  I'm just saying, it would be one thing if it was like "he then held me down while i couldn't move and performed..."  13 or not.  Roman Polanski or not.  Male or female.  I would punch a 40 yr old peder-ass the sec he got off of me when that bitch came to the door.  Or least a scream.  a naked cock can't be too hard to kick, even if you are a little weaker, and 13.

Like i said though, i might just be insensitive or ignorant to rape or something, because i don't fully understand it.  Somehow "this famous man told me too" just isn't cutting it for me, even though i'm sure this kinda shit happens all the time for stardom or fame. At 13 i guess you do what older people say?

Fuck this nonsense either way. I haven't put too much thought into it. this was just first reactions, to wasting my morning reading those terrible briefings, i'm sure someone can shed some light on my ignorance.
it's not the wrench, it's the plumber.