Roman Polanski.......Back on the news.

http://www.aol.com/article/2015/10/3...57076874502911

Personally, I wish some bounty hunter would nab his old ass and drag him back to Los Angeles.

Keep in mind, he is under conviction. He skipped out because he never served his sentence. There is no "statute of limitations" on this.

I have read, several times over the years, just what he did, and what he plead out on. It was absolutly dispicable what he did. Under any law, in any State, he raped a young teen age girl.

The telling thing that caught my attention in the link I furnished is the victims words. "Rape". "Teenage Girl". "He's suffered enough". Really??

She might have forgiven him. Heck, in the court of public opinion, he might have been deemed to have "suffered" enough.

But,it seems the State of California does not forgive, or forget.

http://www.aol.com/article/2015/10/3...57076874502911

Personally, I wish some bounty hunter would nab his old ass and drag him back to Los Angeles.

Keep in mind, he is under conviction. He skipped out because he never served his sentence. There is no "statute of limitations" on this.

I have read, several times over the years, just what he did, and what he plead out on. It was absolutly dispicable what he did. Under any law, in any State, he raped a young teen age girl.

The telling thing that caught my attention in the link I furnished is the victims words. "Rape". "Teenage Girl". "He's suffered enough". Really??

She might have forgiven him. Heck, in the court of public opinion, he might have been deemed to have "suffered" enough.

But,it seems the State of California does not forgive, or forget. Originally Posted by Jackie S

yep. read that too yesterday. while i do not condone what Polanski did, which is drug a 13 year old girl and have sex with her, there is one thing that the US did that caused him to flee the US. they reneged on his plea agreement, which is rather unprecedented in legal terms. had the US not done that, i think the pollack would have abided by the original plea. and he "might" have paid the judgement against him, which he has not to this day. for a guy worth an estimated 45 Million, this is pocket change to him.

it was approximately 500k. chump change to a guy worth 45 M.

http://www.celebritynetworth.com/ric...ski-net-worth/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_...ual_abuse_case


Conviction and departure

Under the terms of the plea agreement, the court ordered Polanski to report to a state prison for a 90-day psychiatric evaluation, but granted a stay to allow him to complete his current project. Under the terms set by the court, he traveled to Europe to complete filming.[29] Polanski returned to California and reported to Chino State Prison for the evaluation period, and was released after 42 days.[30] Polanski's lawyers had the expectation that Polanski would get only probation at the subsequent sentencing hearing, with the probation officer, examining psychiatrist, and the victim all recommending against jail time.[31] The documentary Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired alleges that things changed after a conversation with LA Deputy District Attorney David Wells and the judge, Laurence J. Rittenband. Polanski's attorneys assert that the judge suggested to them that he would send the director to prison and order him deported.[5] In response to the threat of imprisonment, Polanski bought a one-way ticket to England and fled the United States.[2]
Shortly after Polanski fled, Rittenband denied he ever did anything that the 2008 documentary would go on to allege, by issuing the following statement:[32]
"I then stated that an appropriate sentence would be for Mr. Polanski to serve out the remainder of the 90-day period for which he had been sent to Chino, provided Mr. Polanski were to be deported by the Immigration and Naturalization Bureau, by stipulation or otherwise, at the end of the 90 days. I expressly stated that I was aware that the court lacked authority to order Mr. Polanski deported directly or as a condition of probation. However, based on the facts before me, I believed that the safety and welfare of the citizens of California required that Mr. Polanski be kept out of circulation for more than 90 days. However, since Mr. Polanski is an alien who had pleaded guilty to an act of moral turpitude, I believe that the interests of the citizens of California could be adequately safeguarded by a shorter jail term if Mr. Polanski would thereafter absent himself from the country." Polanski fled initially to London on 1 February 1978, where he maintained a residence. A day later he traveled on to France, where he held citizenship, avoiding the risk of extradition to the United States by Britain. Consistent with its extradition treaty with the United States, France can refuse to extradite its own citizens,[33] and an extradition request later filed by U.S. officials was denied. The United States government could have requested that Polanski be prosecuted on the California charges by the French authorities.[34] Polanski has never returned to England, and later sold his home there. The United States could still request the arrest and extradition of Polanski from other countries should he visit them, and Polanski avoided visits to countries (such as the UK) that were likely to extradite him and mostly travelled and worked in France, Germany, the Czech Republic and Poland.[citation needed] In 1979, Polanski gave a controversial interview with the novelist Martin Amis in which, discussing his conviction, he said "If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… fucking, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to fuck young girls. Juries want to fuck young girls. Everyone wants to fuck young girls!"[35][36][37]


yeah Roman. sure you want to fuck a 13 year old. one problem.. it's illegal in the USA. anywhere.






yeah. i could hang here if i was worth 45 M and in exile. Polanski is a piece of shit .. but .. the US reneged on his plea deal so he ran away.

The real problem was that plea deal to begin with. "Did not want to subject the girl to any more pain and suffering by having to testify".

Give me a Fukin' break. I can't amagine a more dispicable crime than what he did. And when you read the original reports, (before it became a political issue), what he did was even beyond dispicable. Hell, today, you would be looking at a 50+ year sentence, not a slap on the wrist.

Yes, Polanski deserved to "face his accuser" in a court of law. The State should have did every thing within it's power to make sure he did just that.

They need to Dog the Bounty Hunter to get him, he will go international.

The real problem was that plea deal to begin with. "Did not want to subject the girl to any more pain and suffering by having to testify".

Give me a Fukin' break. I can't amagine a more dispicable crime than what he did. And when you read the original reports, (before it became a political issue), what he did was even beyond dispicable. Hell, today, you would be looking at a 50+ year sentence, not a slap on the wrist.

Yes, Polanski deserved to "face his accuser" in a court of law. The State should have did every thing within it's power to make sure he did just that. Originally Posted by Jackie S

while the prosecutors were correct to consider the impact of the young girl having to testify, they should have given the pollack a plea deal that was for actual jail time. they didn't, then tried to void it. if they had offered the pollack a reduced sentence he probably would not have taken it. it's clear the pollack asshole didn't want to serve any real time for this. my guess is he would have rejected any real jail time, then you have to go to trial.

i think he'd have gotten a much larger sentence in a trial.

They need to Dog the Bounty Hunter to get him, he will go international. Originally Posted by pyramider

just as long as it's not in Mexico yeah?

It's a shame he wasn't home years earlier when the Manson family slaughtered those at his residence that night.

It's a shame he wasn't home years earlier when the Manson family slaughtered those at his residence that night. Originally Posted by Stockinglover

what an asinine statement, so you condone Manson's crimes as long as Polanski had been there?

guess who else would have been there but cancelled for a "booty call"?




http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...eath-List.html

After Manson incited the murder of five people, including McQueen's friends Sharon Tate and Jay Sebring in 1969, it was reported that McQueen was another potential target.




According to his wife, the Bullitt actor began carrying a gun at all times in public, including at Sebring's funeral. McQueen did not attend Tate's funeral which disappointed her husband and his friend the director Roman Polanski.




McQueen, who dated Tate for a short time, was supposed to visit her on August 8, 1969, the night members of the Manson Family killed her.

In October 1969, 24 members of the Manson Family were arrested on charges of arson and grant theft. Among those arrested was Manson and Susan Atkins.




After her arrest and incarceration in Los Angeles, Atkins told another inmate about the Tate murder, as well as a list of celebrities that she and other Family members planned to kill in the future.


These included:
McQueen
Elizabeth Taylor
Richard Burton
Tom Jones
Frank Sinatra

some updated info. first, Polanski did pay the settlement, per this account by the victim, Samantha Gailey (Geimer)

In 1988, she filed a civil suit against Polanski, alleging sexual assault; it ultimately was settled for a six-figure sum. It took years to collect on but when she finally got the money, Geimer said, it helped with the raising of her three children, since her work as a secretary and Dave's as a property manager were not very lucrative.

he also wrote her a letter after a documentary on this subject, stating ..

After watching the documentary, Polanski wrote Geimer a letter, which appears in the book. "I wanted you to know how sorry I am for having so affected your life," he wrote.

Also, Geimer herself has defended Polanski's right to move on from the issue.

"Over the years, Geimer has often defended Polanski's right to move on with his life. When he was nominated for an Oscar for "The Pianist," she wrote an op-ed piece for The Times arguing that his movie should be judged on its merits."

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/sep...ook-20130916/2

while i do not condone what Polanski did, i do wonder why this woman's mother, an actress at the time, allowed her daughter to go with Polanski alone?

some updated info. first, Polanski did pay the settlement, per this account by the victim, Samantha Gailey (Geimer)

In 1988, she filed a civil suit against Polanski, alleging sexual assault; it ultimately was settled for a six-figure sum. It took years to collect on but when she finally got the money, Geimer said, it helped with the raising of her three children, since her work as a secretary and Dave's as a property manager were not very lucrative.

he also wrote her a letter after a documentary on this subject, stating ..

After watching the documentary, Polanski wrote Geimer a letter, which appears in the book. "I wanted you to know how sorry I am for having so affected your life," he wrote.

Also, Geimer herself has defended Polanski's right to move on from the issue.

"Over the years, Geimer has often defended Polanski's right to move on with his life. When he was nominated for an Oscar for "The Pianist," she wrote an op-ed piece for The Times arguing that his movie should be judged on its merits."

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/sep...ook-20130916/2

while i do not condone what Polanski did, i do wonder why this woman's mother, an actress at the time, allowed her daughter to go with Polanski alone? Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

In a court of law, it's "the State of California vs Roman Polanski".

Just go back and read the sworn depositions that would have been offered as sworn testimony in a trial. I cannot think of a more vile thing that a grown man could do short of murder.

I also agree that there should have been some type of parental culpability is this whole sordid affair.

As I said before. God can forgive. The Victim can forgive. But The State of California should never forgive.

some updated info. first, Polanski did pay the settlement, per this account by the victim, Samantha Gailey (Geimer)

In 1988, she filed a civil suit against Polanski, alleging sexual assault; it ultimately was settled for a six-figure sum. It took years to collect on but when she finally got the money, Geimer said, it helped with the raising of her three children, since her work as a secretary and Dave's as a property manager were not very lucrative.

he also wrote her a letter after a documentary on this subject, stating ..

After watching the documentary, Polanski wrote Geimer a letter, which appears in the book. "I wanted you to know how sorry I am for having so affected your life," he wrote.

Also, Geimer herself has defended Polanski's right to move on from the issue.

"Over the years, Geimer has often defended Polanski's right to move on with his life. When he was nominated for an Oscar for "The Pianist," she wrote an op-ed piece for The Times arguing that his movie should be judged on its merits."

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/sep...ook-20130916/2

while i do not condone what Polanski did, i do wonder why this woman's mother, an actress at the time, allowed her daughter to go with Polanski alone? Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Just like the Michael Jackson parents, some parents will sell their children for a piece of fame or money. An actress and Polanski? Have no idea what she thought she could get out of that....

Just like the Michael Jackson parents, some parents will sell their children for a piece of fame or money. An actress and Polanski? Have no idea what she thought she could get out of that.... Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Wonder if the "actress, mother's" last name was Kardashian ?

Wonder if the "actress, mother's" last name was Kardashian ? Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

You're not very good at math, are you?

You're not very good at math, are you? Originally Posted by WombRaider

You're not very good at ANYTHING, except if it's related to YOUR work as a swishy walking 'holes attendant / "manager " ! As erudite as YOU'D like everyone to think you are, YOUR dumbass can't figure out satire ? Another of the MANY failings of YOUR life woomby !

Let me guess... Gey Rey posted something about eating dicks.

You're not very good at ANYTHING, except if it's related to YOUR work as a swishy walking 'holes attendant / "manager " ! As erudite as YOU'D like everyone to think you are, YOUR dumbass can't figure out satire ? Another of the MANY failings of YOUR life woomby ! Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

I figured it out. You're just not funny... except of course if we're talking about your junk. I GUESS you could call it a dick... more like a big clit.

As for you, there's no question about your intelligence; you have none. You illustrate your fucking retardation with every post you make. Keep up the good work, dumbass.