dhmac

Isn't that up to the D.A.'s and Polanski's defense to agree on if the plea bargain agreement is gone or not? After all, it's an agreement between the prosecution and defense, is it not? And the state of the case, courtroom-wise, is like a long recess with all the proceedings up until 1978 already a matter of court record. Given that it has a guilty plea in it, I doubt the D.A. will want to drop the agreement and then have to prove guilt in a jury trial when the victim in the case sympathizes with the defendant and rape trials are notoriously tough to win for the prosecution. And I doubt the defense would want to drop the agreement given that it then would open up the remote risk of possibly losing a trial and getting a long prison sentence. So I would be very surprised if either side throws out the plea bargain agreement.

The main wildcard that I see is the D.A. could add new charges for fleeing, but I'm not sure what those charges may be.

dhmac

Thank you, eXcentris, that's the point I'm trying to make that wirefan simply doesn't get. The D.A. would not want to give up that guilty plea in order to go after a jury trial for rape. Their best option is to stick to the plea bargain agreement. (I also wonder if dismissed charges can even be re-applied or if that would be a violation of the "double jeopardy" law).

However, I don't think Polanski could be charged with "California state penal code 3059 for leaving the state without permission" because he was not on parole and the court granted him the freedom to leave the state or the country (Polanski had a damn good lawyer).

pjflyer

I have tried to stay out of this debate as I find myself sympathetic to both sides. Here is an essay written by a friend of mine that ends with a great summation

"So, in the end here is what I think: Roman Polanski is a great filmmaker who has endured incredible personal hardship. The original court case against him was likely "fixed" (as far as the sentencing was concerned), and probably would have resulted in a mistrial. This terrible thing he did happened a long time ago and he has kept his nose clean ever since. However, in 1977 he drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. And if he were a bus driver, he would be Roman the bus driving child rapist."

The rest of the essay is worth reading:


http://sumopopblog.blogspot.com/2009/10/repulsion.html

dhmac

Good essay (and yet another person who recommends seeing "Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired" ). Aside from the debate on the legal aspect of the case that's dominating this thread and sticking to the public debate, what Polanski did was disgusting and he will never get his reputation back again. In the public's mind, he will always be thought of as a man who raped a girl.

But I think the view of apologists vs. the view of hardliners on this case comes down to differing views of the justice system. Some see the justice system as primarily needing to punish criminals, others see it as primarily needing to rehabilitate criminals. Punishment-wise, Polanski really didn't get much punishment (at least so far) for the severity of his crime. Rehabilitation-wise, he is completely rehabilitated and not a danger to society. And I think that's the real underlying difference between the major views.

(And it's very interesting that the victim's view falls on the "rehabilitated" side of the public debate because her view matters more than any other person's).

chris_sc77

I would vehemently disagree with this statement. If this country were truly "free" a victim's wishes should be honored.
The little chick was not innocent anyways. What was she doing hanging out with 30 year old perv like Polanski in the first place?

dan30oly

Are you f*cking kidding me?

Have you paid attention to any of this?

collector_cliff

Seems like the prosecutor featured in the Polanski documentary has come forward and admitted he lied...oops!

http://movies.msn.com/movies/article...6&affid=100055

BravesMG

Trollin'

dhmac

Yeah, that pretty much stops that attempt to get the case thrown out due to legal misconduct as his claim in the movie would've been. Now there's criticism of this guy, David F. Wells, for waiting until now to say that he lied because he says now "he was told the film wouldn't air in the U.S." well over a year after HBO aired the program in the U.S. (and which was a documentary that was an HBO production and, it has now come out, he was told was going to air in the U.S.). Why didn't he come clean earlier instead of waiting until now? I get the impression this guy lies all the time.

RyoHazuki

How do you know this?

eXcentris

What Wells said or did not say only constitutes a part of the accusations of procedural misconduct. When even the prosecution paints judge Rittenband's conduct of the case as "frivolous, contradictory, erratic, and injudicious" you have a problem...

dhmac

He's been married for 19 years now with 2 kids and reportedly has a good family life. And he has not committed any known crimes in the last 31 years.

I think any court anywhere would consider that rehabilitated.

Supermallet

Not the court of public opinion.

Deftones

just when we thought your statements couldn't have been any more ridiculous, you go and say this...

RyoHazuki

I'm not saying you're wrong but I don't know how you can state as fact that he is 100% rehabilitated.

mhg83

I've heard stories of child molesters that get married and have kids in order to be looked at from society as being normal.

dhmac

True, but I don't even 100% know if you're not a danger to society either!

RocShemp

Wow... Now your ratings/runtimes rants don't seem as silly to me.

By your reasoning, if a battered wife makes a show of "he's not like this" and "but I love him," we should let her abuser go free. By your reasoning, if a man rapes a woman, despite their being evidence of his crime, we should free her rapist because his current victim wants to be left alone.

chris_sc77

I think if the victim in ANY crime (including abuse and Rape) says not to press charges then yeah of course I think the perpetrator go free.
I would never in my life defend these people and I would beat Polanski if I caught him with a minor and I was told I would get away with it but with this I dont see how anyone was really hurt. Especially when the "victim" says the prosecutors did more damage than Polanski.

Solid Snake

.....wtf. wow.

dhmac

Well, I see what you are getting at, but this case is not that simple. If it was just dropping charges before going to court, then that would've been done. But the victim did want some justice and was OK with the plea bargain to drop all but one charge, which he plead guilty to in a court of law. So once in the court system, it's outside the victim's ability to simply drop the charges at that point. Only the D.A. can do it at that point, as I understand it. Although she thinks the punishment he's already received is enough justice, it's now outside her ability to make that choice anymore. I do think her wishes as the one and only victim in the case should be reflected in whatever decision is going to be made in the case as it goes forth, but unfortunately they don't necessarily have to at this point.

wm lopez

Great to see Bill Maher not stick up for this guy.
See Bill Maher is not all bad.

Deftones

victims don't charge people with crimes. the government (county, city) where the crime was committed is the charging agency. it doesn't matter if the victim files a police report and then recants their entire story. if the police and charging agency believe a crime has been committed and has the evidence to back it up, they don't need the victim. the victim is irrelevant in many cases. also, victims can't "drop the charges". now, there are certain circumstances where police won't charge and individual with a crime due to lack of victim cooperation, but those generally aren't rape cases.

Supermallet

Whaaaaaaat? Did someone hijack wm lopez's account?

Mr. Salty

The point of the criminal justice system is to deter criminals from committing additional offenses, against other people. You may be OK with letting a rapist go, but the next person he rapes probably isn't.