Patterico's Pontifications

1/9/2009

Nice Fisking of a New York Times Piece About Poor Roman Polanski

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:39 pm



It’s a nice job by Bill Wyman.

17 Responses to “Nice Fisking of a New York Times Piece About Poor Roman Polanski”

  1. Can you believe that it’s been 20 years since he quit the Stones?

    Time flies.

    Icy Texan (b7d162) — 1/9/2009 @ 11:09 pm

  2. Quick Polanski factoids:

    1) He pleaded guilty to a less serious charge for reasons not entirely clear;

    2) He is not technically convicted until he is sentenced but at least there is no need for a trial now;

    3) He took off presumably because he thought he might get jail or prison time;

    4) His complaints about the sentencing judge are no longer relevant because the judge is dead.

    5) His slick publicity team is trying his case in the press (a sympathetic LA Times) because he can’t win in court.

    Alta Bob (f69930) — 1/9/2009 @ 11:40 pm

  3. Thank God for the internet, or the facts of this degenerate’s case would have been diluted down into a thin slurry, via MSM-only spin. Like this NY Times bit.
    Not any more. Never forget.

    Andrew (8a94e5) — 1/10/2009 @ 9:17 am

  4. Someone once suggested that he could make a movie titled, “Close Encounters Of The Third Grade”. Maybe so. Maybe so.

    Huey (a69128) — 1/10/2009 @ 11:00 am

  5. My vague recollection is that Roman Polanski drugged and anally raped a 13 year old, then fled to Europe to avoid jail time. Dude better hope the Holder nomination goes through.

    fat tony (edf3c8) — 1/10/2009 @ 11:06 am

  6. 2) He is not technically convicted until he is sentenced but at least there is no need for a trial now;

    How is this true? A conviction is the outcome of a trial; sentencing follows a conviction.

    IANAL, but maybe one of the lawyers here can clarify this?

    Steverino (69d941) — 1/10/2009 @ 11:15 am

  7. You do not run away from an ongoing criminal case and then declare you are a victim. Polanski was hardly rail roaded, he just did not want to face the risk of losing his criminal case. What Polanski did was not the pedeophilia, but it was definitely wrong. Frankly, I think a deal to resolve this criminal matter could be worked out but the burden for one is on Polanski.

    Joe (dcebbd) — 1/10/2009 @ 11:46 am

  8. And Polanski movies are overrated too.

    Joe (dcebbd) — 1/10/2009 @ 11:47 am

  9. Someone once suggested that he could make a movie titled, “Close Encounters Of The Third Grade”. Maybe so. Maybe so.

    Funny, but aren’t thirteen year olds in eighth grade typically?

    In Iran, this would be all good if he got married because the Prophet Mohammed when he was in the mid fifties started having sex with his nine year old child bride Aisha. Perhaps Polinski should pull a Cat Stevens and go Shiite.

    Joe (dcebbd) — 1/10/2009 @ 11:49 am

  10. Call me cynical, but the director worked with the son of Polanski’s first producer, then claimed to be all surprised when there was a connection. I’m very suspicious about the film, the funding, the timing, etc. Yes, Polanski’s just Mr. Fascinating, but it’s a quite a stretch to make him an slightly innocent victim of an over-zealous prosecutor.

    That the victim forgives him isn’t the point–he knew what he did was wrong, fled to avoid the consequences and now feels miffed.

    Kate (bd06f2) — 1/10/2009 @ 1:10 pm

  11. Steverino:

    “Conviction,” is a complicated question, actually. For most usages, sentencing must have occurred, though that’s not always true for technical legal use. If the defendant dies between verdict and sentencing, that’s not a conviction for the purpose of ordering restitution.

    But in non-technical parlance, I think it’s completely fine to say he was convicted by the jury or by plea. Some might differ.

    As to the underlying issue, I’ve been here. I got a call once from a defense attorney:

    Defense: Hey, Mr. Smith wants to come back and face his charges. He’s just worried that you’ll arrest him and charge him with fleeing. What I want is a guarantee that he won’t be remanded when he shows up.

    JRM: We don’t make deals with absconders. When he comes back, we can talk.

    Defense: Well, can you just tell me that you won’t ask for remand?

    JRM: This isn’t a negotiation. He comes back, we deal with it. I don’t negotiate with runners. Our office doesn’t. Won’t happen.

    Defense: He’s very sorry, and there are some surrounding circumstances that you should be aware of.

    JRM: I. Don’t. Care. He comes back, we deal with it.

    It’s the only way to do this. You can’t negotiate with people who have fled. Polanski’s behavior is absolutely outrageous, and apologetics for him are just short of the Jack Abbott insanity.

    –JRM

    JRM (de6363) — 1/10/2009 @ 1:49 pm

  12. C’mon, all he did was mirandize a 13-year old 30 years ago. Can’t we let bygones be bygones?

    Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/10/2009 @ 7:47 pm

  13. I had a client, with dual citizenship, who fled but then voluntarily came back and served his time. No deals, he knew he would be taken into custody at the airport. He missed America. Now he’s a free man. But he was not a child-molester or from Hollywood.

    nk (2a3e35) — 1/10/2009 @ 8:08 pm

  14. I had other clients, who knew their sentence but were not remanded immediately, who reported voluntarily after being allowed out on as little as $2,000.00 bail to get their affairs in order. And I believe that there are hundreds like them across the country every day. Polanski is an exceptionally cowardly rat.

    nk (2a3e35) — 1/10/2009 @ 8:14 pm

  15. My recollection (and as good a light as Polanski deserves) is that considering the evidence against him he was advised to plead to the lesser charge by his lawyer. After he did so, he came to the realization that the sentence was going to be about twenty years, and he ran. (So you get one of those ‘oh I didn’t mean to plead guilty in court there your Honor, not if I knew what was going to happen’ moments.)

    Hollywood pedophile rapist and hollywood stupid to boot.

    luagha (ff416e) — 1/10/2009 @ 8:23 pm

  16. Comment by Steverino — 1/10/2009 @ 11:15 am

    Criminal case procedure varies from state to state.

    Often the judge will not accept the plea until the time for the sentencing. That way the judge will have an opportunity to review the probation officer’s report, the pre-sentence memoranda by the prosecution and defense, the victim’s statement to the court, and letters from the defendant’s supporters before determining whether the sentnecing provisions of the plea agreement are appropriate.

    slp (adbb56) — 1/12/2009 @ 12:42 am

  17. […] he was originally charged with rape, sodomy, child molestation and giving drugs to a minor. As Patterico noted earlier this year, Bill Wyman wrote the definitive fisking of Roman Polanski apologists […]

    Patterico’s Pontifications » Roman Polanski Arrested in Switzerland (e4ab32) — 9/27/2009 @ 12:18 pm


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0820 secs.