Printable View
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/382011...-entertainment
Sticking up for child molester... reaaal nice. What a stupid moronic country. This monster should have been dropped into the general population and raped in a prisons shower.
The guy drugged and raped a child. Then fled the country after disagreeing with the judge. What the hell is the point in having an extradition treaty if isn't honored?
From what I read about it, the US refused to reveal legal documents the Swiss needed. Contrary to what you believe, everybody, including (alleged) rapists, deserve a fair hearing before extradition. If the US fucks it up by not providing the required information, it is their fault, really. So screw your justice department, I suppose.
Or would you want any country to extradite anyone just because another country asks? (Or just to the USA?)
Too slow Lewk
Sadly you're making the same idiotic mistake that came up in the original thread. He didn't plead guilty to anything except sex with a minor, and thus far hasn't been found guilty of the other charges you mentioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
But you're lewk, completely unable to understand concepts like "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law"
He entered a guilty plea. He also never recanted that he had sex with her. He drugged her and raped her.
That is just a BS excuse. Here is the real reason -Quote:
From what I read about it, the US refused to reveal legal documents the Swiss needed. Contrary to what you believe, everybody, including (alleged) rapists, deserve a fair hearing before extradition. If the US fucks it up by not providing the required information, it is their fault, really. So screw your justice department, I suppose.
As their own justice ministry stated....Quote:
Beyond the legal confusion, Polanski's extradition is a complicated and diplomatically sensitive because of Polanski's status as a cultural icon in France and Poland
Quote:
The Justice Ministry also said that national interests were taken into consideration in the decision,
This reminds me of something I've been wanting to ask you. In the past you've said that you approve of punishment of crimes not just to punish and deter and keep a criminal out of the society, but also to 'please' or 'compensate' the victims or their family, so to say. I disagree with this, I think emotions should stay out of the legal system as much as possible, and it wouldn't be fair for, say, victims who have no next of kin or friends.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
That said, in this case, the victim does not want him to be charged. I still think that in principle should not affect the justice system (although I don't support forcing victims to testify, if they don't want to because it's painful or something). But since you think punishment is for a big part there to give the victim justice.. what if the victim doesn't want it? Like here? Should the courts respect her wishes?
Dude, seriously, I think you should actually read the article you've linked to:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Quote:
The Oscar-winning director of "Rosemary's Baby," "Chinatown" and "The Pianist" was accused of plying his victim with champagne and part of a Quaalude during a 1977 modeling shoot and raping her. He was initially indicted [is that the same as being convicted?] on six felony counts, including rape by use of drugs, child molesting and sodomy, but pleaded guilty to one count of unlawful sexual intercourse.
In exchange, the judge agreed to drop the remaining charges and sentence him to prison for a 90-day psychiatric evaluation. However, he was released after 42 days by an evaluator who deemed him mentally sound and unlikely to offend again. The judge responded by saying he was going to send Polanski back to jail for the remainder of the 90 days and that afterward he would ask Polanski to agree to a "voluntary deportation." Polanski then fled the country on the eve of his Feb. 1, 1978, sentencing.
Based on references to Gunson's testimony in U.S. courts, the Swiss said it "should prove" that Polanski served his sentence after undergoing 42 days of diagnostic study.
"If this were the case, Roman Polanski would actually have already served his sentence and therefore both the proceedings on which the U.S. extradition request is founded and the request itself would have no foundation," the ministry said.
The Justice Ministry also said that national interests were taken into consideration in the decision, and the wishes of the victim, Samantha Geimer, who long ago publicly identified herself and has joined in Polanski's bid for dismissal.
This is far from the first time the Swiss decided that their national interest entailed doing something grotesquely immoral, while providing no real military or political advantage (the supposed definition of national interest).
On another note, I want to know why Lewkowski supports rape.
If the US wouldn't cause the 'legal confusion', I'm fairly sure they'd still have extradited him. This even surprised Polanski's lawyers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
And related to what I posted above (nice how you cut out that part of the line):
Curious what you would think about that.Quote:
The Justice Ministry also said that national interests were taken into consideration in the decision, and the wishes of the victim, Samantha Geimer, who long ago publicly identified herself and has joined in Polanski's bid for dismissal.
So, we're really talking about Polanksi needing to come back to the US to serve, um, 48 days?
Clearly we need to invade Switzerland. :bored:
trueQuote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
true, hence the single guilty plea of sex with a minorQuote:
He also never recanted that he had sex with her.
and this is when you go batshit retarded :(Quote:
He drugged her and raped her.
I was just told that the reason the Swiss might have taken Polanski into custody originally was to gain leverage in the Swiss bank deal with the US. Since the deal has been agreed to a month ago (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a4a60edc-7...44feabdc0.html), they have no reason to continue playing this game. It's hard to expect more from people who refuse to return money and art to the families of Holocaust victims.
If anything Lewkowski should be in a rage over the American system that sentenced a man to 90 days for getting a 13-y-o drunk in order to have sex with her, but he's naturally more interested in trolling European members on this forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by ']['ear
And Jesus said "Let he who is with sin rape the first rapist" ...
Bleh, mixed on this. It seems manifestly stupid that the US couldn't/wouldn't supply the paperwork needed. The first Swiss news releases on this said their extradition decisions are very narrowly focused on procedural issues.
But now that statements are coming out about Swiss "national interest", I also can't avoid the feeling that the US didn't release the info because they felt the Swiss government was going to make a political decision anyway.
But the idea that some are clapping about this is pretty sick to me -- he did drug and rape her. And while one could plea that down to a very short sentence in the US back in the 1970s, it's hard to avoid the feeling that justice got perverted on all sides on this (regardless of what the victim now things, possibly after a civil settlement).
He drugged her and raped her. I suggest you look up the definitions of the words.Quote:
and this is when you go batshit retarded
Would have been a hell of a lot longer then that. We could have got him for running and since he never carried out his sentence we could have got him on contempt charges AND probably re-sentenced him because it was probationary.Quote:
So, we're really talking about Polanksi needing to come back to the US to serve, um, 48 days?
Actually the order is incorrect. Deterrence is first, then justice and finally giving closure to victims.Quote:
This reminds me of something I've been wanting to ask you. In the past you've said that you approve of punishment of crimes not just to punish and deter and keep a criminal out of the society, but also to 'please' or 'compensate' the victims or their family, so to say
No, he drugged and raped her. :bored: The fact that you're downplaying the act speaks volumes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
I am not happy with this, but the US had really enough time to provide the papers. Of course those papers are probably not that important, but they gave the possibility to refuse the delivery. The US have known that Polanski will not be delivered if the formalities are not flawless.
Why don't you just go and fuck yourself. Honestly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Lewk long since lost any credibility on most issues but advocating rape as a punishment for an alleged rapist has got to rate highly on the dumbfuckometer.
I have no sympathy for Polanski, he admitted having sex with a minor and somehow conned a judge into letting him have a vacation in a psych ward instead of doing hard time. However, the major fuck ups in all this have come from the US legal system. It would appear that your system is designed to allow those with money and influence get away with theft, rape and murder and so long as your system insists on encouraging plea bargaining to the nth degree it will continue to create disastrous cases like this one.
And Loki, don't be a fucking imbecile for fuck sake man grow up.
When Polanski was arrested I wanted to see him punished. I think its insane the US Justice Department refused to hand over the papers required for extradition. That modern failure on top of the originally insane sentencing decades ago mean trying to blame the Swiss is stupid and dishonest.
It would actually be sorta interesting if he had advocated rape as a punishment for rape. :noob:Quote:
Originally Posted by termite
I suppose I should clarify that I think 90 days of puttering around in a psych ward is an absurdly light and useless sentence for a serious crime such as that of getting a minor drunk in order to have sex with her. At best he's a dangerous criminal, at worst a dangerously disturbed person. That's why I think Lewkowski should be in a rage over the American system that sentenced a man to 90 days psych for a crime that Lewkowski would prefer answer with prison-rape, and that couldn't even be arsed to produce the paperwork necessary to finally get him back after thirty years of trying. You can whine about the Swiss all you like, but you are the bumbling idiots and pedophile-enablers here Loki. Yes, especially you. Meanwhile, Lewkowski is just trolling and it seems he's in good company.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
It would be bizarre. Love the sinner, hate the sin, and all that. Rape is still a sin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
It'd probably also be very satisfying for the rapists, and I dunno why Lewk should give them that pleasure. Nor do I know why he should want to encourage that kind of behaviour considering the likelihood of several of those rapists getting back out into society again.
Did you miss the prison shower thing?Quote:
It would actually be sorta interesting if he had advocated rape as a punishment for rape.
...here is what earthJoker is referring to:Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
This is what he was originally charged with (along with more), but not found guilty of. The only charge the prosecuters plea bargained him into was Unlawful Sexual Intercourse, i.e. sex with a minor, i.e. statutory rape. None of that involves drugging, or alcohol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
The following lawsuit was settled, so no additional guilt from that.
Its how the law works Lewk, you can't claim someone is guilty of everything they are charged with because of a plea bargain. :rolleyes: Not happy with that? Thats great, but it doesn't give you an excuse to pull shit out of your ass.
EDIT:
Goes for Loki's and Dread's bullshit too.
Y'know, for once I'd really like to see Lewk in the center of a process. He'd feel pretty differently if he was wrongly accused of, say, child-molestation. Because that's one accusation you can never walk away from, even if you're clearly found to be not guilty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Seems pretty cut and dried.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
Can I take it the Swiss have the same high standards for all extradition requests? Or just for pedophile rapists who happen to own property in Switzerland?Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker
Aw, a Swiss got upset that somebody doesn't think they should get a pass for their role in the Nazi regime. At least the Germans did their best to make up for their mistakes. The Swiss are still in denial. :bored: Then again, this is the same country whose economy depends on deposits from corporate thieves and dictators.Quote:
Why don't you just go and fuck yourself. Honestly.
"High standards" :bored:
You sound like Lewk. The be right and to get justice is not the same. If the Americans screw up the lawsuit twice its really your problem!Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
No I am upset of you playing the nazi card. As this has anything to do with this case. But all you do is country bashing. Should we start to list all the US-Crap in the world on every US topic now?Quote:
Aw, a Swiss got upset that somebody doesn't think they should get a pass for their role in the Nazi regime. At least the Germans did their best to make up for their mistakes. The Swiss are still in denial. :bored: Then again, this is the same country whose economy depends on deposits from corporate thieves and dictators.
I don't know which Swiss girl ever dumped you, but get over it.
Maybe we shouldn't even deliver a single person to a country that stil has the death penalty.
Eh dude he's never scored a pretty Swiss girl but I suppose he may have been able to satisfy himself with a swiss cheese.
So what's why the Swiss used "national interest" to justify the request. :bored: Pray tell why it's in the Swiss national interest to not extradite a pedophile rapist.Quote:
Originally Posted by earthJoker
I can't really think of any Western country that continues to profit through genocide. Or that thinks it proper to profit from helping the most corrupt dictators in the world hide their money there.Quote:
No I am upset of you playing the nazi card. As this has anything to do with this case. But all you do is country bashing. Should we start to list all the US-Crap in the world on every US topic now?
imagery...Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
DO. NOT. WANT.
No they denial was justified with the missing paper. The national interest thing is just the reason why the didn't put a closed eye on the issue. And probably the national interests are the relationship with France. You surely now that the French government got involved in the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Map of the countries with death penalty:Quote:
I can't really think of any Western country that continues to profit through genocide. Or that thinks it proper to profit from helping the most corrupt dictators in the world hide their money there.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ld_Map.svg.png
Gee, perhaps you should ask the people who live in dictatorships if they care more about the US having the death penalty or the Swiss allowing their dictators to siphon off billions of dollars. Half your economy is based on helping criminals steal money from their countries.
Minx, you're still implying that the only thing wrong about this case is that Polanski had sex with an underage girl. :bored: He didn't just have sex with her: he drugged and raped her. Those would be crimes even if she was 18. Why do you continue playing down the severity of the crime?
I'm not trying to play down the severity of the crime, I'm just going by the article Lewkowski posted which (I believe) said that he pleaded guilty to having unlawful sex with a 13-y-o girl after getting her drunk. Those things already add up to a severe offense--that should result in more than just a few days of psychiatric evaluation--in my view, even if it's not good enough for you. I'd caution you against having sex with 13-y-o girls though, even if you don't drug them, because it's just not okay. No, not even if they have sexy moustaches.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Dude, seriously, you need to get yourself a serious morality-check, you're beginning to seem really disturbed :down: it's almost as if you believe that an adult getting a 13-y-o drunk and then having sex with her is very different from drugging and raping her :down:
But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt because I know in my heart that you can't possibly be that twisted :heart:
Is that before or after the US supports those selfsame dictators with money, weapons or a Coup d'État?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Does it even matter? So Loki enjoys indulging in a bit of bigotry and racism (and trolling) eg. by holding the Swiss as a people responsible for everything from plundering Jews to supporting dictators. Not to mention hypocrisy, eg. when he accuses others of hypocrisy and grandstanding when they choose to actively protest one injustice but not another--but gets all bitchy if he's given a taste of his own medicine and is smeared with everything the US has done wrong since its birth.
So what? Should we travel to his little cornfield and squat down low so as to better emulate him? It's a question I frequently ask myself, even when he isn't trying to imply that I have a callous attitude towards people who abuse children.
EDIT: Yes, all-too-often I find myself answering that question with, "Yes."