by avishai 100 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
Narkissos. A 13 year old is not of the age of consent. A consensual sexual act is not possible with a drugged 13 year old. They are not competent. A criminal sentence was not served for rape. Polanski fled. Am I correct on these statements? The law has not been observed. And yes, Narkissos, libertarians can believe in a system of law and courts.
libertarianism != anarchism
BTS
It's sick the way Holywood is reacting to this. They are trying to make him and the arts community the victims here! WTF! I don't care how long ago it was, this man needs to serve his time. He pleaded GUILTY and then fled before sentencing could take place, So basically he has been a fugitive all this time. Now he will get time on top of whatever original time he would have recieved do to his fleeing. That is unless he gets some a-hole judge in LA that lets him off out of sympathy. Yes, it has been 30yrs, but that still does not excuse the fact that this girl was a child and that he raped and sodomized her!
If it was your daughter would you be asking "why now?"
It's sick the way Holywood is reacting to this.
The are reacting in the same exact way that Democrats have reacted to Kennedy and Chappaquidick. Apologists.
By the way, good article:
http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/09/28/polanski_arrest/
Roman Polanski raped a child. Let's just start right there, because that's the detail that tends to get neglected when we start discussing whether it was fair for the bail-jumping director to be arrested at age 76, after 32 years in "exile" (which in this case means owning multiple homes in Europe, continuing to work as a director, marrying and fathering two children, even winning an Oscar, but never -- poor baby -- being able to return to the U.S.). Let's keep in mind that Roman Polanski gave a 13-year-old girl a Quaalude and champagne, then raped her, before we start discussing whether the victim looked older than her 13 years, or that she now says she'd rather not see him prosecuted because she can't stand the media attention. Before we discuss how awesome his movies are or what the now-deceased judge did wrong at his trial, let's take a moment to recall that according to the victim's grand jury testimony, Roman Polanski instructed her to get into a jacuzzi naked, refused to take her home when she begged to go, began kissing her even though she said no and asked him to stop; performed cunnilingus on her as she said no and asked him to stop; put his penis in her vagina as she said no and asked him to stop; asked if he could penetrate her anally, to which she replied, "No," then went ahead and did it anyway, until he had an orgasm.
It seems that many of the rationalizations about Polanski's crimes could be modified a bit and applied to Phillip Garrido's crimes. Maybe the two of them will end up being cell mates.
Would any of you who are seeming to turn a blind eye to his crime be saying this if he were a former JW or a Catholic Priest?
I had the exact same thought. Or even just some nobody off the street. People seem to be making a martyr of this guy simply because of his accomplishments as a filmmaker.
Yeah - well - I guess there were people that thought Phil Spector was a very talented record producer and sound man.
I suppose that there were people that thought that Michael Jackson should get a pass for fooling around with little boys because he could sing and dance.
Should I go on to mention O.J.Simpson and that weirdo that used to play the TV character Barretta?
I really think there must be something in the water out there in California.
Bottom line: he raped a child, and justice was not served by his running away. As far as I can tell, he has never accepted responsibility for what he did. I'm glad they arrested him.
One very sick man with no remorse was caught and is being brought to stand trial for a crime he commited against a child, where is the problem of issue in this?
If we believe we are a society of laws then no one can be above those laws and all must pay for their crimes against socieity and there is no greater crime than a crime commited against the most innocent of societies members, its children.
If we as adults do not protect the children, who will?
If we dont do it now, when?
He should be treated no differently than a totally unknown person guilty of raping a child and fleeing the country.
The LA County DA's office should be commended for purusing justice.
When he is sentenced, the judge can take everything into consideration, including the victim's opinion and Polanski's conduct since the crime.
These are the admitted facts.
He served alchohol and drugs to a 13 girl, putting her life at risk, for the express purpose to sexually molest her.
He then raped and sodomized her. She was not consenting at all.
He stipulated to these facts and pleaded guilty.
He was offered a compromise plea deal which is often done to spare the victim. It was incredibly short for such a heinius crime. (Was he given special treatment because of his fame by the prosecutors?)
It was so short, the judge rejected it.
Scared, he fled the country to avoid justice.
Why so long, 30 years?
France and other countries have refused to send him back. He has convinced them that he is an innocent victim of flawed USA justice.
During the Clinton Presidency, the pursuit of him was halted. It was restarted late in the Bush presidency.
He publicly planned a trip to Switz. allowing the USA authorities to ask for help. They arrested him.
Opinion: The guys is a pig of the worse kind and deserves this arrest. And hopefully will become an example to other child molesters, you don't get away with the crime, you will be caught, you will have to pay a price.
