I answered your question...

When a child is involved, I don't care how talented the person is, the stigma of the heinous act is sure to follow.

Actually, the age of consent in California in 1976 was 14, she was 2 weeks before her 14th birthday. Yes, still illegal.

For her own sake and to get rid of her own notariety (I think I spelled that wrong), she has requested that the court impose the sentence that was part of his original plea bargain, which was no jail time. I think in a case like this, the victim's wishes need to be taken into account. Everyone agreed at the time that the best thing for the victim was for things to die down quietly with no more publicity than was necessary. The judge didn't agree (which is within his rights). Hence, this whole mess started.

Is he and should he be above the law? No, of course not, no one should. But, has justice for his victim truly been served? She is the only who can answer that and for 30 years she has been saying No, it has not. She and her family and children are stalked by the media and papparazzi, she is forced to relive over and over again something that should have become part of her past 33 years ago. Is that justice? And, for 33 years, he has lived an exemplary life, that should count for something. If he was out in the world raping, killing, maiming and pillaging, that would be one thing. But he has not. I think that totality of circumstances need to be taken into account, most particularly the wishes of the victim.

Just call him Father Roman and throw him some more kids.

I dont see what's the controversy

the guy committed a crime

he pled guilty

and then ran like a rabbit

THAT is a bigger crime than the rape charge


if you get a speeding ticket and never show up, the "failure to appear" is a bigger charge than the ticket

you're not allowed to run from the justice system

Yes, the art stands on its own. Art is art.

But I can't completely separate the art and the artist. In some cases, if I truly dislike the artist, for whatever reason, I am inclined to avoid the art.

You know, that's a perspective I hadn't thought of. Yes, I would tend to agree with you there.

I've been boycotting Woodey Allen for years.
Easy to do bein's he's boring.

he didn't go to a place that did not consider it a crime .. he went to a place and other places that do not have extradition to this country ..tha's why he's where he lives now..not because they don't consider it crime..

!.

double post

His Polanski did a little too much Roman back in his youth.....

what ever happened to statute of limitations

this was 22 years ago

are they saying he has been out of the jurisdiction of the prosicuting authority all that time (thus voiding the statute)

and it is not like he kept a low profile (they knew where to find him) so is the statute really nullified ?????

if the victim is not pursuing why are they wasting taxpayer money

it is not like there are not more drastic things that need attention

there is no statute of limitations for a fugitive from justice. He already pleaded guilty and has been convicted. THEN he ran before sentencing

he has stayed in countries that have no extradition treaties with the US and finally he popped into a country which did and was arrested by the Swiss

well i knew about the out of jurisdiction voiding the statute

but i did not realize he has been out of the country the entire time

but i still think if the victim is not pushing it they should quit wasting the taxpayer money on it

they should be going after criminals that have victims that are pushing for prosecution

what if the victim does not testify they wasted time and resources on a dead case (per above she said she is not seeking further punisment)

so why push it (an attention seeker must be in charge)

but hey what do i know

he plead guilty so the statue does not apply .. he ran after pleading guilty ..