Comments on: Polanski: Children, Wife, “Decimated” as They Await His Release

By: Wrong-Way-Roger

Wrong-Way-Roger — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 08:53:37 +0000

Must one be drugged and tied down to wonder why Roger is so soft (n.p.i.) on sex crimes? Don’t you bet Roger’s confessions would burn down the booth!

By: Gus

Gus — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 07:41:06 +0000

I’m about the same age as Polanski was when he did that 13-year-old. Yes, I’m over 40.

If I were to do a 13-year-old, my ass would be in jail yesterday.

I’m sorry, but Polanski is not that special. The only reason this case has dragged on for so long is that he fled. If he had stayed and done his time, he’d have been out of jail years ago.

Yes, it happened a long time ago. But a 43-year-old man did a kid. If I had done it, I sure as hell wouldn’t get any special consideration. And I wouldn’t be able to bail out to a chalet in Gstaad. Put that pervert behind bars. Now.

By: just sayin'

just sayin' — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:10:37 +0000

So what’s the intention in mentioning that he’s a Holocaust survivor? Sympathy maybe? I think not. Send him to a US maximum security prison til he gets butt-raped, then solitary confinement til death. Justice served.

By: axon

axon — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:19:18 +0000

Polanski is a slime. He is a dirty, selfish, immature little man.

By: music expert

music expert — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:21:15 +0000

Right on, Axon. What I’ve never heard anywhere–and it should be pointed out–is that anyone convicted of sex with an underaged girl has to register for the REST OF THEIR LIVES as a sex offender. Why not Polanski? He certainly fits the bill. And that would serve as a reminder of the severity of what he did.
Not only did Polanski not apologize, he kept doing it with minors! He said everybody did it and/or wanted to do it. Fuck him! Keep that pervert in jail! Who cares how it affects his fucked up family?

By: FattDoll

FattDoll — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:27:16 +0000

Polanski is a rapist and sodomite. Michael Jackson was innocent..he was Cannibalized by the media. Why the sympathy for Polanski??

By: Simba

Simba — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 00:27:58 +0000

Trey, if the guy pleads guilty, the court doesn’t have to convict him. He’s already admitted to wrongdoing. Polanski fled because he was afraid of the sentencing, which he should have thought about in the first place. “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time”. Good advice, Roman.

By: Trey

Trey — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 23:00:33 +0000

Come on guys relax. He isn’t advocating that we let rapist go free. Roger is simply stating the facts. And the facts say that from the very beginning up until now justice in this case has been perverted. The courts, lawyers and prosecutors all have to follow certain rules to make sure that everyone they try has the same rights to defend themselves. What we have here is a case where a guy is being tried very differently in the court system than someone accused of the very same crime would. We do not need hot shot prosecutors perverting justice for their own causes. What would happen if someone was accused of rape and didnt do it? If they were tried in the way that Polanski is being tried, he would never have a prayer on earth of proving his innocence. Yes we all no Polanski did it, he admited and the court system started the process of conviting hom for it. He needs to come back and take his medicine. Which in any other case would be six months in jail, ten years probation case closed in a matter of two weeks. LA knows that is all they can get here, but yet they refuse to offer him a plea out. That would get their guilty plea, time in jail and an end to this circus. Instead we have a hot head prosecutor who is hell bent on going above and beyong the call of the law, and that isnt his job. Keep digging Roger, it is only going to get more interesting from here out.

By: Mom of 3

Mom of 3 — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:33:16 +0000

Roger, you should spend time talking with victims of sexual abuse by priests or famous people. Even when there are payoffs to the families, the children suffer for the rest of their lives. Ask the victims of Gary Glitter, Jeffrey Jones or Paul Reubens. Glitter is in prison now, but the latter two took guilty pleas to avoid trial. The kids looked up to these perverts, and were horrendously exploited.

By: Bonnie Herman

Bonnie Herman — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 20:54:13 +0000

In what version of US justice is it allowed for a judge to accept a plea agreement reached between the prosecution and defense and then unilaterally decide to renege on the deal? That’s what the judge did in this case. He accepted the deal that BOTH sides had agreed. And then he told pals that he was planning to renege on the deal and sentence Polanski to jail time. That is NOT American. That’s banana republic law. In the light of that Polanski was absolutely right to leave the USA. The only legal finding in this case was NOT rape, nor sodomy, nor drugs. The only finding – based on a plea accepted by the prosecution – was unlawful sex with a minor. So all this bandying about of the emotive word “rape” is not based on legal finding. On top of that – the woman who was involved is adamant that the matter should be dropped. Do the wishes of the person who Polanski had sex with count for nothing? The moaning and whining comes from a bunch of “the establishment is always right” and “entertainment industry people are always liberals flouting the law” types. How about some respect for TRUE American principles? Such as the one that judges and prosecutors can’t break the rules. And judges can’t make demands of defendants based on whether the judge can get his face on TV!!!