Category: Punditry
Posted by George Bullard on Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:12 AMFree Roman Polanski
There's no credible purpose in hauling director Roman Polanski back to the U.S. in a 32-year-old California rape case. Polanski is 76. The girl -- then 13, now 45 -- is quoted saying she forgives Polanski for that infamous 1977 night in Jack Nicholson's home. She apparently doesn't want him jailed and says a new round of court stuff will harm her and her family.
She raises the question: What's to be gained by jailing an old man after all these years? California has been ordered to turn loose up to 40,000 felons due to prison overcrowding. So having a felon No. 40,001, Polanski, also loose is not a big deal, numerically speaking. As one writer noted, perhaps California could use the prosecution money to restore services cut in recent, drastic budget woes. As in: Feed and cloth a thousand more kids, as opposed to jailing an old man.
The 1977 case is blanketed in controversy, including the actions of the presiding judge. The prudent way out is for California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to note the sentiments of the victim and pardon Polanski. Like when Bill Clinton pardoned politically-connected fugitive Marc Rich, who at the time was on the federal most-wanted list. Or when George Bush II commuted Scooter Libby's sentence. Two legal presidential acts, yes. Justice, you decide.
Whatever the outcome of the Polanski case, no doubt the director has had an roller-coaster life. Academy Award winning director. His mother died in Auschwitz. He himself escaped Nazis and Krakow ghetto. In 1969, the Charles Manson nut brigade killed Polanski's wife, Sharon Tate.
If there's no statute of limitations on carrying out arrest warrants, there should be.
Spare me the arguments about arresting Polanski to serve justice. The legal establishment skirts justice every day in order to cross the T of legalities -- as in laws prohibiting cocaine and crack. They are forms of the same drug. Yet crack users get much tougher jail sentences than cocaine users. Justice and law are not necessarily synonymous.
Here for story.
Comments
| Jump to bottom |
Roman Polanski
So now, George is the arbiter of who does time in the U.S. and who doesn't do time.
Justice isn't blind.
Justice is George.
I just want to know where I get in the "Justice is George" line down at the court house.
Roman Polanski
So George's philosophy, apparently, is this:
1) If you commit a crime in the U.S., just flee the country.
2) After "X" years of living "on the lamb", you can return to the U.S. No harm, no foul.
So this is the new legal strategy for rapists.
George, just make a check next to the items below the so we can start our list of what other crimes this new leagl system is applicable to:
___ murderer
___ arson
___ theft
___ assault
___ robbery
___ bribery
Geez, what the heck is Kwame doing in Dallas? He should just leave the country for 30 years and forget the one million dollars. What a dope.
Who in this country should ever have to be punished for a crime?
What a bunch of lemmings. You actually think the law should be enforced?
Get a clue. The law is arbitrary. It's optional.
It's open season in the U.S.
Don't want to do the time? Just leave. We'll forget this ever happened.
Roman Polanski
Try the man for the crime. He fled once and we shouldn't allow this injustice to go unclosed.
As for the writer who noted the overcrowded prisons in California, here's a solution: Garnish all Polanski's assets, auction them and give the proceeds to the Governor to distribute to the prison system. Commute his sentence after one year in a commoner's prison.
Don't free Polanski
This man was convicted of raping a 13 year old girl and then fled the country. He did not serve his time.
If you need any more reason, please read the original testimony from the case. It is disturbing.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskicover1.html
Polanski = criminal
Your position of this stuns me George, you're usually a pretty straight-thinking guy...
Polanski is a convicted felon who escaped the US after being convicted but before being sentenced...
This means that the wishes of the victim (though I am happy she has moved on), have absolutely NO bearing on this matter. This is now a rule-of-law matter...
He was convicted in a US court of law, that makes him a criminal. He has yet to serve any time for this...
As such, he should serve the sentence for his original crime and any additional punishment associated with his escape.
Letting Polanski go free sets a dangerous precedent for other cases...
Polanski
Bullard says "no credible purpose".... stunning. The guy was a middle-aged man who coerced a young teen with alcohol and drugs, then rapes her. He cops a plea of guilty, then flees the country before sentencing. People like Bullard make me sick to my stomach, as our rule of law becomes increasing ignored. I would imagine Bullard's view would differ if he had a 13 year old daughter. This guy should be writing for msnbc.
Keep Polianski out of spotlight
Well-said. Totally agree with you (this time!), George.
Spare us a dusting off of this tawdry tale. We don't need to see his face, hear about his misbehavior or force the victim to relive it.
Justice is not being served. Tabloid cravings, on the other hand . . .
Free Polanski the rapist?
I tell ya, if some scum bag raped my 13 year old daughter and it took me 32 years to find him I would wear his guts for garters even if my daughter had "forgiven" him long ago.
George, I am dissappointed in you. You must not have any daughters.
| Jump to top |
