gravenewworld
- 1,129
- 27
SHould he go to jail or was his case so mishandled he deserves to be off the hook?
The discussion centers around the legal and ethical implications of Roman Polanski's case, particularly regarding his plea bargain for statutory rape of a minor and the subsequent extradition issues. Participants explore the handling of his case, the differences in legal definitions and practices between the US and Europe, and the societal reactions to his actions.
Participants generally agree that Polanski's actions were wrong and that he should face consequences. However, there is significant disagreement regarding the legal interpretations of his plea, the definitions of statutory rape, and the implications of extradition laws. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views presented.
Participants note the limitations of understanding due to differing legal definitions and cultural perceptions of consent, as well as the complexities surrounding plea bargains and extradition treaties.
I don't see your point. That article only quibbles about the wording distinction between "rape" and "statutory rape". Ok, so he's an alleged rapist and convicted statutory rapist. So what?Count Iblis said:He admitted to statutory rape, which is not considered to be rape in Europe:
http://worldhaveyoursay.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/on-the-use-of-the-word-rape/
No, statutory rape is by definition not consentual. That's the whole point of criminalizing it!I stand corrected on Honduras, but Polanski was awaiting sentencing for consensual sex with a 13 year old, not for rape.
I don't really know how extradition laws work, but the US has extradition treaties with both Switzerland and France. The US does not have an extradition treaty with Iran.This is called "statutory rape" in the US. Now, in France the age of consent was 12 at the time, so it isn't (or wasn't) even a crime in France.
We could just as well start to arrest people who violated Iranian sharia law and extradite them to Iran. It is one thing to have extremist laws, it is another thing to expect decent countries to extradite people who violated such laws.
Why is "Europe" not outraged that Roman Polannski wasn't tried for rape? That's what our outrage is about in this thread.This is what the outrage in Europe is about.
Although the age of consent has gone up in European countries since the 1970s, you do not get long prison sentences for merely having sex with a minor.
Your personal opinion about how "consentual" should be defined isn't really relevant to how it is defined and according to the legal definition (then in the US, now in France), this sex was not consentual.Of course! Children older than about ten can have sexual feelings. We have laws banning sex with children to protect children. But this is a very difficult issue. I think in the US you had a case where a teacher had consensual sex with a 12 year of boy. The teacher got pregnant and was sentenced to ten years in jail. After the teacher left jail they got married.
The whole idea that you can make a law that defines what is consensual or not is, i.m.o. ridiculous.
Fortunately, this example is not one of those ambiguous examples where consent is a reasonable possibility (such as a 19 year old boy with a 17 year old girl in a long term relationship). In this case, the age difference, status of the two parties and the situation make the sex clearly coercive - even if we didn't already know she said "no".They can have the ability to consent, it is simply that in different lawmakers have different laws in order to protect children. The law assumes that children below a certain age cannot consent, regardless of whether that is true or not from a scientific point of view.
The problem here is that rare cases in which the child obviously did consent cannot be treated different from a case in which a child was raped.
Count Iblis said:He admitted to statutory rape, which is not considered to be rape in Europe:
http://worldhaveyoursay.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/on-the-use-of-the-word-rape/
Count Iblis said:Russ, Lisab, I do agree with the main points you are making. You have someone who drugged and raped a girl and it is wrong that this goes unpunished. I fully agree.
I think the main complicating factor here is caused by the way the US law works, which is quite different from how it works in Europe. Plea bargains, confessing to something in exchange for being sentenced for a lesser charge etc. are things that are quite alien to us.
So what? How does any of that matter?Count Iblis said:I think the main complicating factor here is caused by the way the US law works, which is quite different from how it works in Europe. Plea bargains, confessing to something in exchange for being sentenced for a lesser charge etc. are things that are quite alien to us.
It's generally very difficult to extradite Americans for anything.CRGreathouse said:I certainly think the UK should have the right to extradite US terrorists.
mgb_phys said:Probably not relevant to this case but the US might not have an extradition treaty with the EU for much longer.
The current treaty with the UK from 2003 is being challenged in the european court by some UK hacker that broke into the pentagon looking for evidence of UFO coverups.
Apparently it requires the UK to hand over terrorists suspects without the US having to offer any evidence but bans the extradition of US citizen terrorists to the UK.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6521255.stmWhoWee said:Do you recall the name of the hacker or have a link - I'd like to read the story.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plea_bargainCount Iblis said:Russ, Lisab, I do agree with the main points you are making. You have someone who drugged and raped a girl and it is wrong that this goes unpunished. I fully agree.
I think the main complicating factor here is caused by the way the US law works, which is quite different from how it works in Europe. Plea bargains, confessing to something in exchange for being sentenced for a lesser charge etc. are things that are quite alien to us.
WhoWee said:Pleading guilty did complicate matters. He clearly thought he was above the law when he fled the country.
russ_watters said:So what? How does any of that matter?
PARIS (Reuters) - France's Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand questioned on Thursday whether film director Roman Polanski would get a fair hearing from the US justice system...
If he already pled guilty is there a trial?PARIS (Reuters) - France's Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand questioned on Thursday whether film director Roman Polanski would get a fair hearing from the US justice system...
mgb_phys said:If he already pled guilty is there a trial?
Count Iblis said:http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=8721650
Count Iblis said:The harsher the rhetoric from the US, the less likely it becomes that Polanski will be extradited.
Galteeth said:Actually I think there will be another trial, since evading law enforcement is a separate crime.
Count Iblis said:Russ, Lisab, I do agree with the main points you are making. You have someone who drugged and raped a girl and it is wrong that this goes unpunished. I fully agree.
I think the main complicating factor here is caused by the way the US law works, which is quite different from how it works in Europe. Plea bargains, confessing to something in exchange for being sentenced for a lesser charge etc. are things that are quite alien to us.
russ_watters said:So what? How does any of that matter?
mheslep said:Not only does it not matter, it is not correct to say that plea bargains are alien to Europe.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2369772&postcount=206
Count Iblis said:They are alien to most of Europe, certainly in the extreme way there are used in the US.
pbadss said:They don't necessarily need to prosecute him for skipping out of the country. They have enough to sentence him for statutory rape, no?