thir
12-13-2011, 11:13 AM
As the thread concerning extradition would be side-tracked by discussing Roman Polanski, I thought it might be an idea to do it here.
My thoughts concern the rules about sex with minors, as is the case with RP, a case that I have not been aware of.
Wikipedia has this to say, and I emphasize the points I find of interest to discuss.
"
On 11 March 1977, Polanski, then 43 years old, was arrested for the sexual assault of 13-year-old Samantha Geimer during a photo shoot for French Vogue magazine. Soon after he was indicted on six counts of criminal behavior, including rape.[56][58] At his arraignment Polanski pled not guilty to all charges.[59]
Geimer's attorney next arranged a plea bargain, which Polanski accepted, in which five of the six charges would be dismissed.[60] As a result, Polanski pled guilty to the charge of "Unlawful Sexual Intercourse with a minor,"[61][62] and was ordered to undergo 90 days of psychiatric evaluation at Chino State Prison.[63]
On release from prison after 42 days, Polanski expected that at final sentencing he would be put on probation, but the judge, Laurence J. Rittenband, had apparently changed his mind in the interim and now "suggested" to Polanski's attorney, Douglas Dalton, that more jail time and possible deportation were in order.[62][64] Polanski was also told by his attorney that despite the fact that the prosecuting attorneys recommended probation, "the judge could no longer be trusted . . ." and the judge's representations were "worthless."[65]
Upon learning of the judge's plans Polanski fled to France on February 1, 1978, just hours before sentencing by the judge.[66] As a French citizen, he has been protected from extradition and has lived mostly in France since then.[67]
Geimer sued Polanski in 1988, alleging sexual assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress and seduction. In 1993 Polanski agreed to settle with Geimer; however, in August 1996 Polanski still owed her $604,416. Geimer and her lawyers later confirmed that the settlement was completed.[68][69]
On 26 September 2009, Polanski was arrested while in Switzerland at the request of U.S. authorities.[70] He was kept in jail near Zurich for two months, then put under house arrest at his home in Gstaad while awaiting decision of appeals fighting extradition to the U.S.[71] On 12 July 2010 the Swiss rejected the U.S. request, declared him a "free man" and released him from custody. All six of the original charges still remain pending in the U.S.[11]
The victim, Samantha Geimer, during a television interview on 10 March 2011, blames the media, reporters, the court, and the judge for causing "way more damage to [her] and her family than anything Roman Polanski has ever done." She adds that the media were "really cruel," stating that the judge was using her and a noted celebrity for his own personal gain from the media exposure.[72
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Polanski#Sexual_assault_case
Legal matters:
1) I understand that in a case of sex with minors it is called rape no matter what. Is that even if it is voluntary, and no matter how old the partner is?
I note that RP pleaded guilty to unlawful sex, but not rape.
2) It seems to me that a bargain was struck, as is often the case, but not followed?
3) Why do the US authorites demand his arrest so many years after, and how do they even know he is there? And why do they do this when the matter is settled between the parties?
Other matters:
I often think that in such matters, the hysteria around these cases are very harmful to the victims. It seems to me that journalists and others pray on this hysteria, whip up a media circus, and everybody chimes in, voicing their rightful indignation. It seems to me that this happens whether the accused has even been to trial or not.
So, question one: Shouldn't cases of minors be treated like any other cases, in the interest of both alleged viticm and alleged purpetrator or in other words, in order to both protect any victims, as well as getting to the truth?
Is it always a good idea to automatically call sex with minors rape, regardless? I am thinking of the minor here. 13 year olds are sexual persons, even if usually not very mature. My own debut was quite young as well, and totally voluntary. I do not think it would have been very relaxed if my partner had faced a long prison sentence if found out.
Yet youngsters need protection. Protection, not smothering.
What would be the best rules?
My thoughts concern the rules about sex with minors, as is the case with RP, a case that I have not been aware of.
Wikipedia has this to say, and I emphasize the points I find of interest to discuss.
"
On 11 March 1977, Polanski, then 43 years old, was arrested for the sexual assault of 13-year-old Samantha Geimer during a photo shoot for French Vogue magazine. Soon after he was indicted on six counts of criminal behavior, including rape.[56][58] At his arraignment Polanski pled not guilty to all charges.[59]
Geimer's attorney next arranged a plea bargain, which Polanski accepted, in which five of the six charges would be dismissed.[60] As a result, Polanski pled guilty to the charge of "Unlawful Sexual Intercourse with a minor,"[61][62] and was ordered to undergo 90 days of psychiatric evaluation at Chino State Prison.[63]
On release from prison after 42 days, Polanski expected that at final sentencing he would be put on probation, but the judge, Laurence J. Rittenband, had apparently changed his mind in the interim and now "suggested" to Polanski's attorney, Douglas Dalton, that more jail time and possible deportation were in order.[62][64] Polanski was also told by his attorney that despite the fact that the prosecuting attorneys recommended probation, "the judge could no longer be trusted . . ." and the judge's representations were "worthless."[65]
Upon learning of the judge's plans Polanski fled to France on February 1, 1978, just hours before sentencing by the judge.[66] As a French citizen, he has been protected from extradition and has lived mostly in France since then.[67]
Geimer sued Polanski in 1988, alleging sexual assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress and seduction. In 1993 Polanski agreed to settle with Geimer; however, in August 1996 Polanski still owed her $604,416. Geimer and her lawyers later confirmed that the settlement was completed.[68][69]
On 26 September 2009, Polanski was arrested while in Switzerland at the request of U.S. authorities.[70] He was kept in jail near Zurich for two months, then put under house arrest at his home in Gstaad while awaiting decision of appeals fighting extradition to the U.S.[71] On 12 July 2010 the Swiss rejected the U.S. request, declared him a "free man" and released him from custody. All six of the original charges still remain pending in the U.S.[11]
The victim, Samantha Geimer, during a television interview on 10 March 2011, blames the media, reporters, the court, and the judge for causing "way more damage to [her] and her family than anything Roman Polanski has ever done." She adds that the media were "really cruel," stating that the judge was using her and a noted celebrity for his own personal gain from the media exposure.[72
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Polanski#Sexual_assault_case
Legal matters:
1) I understand that in a case of sex with minors it is called rape no matter what. Is that even if it is voluntary, and no matter how old the partner is?
I note that RP pleaded guilty to unlawful sex, but not rape.
2) It seems to me that a bargain was struck, as is often the case, but not followed?
3) Why do the US authorites demand his arrest so many years after, and how do they even know he is there? And why do they do this when the matter is settled between the parties?
Other matters:
I often think that in such matters, the hysteria around these cases are very harmful to the victims. It seems to me that journalists and others pray on this hysteria, whip up a media circus, and everybody chimes in, voicing their rightful indignation. It seems to me that this happens whether the accused has even been to trial or not.
So, question one: Shouldn't cases of minors be treated like any other cases, in the interest of both alleged viticm and alleged purpetrator or in other words, in order to both protect any victims, as well as getting to the truth?
Is it always a good idea to automatically call sex with minors rape, regardless? I am thinking of the minor here. 13 year olds are sexual persons, even if usually not very mature. My own debut was quite young as well, and totally voluntary. I do not think it would have been very relaxed if my partner had faced a long prison sentence if found out.
Yet youngsters need protection. Protection, not smothering.
What would be the best rules?