Here is a much more measured and reasonable look at the Polanski thing.
Dr. Joyner says:
"And, while I’m generally dubious of putting old men in jail for crimes they committed decades earlier and have shown no propensity to commit again, I’m rather loathe to reward confessed child molesters for fleeing the country."
I think that is the most reasonable thing to conclude. Polanski is no danger, clearly, to anyone, and finally punishing him doesn't accomplish anything. Now, if there is something wrong with his trial, he can challenge it. But there is something just wrong about him being a free man that, in my zealous pursuit of not being conventional, I was ignoring.
Kate Harding agrees:
"The point is not to keep 76-year-old Polanski off the streets or help his victim feel safe. The point is that drugging and raping a child, then leaving the country before you can be sentenced for it, is behavior our society should not -- and at least in theory, does not -- tolerate, no matter how famous, wealthy or well-connected you are, no matter how old you were when you finally got caught, no matter what your victim says about it now, no matter how mature she looked at 13, no matter how pushy her mother was, and no matter how many really swell movies you've made."
I have been going back and forth on this issue for a couple of days. But, I heard a radio talk show host mention the same thing that the end of the article did....
ReplyDeleteIf it were Father Polanski and it were a 13 year old boy, would the who's who and has beens in Hollywood view it the same way? Of course not.
It may be that he is a 76 year old man and that he will never do it again, but a person must be punished for their crimes, regardless of when that crime was committed. Maybe someone should ask Mr. Polanski if Charles Manson should be released if he promised to never do it again. I think I know what the answer would be.
http://tinyurl.com/ydwhyfh I didn't think I had an opinion On thus thing until I read this.
ReplyDeleteThis guy has been on the loose for 30 odd years when he should have been in jail. He committed a crime and he did not serve the time.
ReplyDeleteThey should throw him in jail and throw away the key.
Good points all.
ReplyDeleteAs Paulie notes, Father Polanski would not get the same treatment from the intelligentsia, although some of the same arguments might be made. (IE He hasn't done anything since, or look at all the good works he did in the meantime.)
Who says that he has not continued? Pedophiles can be very smart and very careful. He has a great deal of money and there are many places in the world where a man with money can buy sexual encounters with children and there are also countries where it is not illegal.
ReplyDeleteCan I prove he's guilty? No. Nor can I prove that he is innocent.
As for the victim not wanting to go to trial. Well who would with a whole world watching? I'd want it to just go away too.
This guy fled. No reward for that... he has been breaking the law every day for all that time. If you parked in a tow zone everyday and got tickets everyday would the city let you off the hook for fines for 30 years because you'd done it for so long? Hell no. They would come for you. Well, too bad, so sad Roman... they've come for you.
Waiting out justice should not be an allowed strategy.
ReplyDeleteAnanda asked: "Can I prove he's guilty? No. Nor can I prove that he is innocent."
Actually, he got convicted. And afterwards he had an admitted sexual affair with a 15-year-old