No he didnt rape any girl. Unless you don't know what rape means that is. Which judging by your reaction is the case.
Yeah right PD. I can see the setting already, a hollywood mansion, a 13 year old that looks 20 or more on drugs and alcohol surrounded by famous people, then she gets "raped". Same as R Kelly "raping" the skank who just wanted to do him.
I'm not saying its cool, but it aint rape.
The (now adult) victim has asked for the charges to be dropped. Who is this for exactly?
With make up, in different clothing, at night, even without alcohol and drugs things look different. I don't know if you ever go out, but young girls get in everywhere all the time.
You guys have no idea it seems what 13 year old do/look like. You think all 13 year olds still play with dolls and shit. No some of them do drugs/drink and party.
Did Polanski ever admit to raping her? Or did he only admit to having sex with a minor?
Who says he drugged her? She?
Maybe she took it all herself.
Who says he drugged her? She?
Maybe she took it all herself.
Did Polanski ever admit to raping her? Or did he only admit to having sex with a minor?
Yes, she took Polanski's champagne and quaaludes on her own and then jump on his unsuspecting and unwilling dick.
CASE CLOSED.
I just dont think he's all to blame here. I somehow think this is a case of a young skank wanting to lure a famous guy into bed.
I'm not defending pedo's, who I am in favour of chemically castrating, as will be done in Poland soon.
Imho the legal age is fine at 16 as is in Holland.
Maurice is pretty thrilled that you quickly diverted attention away from his creepiness in the Mackenzie Phillips thread.
What did he say in that thread?
who would have thought kosma would so strongly support sex with 13 year olds.
Maurice is pretty thrilled that you quickly diverted attention away from his creepiness in the Mackenzie Phillips thread.
At least incest can be consensual!
You have a ton of actual incest porn, don't you?
Guys, I feel like we're jumping the gun a little here. We don't really know the full story, and there are certain circumstances in which Polanski may have needed to rape a 13 year old girl in order to save her. What if there was an adolescent hungry vortex, for instance, and because Polanski's hands were full of drugs and champagne, the only way to reel her back in to safety was with his dick. The point is we don't really know.
Also that work ethic!
Willco, how did this case ever get out in the first place? Did the girl sure him? Who got word?
:lolAnyway Kosma, why are you assuming this 13yo was some manipulative skank when ALL THE EVIDENCE points to Polanski
Just a hunch, but I could be wrong ofcourse. But I can still have a hunch.
I mean some people believe in God when all the evidence says its bull right?
after 30 years, doesn't the statute of limitations run out?Not on fugitives. Statue of Limitations has to do with the amount of time a state or person has the legal right to bring a case to court. The case came to court and he was convicted, but as soon as he fled, the charges still remain pending.
And who cares about your bartending
I'm not a lawyer but is there a difference between raping a 13-year old girl that looks like skank (maybe she was poor and had no money for better clothes?) and raping a 13-year old girl that looks like nun?
after 30 years, doesn't the statute of limitations run out?
Which could either mean thats what she wanted all along (money) or that he in fact is guilty of raping a minor, in which case he should be castrated at least.
PS: Polish and French officials are going to appeal to Obama to grant amnesty to Polanski and ask the Swiss officials to let him go.
But its not unheard of, in the realm of possibillities, of a 13 year old to be a total skank, and its not totally unreasonable to suspect that if such a skank would be in a position to fuck a famous dude she would.
I somehow doubt she waited nearly twenty years to get money. Most likely it was closure.
I somehow doubt she waited nearly twenty years to get money. Most likely it was closure.
Makes sense to me. Skanky 13 year old hatches a plan to finagle a large sum of money from a famous Polish movie director by sleeping with him, feigning rape, manipulating him to flee the country to France, convincing the French government to deny extradition (probably by sleeping with a few government officials, fucking whore), then wait 20 years to file a civil suit. Genius and cunning plan if I do say so myself. Roman Polanksi never saw it coming.
I think you guys are looking at this the wrong way. I mean, R Kelly was able to piss on a young girl and have sex with who knows how many others and he never produced anything as awesome as Rosemary's Baby or Chinatown, and then there's Michael Jackson to consider. If anything, we should be angry with him for failing to produce anything as good as those two movies since he got away with rape.
I think you guys are looking at this the wrong way. I mean, R Kelly was able to piss on a young girl and have sex with who knows how many others and he never produced anything as awesome as Rosemary's Baby or Chinatown, and then there's Michael Jackson to consider. If anything, we should be angry with him for failing to produce anything as good as those two movies since he got away with rape.
There's a difference tho. R Kelly diddled a little black girl. Jacko diddled a bunch of little boys. I mean who the fuck cares about them? This Pollack soiled an innocent little white girl. Someone has to pay for that.
I think you guys are looking at this the wrong way. I mean, R Kelly was able to piss on a young girl and have sex with who knows how many others and he never produced anything as awesome as Rosemary's Baby or Chinatown, and then there's Michael Jackson to consider. If anything, we should be angry with him for failing to produce anything as good as those two movies since he got away with rape.
There's a difference tho. R Kelly diddled a little black girl. Jacko diddled a bunch of little boys. I mean who the fuck cares about them? This Pollack soiled an innocent little white girl. Someone has to pay for that.
and on top of that, we'll need to burn her at the stake because she has been tainted with polish semen.
Polish semen is the best semen around :smug
PS: Polish and French officials are going to appeal to Obama to grant amnesty to Polanski and ask the Swiss officials to let him go.The would be political suicide in a very critical time of his presidency.
Hall of Fame this bitch.
::)
He's nothing but a low-down, double-dealing, backstabbing, larcenous perverted worm! Hanging's too good for him. Burning's too good for him! He should be torn into little bitsy pieces and buried alive!
She can say many things Willco, doesnt make them true.
Did Polanski ever admit to raping her? Or did he only admit to having sex with a minor?A 13yo girl cannot have consensual sex with an adult, it's automatically rape.
I know the law dude
Also PD, you dont know the law everywhere
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/Age_of_Consent.png)
How is this 3 pages? Who the hell is Polanski? :lol
Roman Polanski?
Director of Rosemary's Baby, Chinatown, Tess, The Pianist, The Ninth Gate, The Tenant, etc.
Hey B its not only the Polish foreign ministry getting up in arms, but the French too.
Guys, I feel like we're jumping the gun a little here. We don't really know the full story, and there are certain circumstances in which Polanski may have needed to rape a 13 year old girl in order to save her. What if there was an adolescent-hungry vortex, for instance, and because Polanski's hands were full of drugs and champagne, the only way to reel her back in to safety was with his dick. The point is we don't really know.
Also that work ethic!
demi annihilated
go back to earning cheevs in Shrek 3: The Game
I didn't know 16 was the age of consent in Michigan :lol
I didn't know 16 was the age of consent in Michigan :lol
I always liked that state.
I didn't know 16 was the age of consent in Michigan :lol
Not shocking to see Japan in dark blue, either.
I don't know, i think too much time has passed already. If the victim doesn't want to pursue the accusation, then i don't see the point right now, after all this time.
I don't think Kosma is a pedophile, just that he endorses teenage rape.
I don't know, i think too much time has passed already. If the victim doesn't want to pursue the accusation, then i don't see the point right now, after all this time.
Is there anything the vortex argument can't defend?
Is there anything the vortex argument can't defend?
Kosma's posts in this thread.
Is there anything the vortex argument can't defend?
Kosma's posts in this thread.
What if a server-destroying vortex opened up and the only way to save Evilbore from being swallowed up by it was to make a thread defending Roman Polanski against rape charges? Frankly, we just don't have enough fact here to be sure.
why would defending roman polanski stop a vortex from doing anything? Sorry, but if you stretch the vortex defense too far, it just loses all its plausibility.
never trust swedes
FYI, the Swiss INVITED Polanski to Switzerland for the film festival only to arrest him when he arrived.
never trust swedes
FYI, the Swiss INVITED Polanski to Switzerland for the film festival only to arrest him when he arrived.
It's almost as if the film festival that invited him doesn't actually run the country. WHO KNEW!?
never trust swedes
swedes, the swiss, same diff
FYI, the Swiss INVITED Polanski to Switzerland for the film festival only to arrest him when he arrived.
It's almost as if the film festival that invited him doesn't actually run the country. WHO KNEW!?
I heard Switzerland has a bicameral legislature, where the film board is the lower house and Roger Federer is the upper house.
FYI, the Swiss INVITED Polanski to Switzerland for the film festival only to arrest him when he arrived.
Fucking awesome.
Wouldn't it be something if a situation like this caused World War III?
wtf (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iRnW_PP9RtYpGgoc5KZiwY84hjrQD9AVNJ303) :lol
ITT we defend famous serial killers as if they were Polish film directors
Kosma writes for the Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joan-z-shore/polanskis-arrest-shame-on_b_301134.html?page=2
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-farr/leniency-for-polanski_b_301269.html
The 13-year old model "seduced" by Polanski had been thrust onto him by her mother, who wanted her in the movies.
For over 2,000 more outstanding titles on DVD, visit www.bestmoviesbyfarr.com.
I am going to wear one that says, "SUPPORT TEENAGE RAPE!"
Green, screw the high ground. Here's your thesis for the article: A 44-year old powerful director, who could make or break careers, was absolutely powerless against this cunning--and slutty . . . oh so slutty--13-year-old girl.
Go!
I wonder when Iraqis and Afghanis will be able to prosecute US soldiers
oh wait double standard!
I wonder when Iraqis and Afghanis will be able to prosecute US soldiers
oh wait double standard!
I wonder when Iraqis and Afghanis will be able to prosecute US soldiers:wtf
oh wait double standard!
Polanski, obviously fueled by flashbacks of Nazi Europe, fled to Europe to avoid persecution.:lol
His nightmare came true in 1997, when Geimer filed a civil suit suing the director for millions. Polanski settled out of court for an unknown amount, but Geimer promised the director over a pixelated AOL webcam chat that she would "not be ignored".
What I want to know is who is pushing for this so much. I mean almost 30 years of the US not even trying to get Polanski and now they go fullthrottle after him? Its apparently not the victim herself pushing for his arrest, so who? Is there really someone who hates Polanski's films just that much in the US attorney's office?
What I want to know is who is pushing for this so much. I mean almost 30 years of the US not even trying to get Polanski and now they go fullthrottle after him? Its apparently not the victim herself pushing for his arrest, so who? Is there really someone who hates Polanski's films just that much in the US attorney's office?
Kosma uses a formula to objectively determine the minimum age for a girl to be fair game:
1) Subtract 40 from your own age.
2) That's it.
I'm going to start spreading this around.
http://i38.tinypic.com/71gqqe.jpg
I'm going to start spreading this around.
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.
if he got busted molesting her a day after it happened, it would be a uniform "send his ass to jail." but somehow, if 30 years pass and that makes it okay. smh
I still say that the girl knew was she was getting into and probably got drunk by herself, people always believe the "victim" in these sort of situations.
Holy shit, Salon just tore you a new asshole, Kosma. (http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/09/28/polanski_arrest/index.html) Every apologist article just got annihilated.
Holy shit, Salon just tore you a new asshole, Kosma. (http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/09/28/polanski_arrest/index.html) Every apologist article just got annihilated.
Holy shit, Salon just tore you a new asshole, Kosma. (http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/09/28/polanski_arrest/index.html) Every apologist article just got annihilated.
bubububu he made some movies that I liked!
She was a teenager not a child.
I'm not talking about legal terms, she was a 13 years old model, she agreed to go to the photoshoot even after Polanski had her change her clothes in front of him, all I'm saying is that she knew exactly was she was getting into and Polanski just took her a step farther than she was expecting.Right she was expecting to be photographed, but instead she was drugged and raped. "A STEP FARTHER"
I'm not talking about legal terms, she was a 13 years old model, she agreed to go to the photoshoot even after Polanski had her change her clothes in front of him, all I'm saying is that she knew exactly was she was getting into and Polanski just took her a step farther than she was expecting.Right she was expecting to be photographed, but instead she was drugged and raped. "A STEP FARTHER"
I'm not talking about legal terms, she was a 13 years old model, she agreed to go to the photoshoot even after Polanski had her change her clothes in front of him, all I'm saying is that she knew exactly was she was getting into and Polanski just took her a step farther than she was expecting.Right she was expecting to be photographed, but instead she was drugged and raped. "A STEP FARTHER"
I doubt that she was expecting to just be photographed after polanski asked her to change her clothes in front of him during the first session.
Who knows, all I'm saying is that she wasn't the innocent little girl that everyone seems to think she was.okay
Who knows, all I'm saying is that she wasn't the innocent little girl that everyone seems to think she was.
No one is shocked by the fact that 13 year old girls are hungry for dick. Everyone who's been thirteen themselves knows this. It's totally besides the point.
Who knows, all I'm saying is that she wasn't the innocent little girl that everyone seems to think she was.
She couldn't legally consent to sex.
Even if she could, she didn't.
Who knows, all I'm saying is that she wasn't the innocent little girl that everyone seems to think she was.
Hey maybe she is lying, teenagers are lying creatures especially girls.
The opposing side's argument boils down to little more than "Hey, I liked his movies. He should go free!"
Hey maybe she is lying, teenagers are lying creatures especially girls.
He admitted to raping her.
This isn't in question here.
The opposing side's argument boils down to little more than "Hey, I liked his movies. He should go free!"
I didn't know making a few good movies entitles one to child rape.
Maybe I should write a blog, get a couple of positive comments on it, walk into a Best Buy, and help myself to a few Blurays.
Hey maybe she is lying, teenagers are lying creatures especially girls.
She can say many things Willco, doesnt make them true.
Did Polanski ever admit to raping her? Or did he only admit to having sex with a minor?A 13yo girl cannot have consensual sex with an adult, it's automatically rape.
I know the law dude
Also PD, you dont know the law everywhere
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/Age_of_Consent.png)
I'm not talking about legal terms, she was a 13 years old model, she agreed to go to the photoshoot even after Polanski had her change her clothes in front of him, all I'm saying is that she knew exactly was she was getting into and Polanski just took her a step farther than she was expecting.
Boogie, this should get your fired. The age of consent was raised to 16.
Boogie, this should get your fired. The age of consent was raised to 16.
Really, when?
I mean, are we talking about in the last couple years? Last winter? Before or December 13th, 2008? If not, could it retroactively be applied to that date?
Hey maybe she is lying, teenagers are lying creatures especially girls.
So you would reasonably doubt the guilt of every man accused of rape by a teenage girl? wonderful.
The opposing side's argument boils down to little more than "Hey, I liked his movies. He should go free!"
I didn't know making a few good movies entitles one to child rape.
Maybe I should write a blog, get a couple of positive comments on it, walk into a Best Buy, and help myself to a few Blurays.
Oh man, we should totally come up with a system for this. How many felony offset credits have you earned? What violations of human law and morals are warranted by your artistic achievements?
First, we'd all agree on one person whose crimes exactly balanced out their oeuvre (Arthur Miller hiding his autistic son?), and then calibrate it from there.
Boogie, this should get your fired. The age of consent was raised to 16.Quote from: BoogieReally, when?
I mean, are we talking about in the last couple years? Last winter? Before or December 13th, 2008? If not, could it retroactively be applied to that date?
Hey maybe she is lying, teenagers are lying creatures especially girls.
So you would reasonably doubt the guilt of every man accused of rape by a teenage girl? wonderful.
yeah, I really don't trust teenagers.
Hey maybe she is lying, teenagers are lying creatures especially girls.
So you would reasonably doubt the guilt of every man accused of rape by a teenage girl? wonderful.
yeah, I really don't trust teenagers.
I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkrMVwWAn3M) should help diunx's argument.wow "she was wearing a mini skirt"
How many 13-year-old girls could Steven Speilberg, based on his filmography, anally rape before he would face any jail time?
I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkrMVwWAn3M) should help diunx's argument.wow "she was wearing a mini skirt"
How many 13-year-old girls could Steven Speilberg, based on his filmography, anally rape before he would face any jail time?
I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkrMVwWAn3M) should help diunx's argument.wow "she was wearing a mini skirt"
I didn't even realize there was a link in there. I had to mouse over the words until I found it.
Why am I the only one with this problem? :'(
The opposing side's argument boils down to little more than "Hey, I liked his movies. He should go free!"
I didn't know making a few good movies entitles one to child rape.
Maybe I should write a blog, get a couple of positive comments on it, walk into a Best Buy, and help myself to a few Blurays.
Oh man, we should totally come up with a system for this. How many felony offset credits have you earned? What violations of human law and morals are warranted by your artistic achievements?
First, we'd all agree on one person whose crimes exactly balanced out their oeuvre (Arthur Miller hiding his autistic son?), and then calibrate it from there.
I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkrMVwWAn3M) should help diunx's argument.wow "she was wearing a mini skirt"
I didn't even realize there was a link in there. I had to mouse over the words until I found it.
Why am I the only one with this problem? :'(
It depends on if you want to go by box office or critical acclaim. IMO Polanski is a better filmmaker, so I guess one. Maybe one less attractive 13 year old?
Jaws should be worth at least two or three counts of sodomy.
What about Ridley Scott? ... or Tony Scott?
Kosma writes for the Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joan-z-shore/polanskis-arrest-shame-on_b_301134.html?page=2
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-farr/leniency-for-polanski_b_301269.html
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
It's times like this that I hate bleeding heart liberals.
I've heard a lot of "but - hey - the case is so old that arresting this man is silly!" and "have we forgotten how difficult Roman Polanski's life was?"
... Also, who is spreading this crap that he served his time? He was sentenced to psychiatric evaluation for 90 days. He was released after 48. When it looked like the judge was going to send him back for the remaining 42 days, he fled to France.
Of course, the diminutive Pole has had his share of stinkers
Kosma writes for the Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joan-z-shore/polanskis-arrest-shame-on_b_301134.html?page=2
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-farr/leniency-for-polanski_b_301269.html
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
It's times like this that I hate bleeding heart liberals.
I've heard a lot of "but - hey - the case is so old that arresting this man is silly!" and "have we forgotten how difficult Roman Polanski's life was?"
... Also, who is spreading this crap that he served his time? He was sentenced to psychiatric evaluation for 90 days. He was released after 48. When it looked like the judge was going to send him back for the remaining 42 days, he fled to France.QuoteOf course, the diminutive Pole has had his share of stinkers
That's what she said!
Lucas should be charged with double homicide - one count for killing my childhood and one for murdering cinema.
Lucas should be charged with double homicide - one count for killing my childhood and one for murdering cinema.
Lucas should be charged with double homicide - one count for killing my childhood and one for murdering cinema.
I don't know about you, but my childhood was both raped and murdered. Then raped again.
Lucas should be charged with double homicide - one count for killing my childhood and one for murdering cinema.
I don't know about you, but my childhood was both raped and murdered. Then raped again.
Yes, but your childhood wanted it. Your childhood wasn't as innocent as you make it sound. You knew exactly what you were getting into when you went into to that theater and watched the Phantom Menace.
Lucas should be charged with double homicide - one count for killing my childhood and one for murdering cinema.
I don't know about you, but my childhood was both raped and murdered. Then raped again.
Yes, but your childhood wanted it. Your childhood wasn't as innocent as you make it sound. You knew exactly what you were getting into when you went into to that theater and watched the Phantom Menace.
Then Attack of Clones. Then Revenge of the Sith. :'(
Lucas should be charged with double homicide - one count for killing my childhood and one for murdering cinema.
I don't know about you, but my childhood was both raped and murdered. Then raped again.
Yes, but your childhood wanted it. Your childhood wasn't as innocent as you make it sound. You knew exactly what you were getting into when you went into to that theater and watched the Phantom Menace.
Then Attack of Clones. Then Revenge of the Sith. :'(
You came back for more! Some victim.
Lucas should be charged with double homicide - one count for killing my childhood and one for murdering cinema.
I don't know about you, but my childhood was both raped and murdered. Then raped again.
Yes, but your childhood wanted it. Your childhood wasn't as innocent as you make it sound. You knew exactly what you were getting into when you went into to that theater and watched the Phantom Menace.
Then Attack of Clones. Then Revenge of the Sith. :'(
You came back for more! Some victim.
Still waiting for Fistfulofmetal to chime in with his analysis on the situation.
Okay, but what about artists with works that are somewhat less than stellar? Does Star Wars Episodes I-III mean that George Lucas should be charged with three counts of forced sodomy against a minor? Or, taking this a step beyond sexual crimes, first-degree murder? I think this is important issue to iron out before taking the idea further towards realization.'
Yeah, after The Phantom Menace, your childhood should have known better. By the time Revenge of the Sith came around, you were asking for it!
Hey, I liked THE PIANIST. But I didn't, at the end of it, say, "WOO, NO ONE INVOLVED IN THIS MASTERPIECE SHOULD HAVE TO GO TO JAIL, EVER."
Maybe the girl was really upset at the time but shouldn't she feel some pride now about the whole affair?
Millions of women would give anything to be sodomized by a winner of an Oscar for Best Director.
Polish MPs have passed legislation making it obligatory to chemically castrate certain sex offenders.
Under the law anyone found guilty of raping children under 15, or close relatives, will be given drugs to lower their sex drive.
All but three MPs present in the lower house voted for the measures.
They were part of a bill that also increases jail terms for incest and paedophilia, and criminalises any attempt to justify paedophilia.
Anyone propagating such a view is subject to a prison term of up to two years.
The same sentence will be applicable to anyone attempting to seduce a child under 15 years of age over the internet.
The legislation must still pass the senate before taking effect.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8275236.stmQuotePolish MPs have passed legislation making it obligatory to chemically castrate certain sex offenders.
Under the law anyone found guilty of raping children under 15, or close relatives, will be given drugs to lower their sex drive.
All but three MPs present in the lower house voted for the measures.
They were part of a bill that also increases jail terms for incest and paedophilia, and criminalises any attempt to justify paedophilia.
Anyone propagating such a view is subject to a prison term of up to two years.
The same sentence will be applicable to anyone attempting to seduce a child under 15 years of age over the internet.
The legislation must still pass the senate before taking effect.
"I know it wasn't rape-rape. It was something else but I don't believe it was rape-rape. He went to jail and and when they let him out he was like, 'You know what, this guy's going to give me a hundred years in jail. I'm not staying.' So that's why he left."
"We're a different kind of society, we see things differently ... would I want my 14-year-old having sex with somebody? Not necessarily, no."
Whatever guys.
If he's guilty he's guilty. But just as Diunx I still feel that there is a possiblity that its not as clear cut. Now I'm going to stop posting on this subject, you can continue the morality circle jerk.
shocked that Woody Allen would petition Polanski's arrest :oAnnie Hall gave him carte blanche to fuck each of his step-children.
but imho it is relevant
Yes, we've all heard about both the "Kosma-Diunx Artistic Offsets Principle" and "the teenage girls are lying whores principle."
Malek maybe if youd ever talked to a girl, you'd know more about them. I know in your world women are angels that dont piss, fart, shit and lie.
I really didnt want to do it, but with a few members here its obvious that they dont have any experience with women in general and it kind of hard to take their opinions serious on this subject. I know its a low blow, but imho it is relevant.
You guys have no idea it seems what 13 year old do/look like. You think all 13 year olds still play with dolls and shit. No some of them do drugs/drink and party.
Ive been with a 13/4 year old when I was 16 and
A) she didnt look 13
B) she didnt act 13
And I know there are more out there that get into clubs etc and look and act even older.
As you said case should be dropped anyhow, but I find it absurd that these men get sued because a young girl prob got what she was after.
I just dont think he's all to blame here. I somehow think this is a case of a young skank wanting to lure a famous guy into bed.
But its not unheard of, in the realm of possibillities, of a 13 year old to be a total skank, and its not totally unreasonable to suspect that if such a skank would be in a position to fuck a famous dude she would.
Yes, we've all heard about both the "Kosma-Diunx Artistic Offsets Principle" and "the teenage girls are lying whores principle."
Malek maybe if youd ever talked to a girl, you'd know more about them. I know in your world women are angels that dont piss, fart, shit and lie.
dude pled guilty and ran. that alone makes the he said/she said argument way less valid.
the only thing really up for any debate imo is him being tried this late for it, the only questionable thing about that being that the victim wants to drop the charges.
Kosma, there are far better people to white knight for than roman fucking polanski.
if that's the tack we're taking, i'd like to accuse kosma of being a misogynistic, insecure, small-dicked cro-magnon on account of his inability to consider women as people
You couldnt be farther from the truth. I'm a real gentlemen, you could ask any of the women I've been with how I treated them. I am also still in touch with most of them of a friendly basis. I treat women as equals and I like to pamper them.
This doesnt mean that I dont know what they are capable of, just like men, the most crazy shit. Thats the thing: I dont treat them like some ubeer menschen unable of error and somehow morally superior (Victorian morale and all).
Do you morons realize that even if she had stripped naked, jumped on his lap, unzipped his fly, and sucked his dick --go on...... :drool
it kind of hard to take their opinions serious on this subject.
I am not surprised that Diunx, the boards token South American has an opinion thats closer to mine on the matter either.
dude pled guilty and ran. that alone makes the he said/she said argument way less valid.
the only thing really up for any debate imo is him being tried this late for it, the only questionable thing about that being that the victim wants to drop the charges.
Kosma, there are far better people to white knight for than roman fucking polanski.
He's not being tried. He already plead guilty and served some time. He's being brought in to finish his sentence, not to be tried for a crime.
It's not totally implausible, with Nicholsons house, a photoshoot with no chaperone etc. I'm just not buying her story of being the victim 100%.
It's not totally implausible, with Nicholsons house, a photoshoot with no chaperone, maybe it was a crazy party with drugs and alcohol and she took everything by herself? etc. I'm just not buying her story of being the victim 100%.
If the story has a twist then maybe, instead of pleading guilty, he could have introduced those twists in a court of law and got off the hook like countless other celebrities.
Or after the judge showed hes fucking with him he decided to run because he wouldnt get anything done anyway.
Or after the judge showed hes fucking with him he decided to run because he wouldnt get anything done anyway.
A drugged up 13 year old with a 40+ year old wang inside her pooper is a victim no matter which way you slice it, you nit.
While disgusting, and nothing I endorse I don't agree with that law either then.
He is a looney if he lets it come that far, but I dont think he should be punished if she wanted it too.
A drugged up 13 year old with a 40+ year old wang inside her pooper is a victim no matter which way you slice it, you nit.
While disgusting, and nothing I endorse I don't agree with that law either then.
He is a looney if he lets it come that far, but I dont think he should be punished if she wanted it too.
So if your girlfriend goes out to a bar without you, she decides to have some fun with drugs and alcohol, she crashes out in some booth somewhere - some dude can fuck her while she sleeps right? Why not?
If he wants to die he can try yeah.
I'm talking about consent. Someone who is passed out can't give that eh?
So if your girlfriend goes out to a bar without you, she decides to have some fun with drugs and alcohol, she crashes out in some booth somewhere - some dude can fuck her while she sleeps right? Why not?
If he wants to die he can try yeah.
I'm talking about consent. Someone who is passed out can't give that eh?
Hey will I dont know all the facts, cause I dont really care for this case in particular. Im just drawing up a version where he isnt guilty.
As the posters above me have said, this is all irrelevant. But just so you know, they were both alone in the mansion most of the night. She testified under oath before a grand jury that he gave her both the alcohol and the drugs. He even photographed her while she was drinking. It's hard to believe that she drank the champagne on her own. She would have needed to (A) find it, (B) find the bottle opener, (C) open it, (D) chug it quickly(E) all while Polanski was out of her sight. Since they were alone and he was taking her pictures all night, THIS IS NOT FUCKING LIKELY.
This is all I wanted to say basicly, and also imply that despite what she said and despite Polanski pleaing guilty the story has a twist, maybe.
It's not totally implausible, with Nicholsons house, a photoshoot with no chaperone, maybe it was a crazy party with drugs and alcohol and she took everything by herself? etc. I'm just not buying her story of being the victim 100%.
cause I dont really care for this case in particular.Uhhh
True if thats what she said then he should be punished.
Well Id like to know what he said too.
OK well that's what she said.
Well Id like to know what he said too.
Whoopi has weighed in on the matter:Quote"I know it wasn't rape-rape. It was something else but I don't believe it was rape-rape. He went to jail and and when they let him out he was like, 'You know what, this guy's going to give me a hundred years in jail. I'm not staying.' So that's why he left."
"We're a different kind of society, we see things differently ... would I want my 14-year-old having sex with somebody? Not necessarily, no."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/sep/29/roman-polanski-rape-whoopi-goldberg (http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/sep/29/roman-polanski-rape-whoopi-goldberg)
I wouldnt kill him but Id sure try to beat him up or worse.
I would trust what my GF says.
Why are some of you bringing up anal like that makes it worse? I'm not approving what the guy did but shouldn't he get some credit for at least making sure that the girl wasn't going to get pregnant?
Because Anal is a no no in their puritan minds.
Why are some of you bringing up anal like that makes it worse? I'm not approving what the guy did but shouldn't he get some credit for at least making sure that the girl wasn't going to get pregnant?
I'm pretty much done with EB at this point, seeing as no one except Diunx will even admit there is a possibility she was in on it.
I'm pretty much done with EB at this point, seeing as no one except Diunx will even admit there is a possibility she was in on it.
Why are some of you bringing up anal like that makes it worse? I'm not approving what the guy did but shouldn't he get some credit for at least making sure that the girl wasn't going to get pregnant?Got a legit lol out of me
You're done with EB because no one else will support your baseless accusations, which are grounded in nothing but sexist prejudices?
I'm pretty much done with EB at this point, seeing as no one except Diunx will even admit there is a possibility she was in on it.
I'm pretty much done with EB at this point, seeing as no one except Diunx will even admit there is a possibility she was in on it.
I'm pretty much done with EB at this point, seeing as no one except Diunx will even admit there is a possibility she was in on it.
Thats the thing: I dont treat them like some ubeer menschen unable of error and somehow morally superior (Victorian morale and all).
I'm pretty much done with EB at this point, seeing as no one except Diunx will even admit there is a possibility she was in on it.
if that's the tack we're taking, i'd like to accuse kosma of being a misogynistic, insecure, small-dicked cro-magnon on account of his inability to consider women as people
You couldnt be farther from the truth. I'm a real gentlemen, you could ask any of the women I've been with how I treated them. I am also still in touch with most of them of a friendly basis. I treat women as equals and I like to pamper them.
This doesnt mean that I dont know what they are capable of, just like men, the most crazy shit. Thats the thing: I dont treat them like some ubeer menschen unable of error and somehow morally superior (Victorian morale and all).
Did you just come over your keyboard?
Prole.
Some women, never said all women.
Im just saying its a possibillity.
No he didnt rape any girl. Unless you don't know what rape means that is. Which judging by your reaction is the case.
Im just saying its a possibillity.
Some men are whores too, it has nothing to do with gender.
Prole.
Some women, never said all women.
:drake
Im just saying its a possibillity.
Im just saying its a possibillity.
You said it was a possibility on page 2 or so. Then on page 4 or 5 Willco owned you with facts and you said "well if all that is the case then you guys are right, I didn't know that." Then a few pages later you came screaming back in inexplicably.
If you were merely expressing a possibility then this would have been over a long fucking time ago.
Also, elements of your 'possibility' require not only for the girl to be lying about what happened, but Polanski himself. You're going further than HE is in his defense. So, misogynist seems to fit quite well. Especially after you tried to play the virgin card on your opposition.
Im just saying its a possibillity.
fine, it's a possibility that she's promiscuous, which STILL doesn't change that she was raped.
I don't hate women prole.Send her a link to this thread; it should change her opinion. Her opinion of you only indicates that you're able to hide your true feeling when trying to get laid.
Here just a sample opinion of an ex lover.
(http://i36.tinypic.com/104f14p.jpg)
I don't hate women prole.
Here just a sample opinion of an ex lover.
(http://i36.tinypic.com/104f14p.jpg)
I don't hate women prole.
Here just a sample opinion of an ex lover.
(http://i36.tinypic.com/104f14p.jpg)
What is the sound that a dead horse makes when it's beaten?
Thats all Im saying Tiesto. I wanted to raise that doubt. Maybe I went overboard a bit, but thats all I wanted to say.
No he didnt rape any girl.
but it aint rape.
I somehow think this is a case of a young skank wanting to lure a famous guy into bed.
I agree that people are too readily passing judgement. Let's see all the facts first. We don't even know if she had an orgasm or not.:rofl
but there are quite a number of girls who falsely claim 'rape', we had a situation at a local college where a girl got into a gangbang with 5 other guys, she accused them of rape and then later fessed up that it was completely consentual. Pretty shitty deal to be falsely accused of something like that.But you realise this could be seen as grey too....
To Kosma's defense, Polanski did direct Chinatown.
Triumph: The Clay Davis Principle.
Thats all Im saying Tiesto. I wanted to raise that doubt. Maybe I went overboard a bit, but thats all I wanted to say.
So you're saying that the justice system lets black celebrities walk to appease the black community, much like the pity Oscars the Academy hands out every now and then to get black folks off their back?
So you mean if Polanski was black more people in the US would have defended him?
Based on what I have read, Polanski is totally in the wrong - no way should you be drugging up a 13 year old and then sexing them... but there are quite a number of girls who falsely claim 'rape', we had a situation at a local college where a girl got into a gangbang with 5 other guys, she accused them of rape and then later fessed up that it was completely consentual. Pretty shitty deal to be falsely accused of something like that.
I havent seen Chinatown, so I dont know what the reference is there.
Dude rapes his underage daughter, and doesn't go to jail. THE WRITING WAS ON THE WALL, PEOPLE!
I havent seen Chinatown, so I dont know what the reference is there.
I havent seen Chinatown, so I dont know what the reference is there.
lol why are you defending him them? I have the excuse of loving Chinatown, Rosemary's Baby and The Fearless Vampire Killers.
Based on what I have read, Polanski is totally in the wrong - no way should you be drugging up a 13 year old and then sexing them... but there are quite a number of girls who falsely claim 'rape', we had a situation at a local college where a girl got into a gangbang with 5 other guys, she accused them of rape and then later fessed up that it was completely consentual. Pretty shitty deal to be falsely accused of something like that.
there are not quite a few girls who do this -- there are standout cases where the male outrage is so high that it overwhelms the fact of actual rape statistics, which are staggering. kinda like how conservatives freak out over anecdotal cases of welfare abuse, and use that outrage to paint the status quo as wrongheaded and thus as an excuse to deny health care to everyone despite the facts -- ya feel me?
"If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!"
More than 100 film industry figures have now signed a petition calling for the release of Polanski, the acclaimed director of Chinatown, Rosemary's Baby and The Pianist.
They include leading Hollywood figures Martin Scorcese, Woody Allen, David Lynch, Wim Wenders, Pedro Almodovar, Tilda Swinton and Monica Bellucci.
Almost fell out my seat when I saw the thread title
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e86/PhoenixDark1/Turkish_talkshow_spaz.gif)
:lol What is that from?
QuoteMore than 100 film industry figures have now signed a petition calling for the release of Polanski, the acclaimed director of Chinatown, Rosemary's Baby and The Pianist.
They include leading Hollywood figures Martin Scorcese, Woody Allen, David Lynch, Wim Wenders, Pedro Almodovar, Tilda Swinton and Monica Bellucci.
Going back to Whoopi :lol
[youtube=560,345]9NX_D0Bv9M0[/youtube]
Impressive list.
Erika Abrams, Fatih Akin, Stephane Allagnon, Woody Allen, Pedro Almodovar, Gianni Amelio, Wess Anderson, Roger Andrieux, Jean-Jacques Annaud, Alexandre Arcady, Fanny Ardant, Asia Argento, Darren Aronofsky, Olivier Assayas, Alexander Astruc, Gabriel Auer, Alexandre Babel, Jean-François Balmer, Luc Barnier, Christophe Barratier, Xavier Beauvois, Liria Begeja, Gilles Behat, Jean-Jacques Beineix, Marco Bellochio, Monica Bellucci, Véra Belmont, Djamel Bennecib, Alain Berliner, Pascal Berney, Giuseppe Bertolucci, Lucien Blacher, Catherine Boissičre, Thierry Boscheron, Freddy Bossy, Patrick Bouchitey, Cédric Bouchoucha, Paul Boujenah, Katia Boutin (Membre de l'équipe du dernier film de Roman Polanski "The Ghost"), Jacques Bral, Patrick Braoudé, Guila Braoudé, Anne Burki, André Buytaers, Christian Carion, Henning Carlsen, Jean-michel Carre, Lionel Cassan (Membre de l'équipe du dernier film de Roman Polanski "The Ghost"), Mathieu Celary, Teco Celio, Christophe Champclaux, Patrice Chéreau, Brigitte Chesneau, Catherine Chouchan, Elie Chouraqui, Souleymane Cissé, Jean- Pierre Clech, Henri Codenie, Robert Cohen, Alain Corneau, Jérôme Cornuau, Guy Courtecuisse (Membre de l'équipe du dernier film de Roman Polanski "The Ghost"), Miguel Courtois, Morgan Crestel, Dominique Crevecoeur, Alfonso Cuaron, Frédéric Damien, Sophie Danon, Luc et Jean-Pierre Dardenne, Hervé de Luze (Membre de l'équipe du dernier film de Roman Polanski "The Ghost"), Benoît Delmas, Jonathan Demme, Dante Desarthe, Romain Desbiens, Thomas Desjonqučres (Membre de l'équipe du dernier film de Roman Polanski "The Ghost"), Alexandre Desplat, Rosalinde et Michel Deville, Guillaume D'Ham (Membre de l'équipe du dernier film de Roman Polanski "The Ghost"), Christelle Didier (Membre de l'équipe du dernier film de Roman Polanski "The Ghost"), Kathrin DiPaola, Ariel Dorfman, Georges Dybman, Jacques Fansten, Joël Farges, Gianluca Farinelli (Cinémathčque de de Bologne) , Etienne Faure, Michel Ferry, Jean Teddy Filippe (Membre de l'équipe du dernier film de Roman Polanski "The Ghost"), Martine Fitoussi, Scott Foundas, Stephen Frears, Thierry Frémaux, Sam Gabarski, René Gainville, Matteo Garone, Tony Gatlif, Catherine Gaudin-Montalto, Costa Gavras, Jean-Marc Ghanassia, Terry Gilliam, Christian Gion, Stéphane Gizard, Christophe Goumand, Marc Guidoni, Dimitri Haulet, Buck Henry, David Heyman, Laurent Heynemann, Dominique Hollier, Isabelle Hontebeyrie, Frédéric Horiszny, Robert Hossein, Jean-Loup Hubert, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, Gilles Jacob, Just Jaeckin, Anne Jeandet, Alain Jessua, Arthur Joffé, Pierre Jolivet, Kent Jones (World Cinema Foundation) , Paola Jullian, Roger Kahane, Nelly Kaplan, Wong Kar Waď, Ladislas Kijno, Richard Klebinder, Harmony Korinne, Jan Kounen, Diane Kurys, Emir Kusturica, Jean Labadie, John Landis, Claude Lanzmann, David Lanzmann, André Larquié, Françoise Lassale, Carole Laure, Christine Laurent-Blixen, Emilien Lazaron (Membre de l'équipe du dernier film de Roman Polanski "The Ghost"), Vinciane Lecocq, Patrice Leconte, Claude Lelouch, Gérard Lenne, Pierre et Renée Lhomme, Marceline Loridan-Ivens, David Lynch, Michael Mann, François Margolin, Jean-Pierre Marois, Tonie Marshall, Mario Martone, Christine Mathis, Nicolas Mauvernay, Christopher, Spencer et Claire Mc Andrew, Allison Michel, Radu Mihaileanu, Jean-Louis Milesi, Claude Miller, Jean-Marc Modeste , Mario Monicelli, Jeanne Moreau, Christian Mvogo Mbarga, Juliette Nicolas-Donnard, Sandra Nicolier, Michel Ocelot, Eric Pape, Abner Pastoll, Alexander Payne, Richard Pena (Directeur Festival de NY) , Olivier Pčre, Suzana Peric (Membre de l'équipe du dernier film de Roman Polanski "The Ghost"), Jacques Perrin, Thomas Pibarot, Anne Pigeon Bormans, Michele Placido, Sabrina Poidevin, Agnčs Catherine Poirier, Harry Prenger, Gilbert Primet, Philippe Radault, Tristan Rain, Jean-Paul Rappeneau, Raphael Rebibo, Jo Reymen, Laurence Reymond, Yasmina Reza, Christiane Rhein, Jacques Richard, Avital Ronell, Laurence Roulet, Marc Saffar, Gabriela Salazar Scherman, Walter Salles, Jean-Paul Salomé, Jean-Frédéric Samie, Marc Sandberg, Jerry Schatzberg, Julian Schnabel, Barbet Schroeder, Pierre Schumacher, Ettore Scola, Luis Gustavo Sconza Zaratin Soares, Martin Scorsese, Frank Segier, Guy Seligmann, Julien Seri, Pierre Silvant, Charlotte Silvera, Abderrahmane Sissako, Paolo Sorrentino, Roch Stephanik, Guillaume Stirn, Jean-Marc Surcin, Tilda Swinton, Jean-Charles Tacchella, Radovan Tadic, Danis Tanovic, Bertrand Tavernier, André Techiné, Cécile Telerman, Alain Terzian, Valentine Theret, Pascal Thomas, Giuseppe Tornatore, Serge Toubiana, Nadine Trintignant, Tom Tykwer, Alexandre Tylski, Jaques Vallotton, Betrand Van Effenterre, Jean-Pierre Vergne, Sarah Vermande, Gilles Walusinski, Wim Wenders, Anaďse Wittmann, Arnaud Xainte, Christian Zeender.
Wes Anderson too? Wow.
I hope you guys make a stand morally and don't watch any works of people condoning this kind of behaviour, I myself, would feel morally bankrupt if I supported people I despise in such a way.
Oh wait all of you guys seen Chinatown already, and I bet you did it in the 80's or 90's.
:piss fake morals :piss2
Why now? Why didn't they do this like 20 some odd years ago?
Why now? Why didn't they do this like 20 some odd years ago? I mean, yeah, what he did is :-X, but it just strikes me as odd.
September 28, 2009, 11:47 PM
L.A. Prosecutors Offer Timeline to Prove They Pursued Polanski
By MICHAEL CIEPLY
Just to be clear that it really, truly, honestly did try to catch Roman Polanski during his 31 years as a fugitive from sentencing on a child-sex conviction, prosecutors in the Los Angeles county district attorney’s office have compiled an “advisory” that outlines their efforts. Herewith, is the official time line, from the office of district attorney Steve Cooley:
Feb. 3, 1978: the Extradition Services Section opened a file after federal authorities confirmed Polanski was living in France.
May 3, 1978: provisional arrest request prepared when it was learned Polanski may be in England. A formal extradition package was submitted on May 12, 1978.
April 2, 1981: confirmed with Office of International Affairs that the District Attorney’s Office would continue to seek Polanski’s arrest and extradition.
December 1986: consulted with Royal Canadian Mounted Police after being informed Polanski may be traveling to Canada.
May 1988: after receiving notice Polanski may travel to Germany, Denmark, Sweden or Brazil, verified the arrest warrant was still active.
June 1994: provided the Office of International Affairs confirmation that our office continued to pursue the extradition of Polanski and submitted a provisional arrest warrant request to France on June 21, 1994.
October 2005: informed that Mr. Polanski would travel to Thailand. The District Attorney’s Office submitted an Interpol Red Notice that had been distributed in 2002. Polanski appeared in Thailand, but was not arrested.
July 10, 2007: informed Polanski was scheduled to appear in Israel. The Office of International Affairs notified our office that authorities in Israel requested additional details, which were sent. By the time the information arrived, Polanski had left Israel and was not arrested.
Sept. 22, 2009: informed that Polanski was scheduled to appear at a film festival in Zurich, Switzerland. An application for a provisional arrest warrant was prepared to the U.S Department of Justice, Office of International Affairs. It was executed by Swiss authorities on Sept. 27, 2009.
Wes Anderson too? Wow.
I hope you guys make a stand morally and don't watch any works of people condoning this kind of behaviour, I myself, would feel morally bankrupt if I supported people I despise in such a way.
Oh wait all of you guys seen Chinatown already, and I bet you did it in the 80's or 90's.
:piss fake morals :piss2
You supported someone who you think is a deviant and should be locked up, you gave him money. Yeah thats pretty morally bankrupt.
I never helped the man in any way, you gave him money which helped him stay a fugitive.
Wes Anderson too? Wow.
I hope you guys make a stand morally and don't watch any works of people condoning this kind of behaviour, I myself, would feel morally bankrupt if I supported people I despise in such a way.
Oh wait all of you guys seen Chinatown already, and I bet you did it in the 80's or 90's.
:piss fake morals :piss2
Why now? Why didn't they do this like 20 some odd years ago? I mean, yeah, what he did is :-X, but it just strikes me as odd.
::)QuoteSeptember 28, 2009, 11:47 PM
L.A. Prosecutors Offer Timeline to Prove They Pursued Polanski
By MICHAEL CIEPLY
Just to be clear that it really, truly, honestly did try to catch Roman Polanski during his 31 years as a fugitive from sentencing on a child-sex conviction, prosecutors in the Los Angeles county district attorney’s office have compiled an “advisory” that outlines their efforts. Herewith, is the official time line, from the office of district attorney Steve Cooley:
Feb. 3, 1978: the Extradition Services Section opened a file after federal authorities confirmed Polanski was living in France.
May 3, 1978: provisional arrest request prepared when it was learned Polanski may be in England. A formal extradition package was submitted on May 12, 1978.
April 2, 1981: confirmed with Office of International Affairs that the District Attorney’s Office would continue to seek Polanski’s arrest and extradition.
December 1986: consulted with Royal Canadian Mounted Police after being informed Polanski may be traveling to Canada.
May 1988: after receiving notice Polanski may travel to Germany, Denmark, Sweden or Brazil, verified the arrest warrant was still active.
June 1994: provided the Office of International Affairs confirmation that our office continued to pursue the extradition of Polanski and submitted a provisional arrest warrant request to France on June 21, 1994.
October 2005: informed that Mr. Polanski would travel to Thailand. The District Attorney’s Office submitted an Interpol Red Notice that had been distributed in 2002. Polanski appeared in Thailand, but was not arrested.
July 10, 2007: informed Polanski was scheduled to appear in Israel. The Office of International Affairs notified our office that authorities in Israel requested additional details, which were sent. By the time the information arrived, Polanski had left Israel and was not arrested.
Sept. 22, 2009: informed that Polanski was scheduled to appear at a film festival in Zurich, Switzerland. An application for a provisional arrest warrant was prepared to the U.S Department of Justice, Office of International Affairs. It was executed by Swiss authorities on Sept. 27, 2009.
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/28/la-prosecutors-offer-timeline-to-prove-they-pursued-polanski/
He was dumb enough to appear at a film festival in which his appearance was publicized well ahead of time in a country with an extradition treaty with the US.
MYSTERY SOLVED
I don't know how you guys can say one thing, then do the other.
"HEY BAD MAN, I WANT YOU PUT IN JAIL"
"but first here's a dollar"
I don't know how you guys can say one thing, then do the other.
"HEY BAD MAN, I WANT YOU PUT IN JAIL"
"but first here's a dollar"
Going back to Whoopi :lol
[youtube=560,345]9NX_D0Bv9M0[/youtube]
Seriously, I think Kosma is making a good point about the hypocrisy of viewing the work of someone who you morally have a problem with. If you don't even think that Polanski should have been allowed to make those films, then how can you allow yourself to watch and possibly enjoy those films?
Seriously, I think Kosma is making a good point about the hypocrisy of viewing the work of someone who you morally have a problem with. If you don't even think that Polanski should have been allowed to make those films, then how can you allow yourself to watch and possibly enjoy those films?
Seriously, I think Kosma is making a good point about the hypocrisy of viewing the work of someone who you morally have a problem with. If you don't even think that Polanski should have been allowed to make those films, then how can you allow yourself to watch and possibly enjoy those films?
Typical hypocrites. Here you guys are railing against pedophilia, yet simultaneously have absolutely no problem using Socrates' dialectical method against Kosma. ::)
Going back to Whoopi :lol
What the fuck, Whoopi? Also, this is like the first time Elizabeth Hasslebeck (sp?) has said something that's not completely distinguished mentally-challenged.
:rofl
That's not her
:rofl
That's not her
:rofl
That's not her
?
edit: Oh, shit. I didn't see the video. I was just listening to the audio and it sounded like her. That explains a lot. :lol
Seriously, I think Kosma is making a good point about the hypocrisy of viewing the work of someone who you morally have a problem with.Sure -- if you're a naive, idealistic manchild. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have some Burzum to listen to
It's possbile that merely refusing to watch those movies is only an empty gesture but wouldn't actually watching them point one into the negative direction?
OMG I want to watch Naked Gun 33-1/3 but I'm also anti-stabbing, WHAT DO I DO BORE?If you watch it, you might as well be plunging that knife into Nicole Simpson.
Sure guys take the easy way out, only listen to your moral core when it's convenient to you. That's real backbone there.
Put your money where your mouth is.
Sure guys take the easy way out, only listen to your moral core when it's convenient to you. That's real backbone there.mouth: Polanski should go to prison!
Put your money where your mouth is.
Ya, that's the bitch about court, ain't it? They actually write all that shit down.
Ya, that's the bitch about court, ain't it? They actually write all that shit down.
How do we know that this ALLEGED "VICTIM" didn't type this out herself? I'm just raising doubt here.
Except I dont consider a drug dealer a criminal.:wag
And you consider Polanski to be the devil.
You've just twisted what I said. Good jon.
And I'm sure you've never given a criminal any of your money, especially none of those times you've bought illegal drugs.
Except I dont consider a drug dealer a criminal.
And you consider Polanski to be the devil.
I wonder what Green Shinobi thinks about that comment Boogie.
Devil? ...You've just twisted what I said. Good jon.
And I'm sure you've never given a criminal any of your money, especially none of those times you've bought illegal drugs.
Except I dont consider a drug dealer a criminal.
And you consider Polanski to be the devil.
Its not a huge leap of logic twerd its just morally bankrupt and one day you will wake up to it, you're just a foney doing it.
And no I dont buy shit from companies I know are doing shit wrong.
yeah, i'm sure the lawyer's gonna get him off for raping a 13 year old girl and then fleeing the country. ::)
Your money is paying for his top lawyer though.
Its not a huge leap of logic twerd its just morally bankrupt and one day you will wake up to it, you're just a foney doing it.'
In dutch we say, links lullen, rechts vullen. Say one thing, do the other.
And no I dont buy shit from companies I know are doing shit wrong Malek.
Your money is paying for his top lawyer though.
I dont remember who, but someone in this thread used this example: if your GF was raped, what would you do?
Would you buy an album of the guy that raped your GF, because you respect his music? Would you?
Morals are relative, but at least I have some.
I hate child labour, but I just got to have these pants that are made by small kids in Asia.
I hate pedos, but hey I just have to watch this movie by Polanski.
I hate racism, but this album by the guy who raises money for the national party is just sooooo good. Great artist.
I hate child labour, but I just got to have these pants that are made by small kids in Asia.
I hate pedos, but hey I just have to watch this movie by Polanski.
Morals are relative, but at least I have some.
No he didnt rape any girl. Unless you don't know what rape means that is. Which judging by your reaction is the case.
Yeah right PD. I can see the setting already, a hollywood mansion, a 13 year old that looks 20 or more on drugs and alcohol surrounded by famous people, then she gets "raped".
As you said case should be dropped anyhow, but I find it absurd that these men get sued because a young girl prob got what she was after.
Who says he drugged her? She?
Maybe she took it all herself.
are you arguing that people should be clamoring for him to be released so that they won't morally be guilty of supporting a rapist? or are you just calling everyone a hypocrite? if so, duh? it took you how many years of living to realize this?
I hate child labour, but I just got to have these pants that are made by small kids in Asia.
I hate pedos, but hey I just have to watch this movie by Polanski.
I hate racism, but this album by the guy who raises money for the national party is just sooooo good. Great artist.
And also, there were no vortices involved.
And no I dont buy shit from companies I know are doing shit wrong Malek.
FUCK YEAH! I would. not only that but a I would assrape 13 years old Hitler in the ASS.
:drool Ice cream :drool
FUCK YEAH! I would. not only that but a I would assrape 13 years old Hitler in the ASS.
:drool Ice cream :drool
but if you rape hitler, then that means you inherit all of his badness, making you the worst person in the world. and no one will ever know that you saved the ice cream vortex. also, you get no ice cream. how about now?
FUCK YEAH! I would. not only that but a I would assrape 13 years old Hitler in the ASS.
:drool Ice cream :drool
but if you rape hitler, then that means you inherit all of his badness, making you the worst person in the world. and no one will ever know that you saved the ice cream vortex. also, you get no ice cream. how about now?
I condone child rape
I condone child rape
I condone child rape
???
wow...
Before this thread gets HoF'd, I just want to publicly apologize to Fistfulofmetal.
wow...
Before this thread gets HoF'd, I just want to publicly apologize to Fistfulofmetal.
Forum drama is for kids.
Seriously, I think Kosma is making a good point about the hypocrisy of viewing the work of someone who you morally have a problem with. If you don't even think that Polanski should have been allowed to make those films, then how can you allow yourself to watch and possibly enjoy those films?
Seriously, I think Kosma is making a good point about the hypocrisy of viewing the work of someone who you morally have a problem with. If you don't even think that Polanski should have been allowed to make those films, then how can you allow yourself to watch and possibly enjoy those films?
playing videogame based on work of a homophobe? no
watching movies directed by unrepentant rapists? hell yes
Support is such a strong word!!!
Support is such a strong word!!!
how about 'endorsement'
Kosma really worked for Sony?
I'm still hoping that Kosma will admit at some point that this was all for laughs.
I'm still hoping that Kosma will admit at some point that this was all for laughs.
That would be both cheap and dishonest.
Kosma really worked for Sony?
For a while in the UK, I believe.
fake Amanda?
(http://i34.tinypic.com/fu6hhi.gif)
(http://i34.tinypic.com/fu6hhi.gif)
(http://i34.tinypic.com/fu6hhi.gif)
(http://i34.tinypic.com/fu6hhi.gif)
Fucking wow.
(http://i34.tinypic.com/fu6hhi.gif)
And there's already a thread called "Jinfash owns Kosma on pages five and six" in the Hall of Shame. :lol
(http://i34.tinypic.com/2s96528.gif)
PARIS (AFP) – The French government on Wednesday dropped its public support for Roman Polanski, saying the Oscar-winning director held in Switzerland over a three-decade-old child sex case was not "above the law."
"Roman Polanski is neither above nor beneath the law," said government spokesman Luc Chatel.
"We have a judicial procedure under way, for a serious affair, the rape of a minor, on which the American and Swiss legal systems are doing their job," he told reporters.
He added: "One can understand the emotion that this belated arrest, more than 30 years after the incident, and the method of the arrest, have caused."
Polanski, who fled the United States in 1978 before sentencing having pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old girl, was arrested Saturday as he arrived in Zurich to collect a film festival award.
The French government had earlier this week expressed outrage over the arrest, with Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner calling on US authorities to allow Polanski to be freed.
Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand called the arrest of the Franco-Polish film-maker, who lives in Paris, "absolutely horrifying" and said it showed "a side of America which is frightening."
Chatel, asked by reporters to comment on the culture minister's reaction, which some members of the ruling party here have criticised, said: "Frederic Mitterrand was speaking from the heart."
Switzerland says Polanski is being held under an international alert issued by the United States in 2005. Polanski can launch several appeals, so a final extradition decision could take weeks or months, legal experts said.
Jinfash owning Kosma again! he better get iconed in a few months.
:bow Jinfash :bow2
(http://i34.tinypic.com/fu6hhi.gif)
:rofl
I was talking to my wife about all of this shit earlier, and she suggested I dress the puppy in pigtails and a plaid skirt, and 'go as roman polanski' for halloween. :-\
BTW, why didn't the French or the Polish arrest him? Not arresting a guy who does something like this just because it was on another continent just doesn't seem right.
(http://i34.tinypic.com/2s96528.gif)
But they're not even allowed to try him for that crime?BTW, why didn't the French or the Polish arrest him? Not arresting a guy who does something like this just because it was on another continent just doesn't seem right.He had dual Polish and French citizenship, neither country will extradite one of their own to the US.
But they're not even allowed to try him for that crime?BTW, why didn't the French or the Polish arrest him? Not arresting a guy who does something like this just because it was on another continent just doesn't seem right.He had dual Polish and French citizenship, neither country will extradite one of their own to the US.
The Roman Polanski defenders are out in force. Since his arrest, we've already heard pretty much every line that has ever been used to defend him during his decades as a fugitive: that his life has been hard, that he's suffered (because everyone who has had a sufficiently tough life is, of course, entitled to one free rape, courtesy of the US government), that he's paid his price (since living in Europe as a rich and acclaimed film director is a fate worse than death) and that the real tragedy is that he will forever be known as a rapist.
Which is not so much a "tragedy" as it is the result of the facts being known. Polanski vaginally and anally assaulted a 13-year-old girl, forced oral sex on her and pleaded guilty to unlawful sex with a minor. He did this as part of a plea bargain. When he began to fear that his sentence would not be as light as he had hoped, he fled the country. And had he not directed movies, our judgment would be unilateral and harsh. It's generally considered unacceptable, in the US criminal justice system, for a criminal to flee the country because he's afraid he won't like his sentence.
Yet the Polanski apologists keep coming. And some are actually using Samantha Gailey, the woman he raped, to make their point. They argue that she has "forgiven" him, that she has moved for the case to be dismissed. A New York Daily News article calls her his "most compelling defender", and it's rare to read an article supporting Polanski without her "forgiveness" being mentioned. She plays a key part in this petition for his release. For those like Bernard-Henri Lévy who want to give Polanski a pass, Gailey (who now goes by her married name, Geimer) is a key part of their strategy.
Which is precious, given that people who want to give Polanski a pass were responsible for a large amount of her trauma in the first place. Indeed, many seem not to have actually read her statements on the case – which are, in many cases, less about ensuring the continued welfare of poor Roman Polanski than about not wanting to have her name, family and actions dragged once more through the mud.
Consider, for a moment, her statements in the 1997 People magazine interview in which she "forgave" the man. Her statements are not about how Polanski has suffered, but about the vicious victim-blaming and harassment that followed his arrest:
Reporters and photographers came to my school and put my picture in a European tabloid with the caption Little Lolita. They were all saying, "Poor Roman Polanski, entrapped by a 13-year-old temptress." I had a good friend who came from a good Catholic family, and her father wouldn't let her come to my house anymore. It was even worse for my mother because everyone was saying it was her fault. ... Twenty years ago everything said about me was horrible.
Is it any wonder, then, that she says now the attention is "not pleasant to experience and is not worth maintaining"? Praising Gailey for not pursuing the case, or using her as an excuse to argue that Polanski should be above the law, is a stunningly cynical and callous move, and a continuation both of the massive lack of empathy for her demonstrated at the time of the rape and the legacy of rape apologism that has come to define the conversation around Polanski.
I'm very happy that Gailey, by her own account, has processed the experience and moved on with her life. If she has "forgiven" him, that is her own business – and, for all I know, something she needed to do for her own health. I agree that she should be able to protect her own privacy and only involve herself in the case to the extent that she wishes to do so. I regret that her privacy may be invaded.
But what I am not happy with is the way that certain sectors of society – the same ones that were perfectly willing to shame and blame her when her family sought the conviction – are now parading her around as the good rape victim, the generous rape victim, the rape victim who has seen the light and is now the reason Polanski's 31-year refusal to be held accountable or even express meaningful remorse for raping a child should be aided and abetted by the US government.
I can't speak in Gailey's best interests. I can speak in mine, when I say that I, along with every other US citizen, stand to benefit from this case. If Polanski does finally serve his sentence, it will be a message to all of us that sexual assault is not tolerated, and that no one is above the law – not even those of us who happen to have directed Chinatown.
Forgiveness is a private, personal matter. So is healing from a sexual assault. But the criminal justice system doesn't traffic in healing or forgiveness. It has one purpose, which is to ensure that those who break laws, no matter who they are, will be held accountable and face the court-mandated consequences. And that – not Gailey – is what we need to focus on in the case of Roman Polanski.
In an interview, Weinstein said that people generally misunderstand what happened to Polanski at sentencing. He's not convinced public opinion is running against the filmmaker and dismisses the categorization of Hollywood as amoral. "Hollywood has the best moral compass, because it has compassion," Weinstein said. "We were the people who did the fundraising telethon for the victims of 9/11. We were there for the victims of Katrina and any world catastrophe."
"One gets hung up on legal details, criticizes Switzerland, or puts the state of the rule of law in the USA in question. The Polish producer Krzysztof Zanussi goes farther, to insult the abuse victim Samantha Geimer as an "underage prostitute."
(http://i34.tinypic.com/2s96528.gif)
kosmalol.jpg
I am not sure how I should feel about this whole incident. Polanski is obviously a scumbag and should be punished.. but the victim has already publicly stated that she wants the charges dropped (mostly because she wants to end this nightmare, I think). If she truly forgave him then I think the charges should be dropped, because in the end he was convicted for what he did to the victim, and if she sincerly forgave him then I think everyone should respect her decision and drop the issue. But if she wants to drop the charges because she is still emotionally scarred and she wants to stop hearing about the case, then I think that polansfucker should be put in prison regardless of what country he is in ASAP, and the case would be closed.
P.S: I still can't get over the fact that he got a standing ovation at the Oscars :maf
It's the People v. Polanski, not Gailey/Geimer v. Polanski. The state prosecutes crimes, not the victim. The state should consider the feelings of the victim, but those feelings should not be determinative. There are important policy concerns that require the state to continue to pursue this case.
But in general, I feel that if an adult victim of rape/violence and the family of a murdered person truly and sincerly forgive their attackers and the attackers are genuinly remorseful about what they did, then I think the charges should be dropped.How do you asses whether a criminal is genuinely remorseful? Especially when most are manipulative and lack remorse, shame or guilt.
I feel that it is a worse punishment for these people to live in remorse and to live in society knowing that their victims forgave them and yet society will most likely view these people as murderers/rapists.
It is also better for them because instead of sitting in a 4 ft cell doing nothing and then taking rehabilitation classes, they have the opportunity to better themselves and benefit society and interact with people.
But in general, I feel that if an adult victim of rape/violence and the family of a murdered person truly and sincerly forgive their attackers and the attackers are genuinly remorseful about what they did, then I think the charges should be dropped.
I feel that it is a worse punishment for these people to live in remorse and to live in society knowing that their victims forgave them and yet society will most likely view these people as murderers/rapists. It is also better for them because instead of sitting in a 4 ft cell doing nothing and then taking rehabilitation classes, they have the opportunity to better themselves and benefit society and interact with people.
But if they don't feel any remorse and their victims never forgive them, then to hell with them.
That would certainly benefit any kidnapper or hostage taker that has ever enjoyed the effects of the Stockholm syndrome.
How do you asses whether a criminal is genuinely remorseful? Especially when most are manipulative and lack remorse, shame or guilt.
My current goal is to not get kicked out of law school. I figure if I never go to class and never read my email, they can't kick me out. I discussed this with both Kosma and Castle, and they've both assured me this is a reasonable plan.
Maybe that's not how I spelt it. Ever think about that?spoiler (click to show/hide)There's a reason I have asses on my mind :hyper[close]
But in general, I feel that if an adult victim of rape/violence and the family of a murdered person truly and sincerly forgive their attackers and the attackers are genuinly remorseful about what they did, then I think the charges should be dropped.How do you asses whether a criminal is genuinely remorseful? Especially when most are manipulative and lack remorse, shame or guilt.
Most of the objectives of the criminal law have nothing to do with the victims themselves, but with society in general. Society needs retribution and restitution, too, not just the victims. And society wants to incapacitate and deter violent offenders, while deterring others from engaging in similar behavior.I feel that it is a worse punishment for these people to live in remorse and to live in society knowing that their victims forgave them and yet society will most likely view these people as murderers/rapists.
Of course, many murderers and rapists are sociopaths, completely incapable of feeling remorse. They can, however, fake it.
It's quite easy for people to blend into society. We don't live in tiny villages where everyone knows everyone else.It is also better for them because instead of sitting in a 4 ft cell doing nothing and then taking rehabilitation classes, they have the opportunity to better themselves and benefit society and interact with people.
Or continue to rape and kill.
"Sorry I stuck it in you're butt, but I had a bad case of the rape rage going on. I've talked it over with my family and it won't happen again."
God, you people are dense as hell!!This is a good way to start. I hope you've never called Dawkins an arrogant asshole.
Try reading my post with an open mind (although I should have made it clearer) I am not talking about serial killers and sociopaths. Obviously these people can't be forgiven and sent back to society without any punishment (let alone be sent back). I am talking about people who commit acts of murder/rape/abuse once in a state of rage/under the influence, etc... Everyone is capable of murder, even the most upright and righteous people.I don't think everyone is capable of murder. Killing? Maybe. Murder? No. But if everyone is indeed capable of murder, as you claim, then that gives society even more reason to try to deter its members from committing the crime.
It obviously doesn't make it right, but what if these people commit these crimes when they weren't thinking clearly, and it is obvious that they won't commit it again? I don't think they should be sent to prison if the victims/ victim's family forgive them. They should be given counselling and support from their families to help them.Did you not just claim that everyone is capable of murder? Yet now you claim it can be obvious that someone will never reoffend. Odd.
I don't think a person deserves to go to prison and serve up to 15 years in prison if he ran another person over in a car accident, and then the family of the victim forgave him after they truly feel that the he is feeling remorse. There is no reason for him to go to prison!!
and he should make it up to the victim/victim's family by supporting them (financially, physical labor, etc..). They shouldn't be automatically thrown in prison just like that.Yes, counseling by one's family members, THAT SHOULD WORK!
and he should make it up to the victim/victim's family by supporting them (financially, physical labor, etc..). They shouldn't be automatically thrown in prison just like that.And if he's unable to support them financially, he or she should be thrown in prison? So the rich can kill as much they like while the poor rot in prison?
God, you people are dense as hell!!This is a good way to start. I hope you've never called Dawkins an arrogant asshole.Try reading my post with an open mind (although I should have made it clearer) I am not talking about serial killers and sociopaths. Obviously these people can't be forgiven and sent back to society without any punishment (let alone be sent back). I am talking about people who commit acts of murder/rape/abuse once in a state of rage/under the influence, etc... Everyone is capable of murder, even the most upright and righteous people.I don't think everyone is capable of murder. Killing? Maybe. Murder? No. But if everyone is indeed capable of murder, as you claim, then that gives society even more reason to deter others from committing the crime.It obviously doesn't make it right, but what if these people commit these crimes when they weren't thinking clearly, and it is obvious that they won't commit it again? I don't think they should be sent to prison if the victims/ victim's family forgive them. They should be given counselling and support from their families to help them.Did you not just claim that everyone is capable of murder? Yet now you claim it can be obvious that someone will never reoffend. Odd.
And obvious to whom? The families of the victims? Because, according to you, they are the ones that decide, not--say--psychiatrists. No, the families of a murdered victim are in the best position to judge. . . .I don't think a person deserves to go to prison and serve up to 15 years in prison if he ran another person over in a car accident, and then the family of the victim forgave him after they truly feel that the he is feeling remorse. There is no reason for him to go to prison!!
I don't think you know what an "accident" means.Quoteand he should make it up to the victim/victim's family by supporting them (financially, physical labor, etc..). They shouldn't be automatically thrown in prison just like that.Yes, counseling by one's family members, THAT SHOULD WORK!Quoteand he should make it up to the victim/victim's family by supporting them (financially, physical labor, etc..). They shouldn't be automatically thrown in prison just like that.And if he's unable to support them financially, he or she should be thrown in prison? So the rich can kill as much they like while the poor rot in prison?
lets say that you were driving a car and you took your eyes off the road for a fraction of a second and suddenly this little girl runs on the street and you end up killing her. You are a normal person who would never even dream about hurting someone when your mind isn't clouded (alcohol, drugs, etc..)
Quotelets say that you were driving a car and you took your eyes off the road for a fraction of a second and suddenly this little girl runs on the street and you end up killing her. You are a normal person who would never even dream about hurting someone when your mind isn't clouded (alcohol, drugs, etc..)
do you really think a drunk driver deserves to be let off the hook because they would never drive carelessly when they're sober? this thread is absolutely insane.
HOW DO I REACH THESE KIIIIDZ
I agree with you about the counselling part, there should be professional counselling, but there should also be family counselling (someone you know, someone that understands you). And yes, everyone is capable of killing, but not everyone is going to do it obviously. Not everyone feels remorseful after committing a crime; and in most cases the victim/victim's family will not forgive the killer/rapist. But in the rare cases that they do, I think the cases should be treated very differently and acquittal should be heavily considered and given. It is like I am saying that everyone that kills and rapes is going to run free.
and the last quote... great logic buddy.
Also, about the "accident" part.. lets say that you were driving a car and you took your eyes off the road for a fraction of a second and suddenly this little girl runs on the street and you end up killing her. You are a normal person who would never even dream about hurting someone when your mind isn't clouded (alcohol, drugs, etc..). You are going to get arrested and possibly spend up to 15 years in prison because of what you did. In the beginning, the victim's family is going to be angry, upset and they would want you to spend a good portion of your life in prison for taking away their little girl. But then you meet face to face and express to them sincere regret and absolute remorse for what you did and the pain that you caused them. They believe you and forgive you for what happened. Would you want to spend those 15 years in prison in a 4x4 cell getting butt raped by guys (I am expecting a snarky "oooh yeah" reply) or would you want to spend this time trying to cope with what you did by supporting the victim's family and getting constructive and healthy support from your family and psychiatrists?Well, that's not an accident.
My current goal is to not get kicked out of law school. I figure if I never go to class and never read my email, they can't kick me out. I discussed this with both Kosma and Castle, and they've both assured me this is a reasonable plan.
You might also want to learn the difference between asses and assess.
HOW DO I REACH THESE KIIIIDZ
I agree with you about the counselling part, there should be professional counselling, but there should also be family counselling (someone you know, someone that understands you). And yes, everyone is capable of killing, but not everyone is going to do it obviously. Not everyone feels remorseful after committing a crime; and in most cases the victim/victim's family will not forgive the killer/rapist. But in the rare cases that they do, I think the cases should be treated very differently and acquittal should be heavily considered and given. It is like I am saying that everyone that kills and rapes is going to run free.
The punishment for a crime should be commensurate to the act committed and the culpability of the accused, not the wishes of the family. The law demands uniformity, predictability, and fairness. There's nothing uniform, predicable, or fair about varying a sentence simply because someone killed an Amish girl instead of a girl whose family has different values and beliefs.and the last quote... great logic buddy.
Someone has to explain to you what the consequences of your beliefs. A rich accused has the means to either pay off the family legally or simply bribe them. Money should not be a factor in how a murderer is sentenced. (BY THE WAY HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF CIVIL COURTS, WHICH ARE SEPERATE FROM CRIMINAL COURTS. If the family wants restiution as well as a criminal sanction, they are free to sue.)
I am not sure how you got that paying the family/victim is part of the system that I mentioned. ???
I listed helping the family/victim financially as a possible way for the person who committed the crime to try to amend for what he did AFTER he had been forgiven by the victim/family and the charges were dropped. It is just an example of a way for the person to amend for what he did out of free will. It has nothing with the legal system or bribery.
I am not sure how you got that paying the family/victim is part of the system that I mentioned. ???
I listed helping the family/victim financially as a possible way for the person who committed the crime to try to amend for what he did AFTER he had been forgiven by the victim/family and the charges were dropped. It is just an example of a way for the person to amend for what he did out of free will. It has nothing with the legal system or bribery.
Yeah, in a system where families of the victims determined the sentence, bribery would never become an issue.
It would just be a surprise act of atonement after they had selflessly forgiven the criminal.
I am not sure how you got that paying the family/victim is part of the system that I mentioned. ???
I listed helping the family/victim financially as a possible way for the person who committed the crime to try to amend for what he did AFTER he had been forgiven by the victim/family and the charges were dropped. It is just an example of a way for the person to amend for what he did out of free will. It has nothing with the legal system or bribery.
Yeah, in a system where families of the victims determined the sentence, bribery would never become an issue.
It would just be a surprise act of atonement after they had selflessly forgiven the criminal.
If that actually happens and the the accused bribed the victim, then the victim should receive the same sentence that the his attacker would have gotten (if the court ever finds out). If you accept a bribe after being raped then you are officially fucked up in the head :yuck. The same goes for a victim's family if they do the same.So a rape victim should receive a long sentence normally given to rapists for accepting a bribe--a non violent crime, while in other cases rapists don't serve any time at all? You have come up with a well-though-out and just system.
Besides, how do you know that this doesn't happen in real life? You don't think bribery isn't an issue? Lets say that a woman is raped by some super rich dude and he pays her off to stay quiet about it. How is this any different than a victim accepting a bribe and "forgiving" her rapist? In both cases, the rapist is free.You're creating a greater incentive. currently, a victim could go to a civil court, as the victim in the Polanski case did. You are creating a system in which a very wealthy rapist can give the rape victim a far, far larger settlement to keep quite, AND HE DOESN'T HAVE TO HIDE IT.
[youtube=560,345]3nopKDuydRo[/youtube]:rofl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nopKDuydRo
Could the family of the deceased face prosecution if they are unwilling to forgive an obviously remorseful killer? What's the greater crime, after all? An act of rage that is clearly never, EVER going to happen again, or a continued, careless, callous hardening of one's heart?
I think we all know the answer here. :smug
Could the family of the deceased face prosecution if they are unwilling to forgive an obviously remorseful killer? What's the greater crime, after all? An act of rage that is clearly never, EVER going to happen again, or a continued, careless, callous hardening of one's heart?
I think we all know the answer here. :smug
hmm.. no. If the victim/family can never forgive the killer/rapist, then the case should proceed as it is. But it is good know that the killer is remorseful.
i'd be remorseful too if it was remorse or a noose hanging round my neck.
castle be straight up trolling. :wag
I'd rather have a court determine the sentence based on precedent, mitigating factors, and sentencing guidelines. Under your "family forgiveness sentencing," you'll have similar cases involving similar defendants with similar levels of remorse experiencing very different sentences based on a criterion that doesn't serve society's best interests.i'd be remorseful too if it was remorse or a noose hanging round my neck.
castle be straight up trolling. :wag
But the victim/family has to be convinced that you are genuinely remorseful. :P
Have fun trying to convince them. ;)
Could the family of the deceased face prosecution if they are unwilling to forgive an obviously remorseful killer? What's the greater crime, after all? An act of rage that is clearly never, EVER going to happen again, or a continued, careless, callous hardening of one's heart?
I think we all know the answer here. :smug
hmm.. no. If the victim/family can never forgive the killer/rapist, then the case should proceed as it is. But it is good know that the killer is remorseful.
Oh, so we're back to it being the murderer's tough luck that he went after a vindictive family. Is it dawning on you yet how ridiculous of a legal system you are imagining?
Anyway, it sort of already works the way you want it. Not all the way (thankfully), but remorse/family feelings are often considered. That's why there are plea bargains and leniency during sentencing from time to time.
Not really. The case would proceed like any other murder/rape case, but the option should be open for the victim/victim's family to step in and forgive the murderer/rapist at any time. So, unless the family/victim wants to forgive, the case would proceed normally.
I am going to sleep now :D
If that actually happens and the the accused bribed the victim, then the victim should receive the same sentence that the his attacker would have gotten (if the court ever finds out). If you accept a bribe after being raped then you are officially fucked up in the head yuck. The same goes for a victim's family if they do the same.
Besides, how do you know that this doesn't happen in real life? You don't think bribery isn't an issue? Lets say that a woman is raped by some super rich dude and he pays her off to stay quiet about it. How is this any different than a victim accepting a bribe and "forgiving" her rapist? In both cases, the rapist is free.
If that actually happens and the the accused bribed the victim, then the victim should receive the same sentence that the his attacker would have gotten (if the court ever finds out). If you accept a bribe after being raped then you are officially fucked up in the head yuck. The same goes for a victim's family if they do the same.
Besides, how do you know that this doesn't happen in real life? You don't think bribery isn't an issue? Lets say that a woman is raped by some super rich dude and he pays her off to stay quiet about it. How is this any different than a victim accepting a bribe and "forgiving" her rapist? In both cases, the rapist is free.
Wow you are FUCKING distinguished mentally-challenged, so much worse than Kosma. WOW
If that actually happens and the the accused bribed the victim, then the victim should receive the same sentence that the his attacker would have gotten (if the court ever finds out). If you accept a bribe after being raped then you are officially fucked up in the head yuck. The same goes for a victim's family if they do the same.
Besides, how do you know that this doesn't happen in real life? You don't think bribery isn't an issue? Lets say that a woman is raped by some super rich dude and he pays her off to stay quiet about it. How is this any different than a victim accepting a bribe and "forgiving" her rapist? In both cases, the rapist is free.
Wow you are FUCKING distinguished mentally-challenged, so much worse than Kosma. WOW
If that actually happens and the the accused bribed the victim, then the victim should receive the same sentence that the his attacker would have gotten (if the court ever finds out). If you accept a bribe after being raped then you are officially fucked up in the head yuck. The same goes for a victim's family if they do the same.
Besides, how do you know that this doesn't happen in real life? You don't think bribery isn't an issue? Lets say that a woman is raped by some super rich dude and he pays her off to stay quiet about it. How is this any different than a victim accepting a bribe and "forgiving" her rapist? In both cases, the rapist is free.
Wow you are FUCKING distinguished mentally-challenged, so much worse than Kosma. WOW
No need to be so harsh. It's nice to know that there are still people like castle who believe in forgiveness over revenge.
Mandark, that's the precedent as established by Kosma v. TheBore. Go after the victim, they're the real menace.
Mandark, that's the precedent as established by Kosma v. TheBore. Go after the victim, they're the real menace.That's the next evolution of this thread.
Mandark, that's the precedent as established by Kosma v. TheBore. Go after the victim, they're the real menace.That's the next evolution of this thread.
Joke's on you. Castle doesn't believe in evolution!
I am not sure how you got that paying the family/victim is part of the system that I mentioned. ???
I listed helping the family/victim financially as a possible way for the person who committed the crime to try to amend for what he did AFTER he had been forgiven by the victim/family and the charges were dropped. It is just an example of a way for the person to amend for what he did out of free will. It has nothing with the legal system or bribery.
Yeah, in a system where families of the victims determined the sentence, bribery would never become an issue.
It would just be a surprise act of atonement after they had selflessly forgiven the criminal.
If that actually happens and the the accused bribed the victim, then the victim should receive some sort of punishment. :maf If you accept a bribe after being raped then you are officially fucked up in the head :yuck. The same goes for a victim's family if they do the same.
Besides, how do you know that this doesn't happen in real life? You don't think bribery isn't an issue? Lets say that a woman is raped by some super rich dude and he pays her off to stay quiet about it. How is this any different than a victim accepting a bribe and "forgiving" her rapist? In both cases, the rapist is free.
Edit: this thread is about Polanski, and I am talking about evolution...
That's because you're stupid.
I am not sure how you got that paying the family/victim is part of the system that I mentioned. ???
I listed helping the family/victim financially as a possible way for the person who committed the crime to try to amend for what he did AFTER he had been forgiven by the victim/family and the charges were dropped. It is just an example of a way for the person to amend for what he did out of free will. It has nothing with the legal system or bribery.
Yeah, in a system where families of the victims determined the sentence, bribery would never become an issue.
It would just be a surprise act of atonement after they had selflessly forgiven the criminal.
If that actually happens and the the accused bribed the victim, then the victim should receive some sort of punishment. :maf If you accept a bribe after being raped then you are officially fucked up in the head :yuck. The same goes for a victim's family if they do the same.
Besides, how do you know that this doesn't happen in real life? You don't think bribery isn't an issue? Lets say that a woman is raped by some super rich dude and he pays her off to stay quiet about it. How is this any different than a victim accepting a bribe and "forgiving" her rapist? In both cases, the rapist is free.
Are you distinguished mentally-challenged? If I get ass raped by Bill Gates and he offers me 1 billion dollars just to keep my mouth shut I would be fucked up in the head if I DON'T accept the money.
I am not sure how you got that paying the family/victim is part of the system that I mentioned. ???
I listed helping the family/victim financially as a possible way for the person who committed the crime to try to amend for what he did AFTER he had been forgiven by the victim/family and the charges were dropped. It is just an example of a way for the person to amend for what he did out of free will. It has nothing with the legal system or bribery.
Yeah, in a system where families of the victims determined the sentence, bribery would never become an issue.
It would just be a surprise act of atonement after they had selflessly forgiven the criminal.
If that actually happens and the the accused bribed the victim, then the victim should receive some sort of punishment. :maf If you accept a bribe after being raped then you are officially fucked up in the head :yuck. The same goes for a victim's family if they do the same.
Besides, how do you know that this doesn't happen in real life? You don't think bribery isn't an issue? Lets say that a woman is raped by some super rich dude and he pays her off to stay quiet about it. How is this any different than a victim accepting a bribe and "forgiving" her rapist? In both cases, the rapist is free.
Are you distinguished mentally-challenged? If I get ass raped by Bill Gates and he offers me 1 billion dollars just to keep my mouth shut I would be fucked up in the head if I DON'T accept the money.
wow, so you would let him step over your dignity for money? That is a new low for humanity! You are going to be a rape victim and a whore(male/female)! Lucky you! Enjoy the billion dollars!
I wish Bill Gates would ass rape me and offer me a billion to keep my mouth shut.
He's in heaven already? Fuck.
castle you really are something else. Why does the family of a murder victim even get to make that choice? If I got offed, fuck what my momma and poppa think, that prick better be going to the clink.
They're slutty 13 y/o teenagers; brother Polanski was simply rehearsing.
Chris Rock FTW
People are defending Roman Polanski because he made some good movies. Are you kidding me? He made good movies 30 years ago! Even Johnnie Cochran don’t have the nerve to go, “Well, did you see O.J. play against New England?”
yahoo is saying polanski never even paid her and owes her like $150k in interest above the $500k deal.
yahoo is saying polanski never even paid her and owes her like $150k in interest above the $500k deal.
yahoo is saying polanski never even paid her and owes her like $150k in interest above the $500k deal.