The reason he got arrested there was because the bastard gloated about it this time instead of sneaking around like normal. It has nothing about censoring speech in this instance, just knowing where a fugitive is going to be based on the man’s own arrogant stupidity.
What really surprises me is that I now hate the French even more. How the hell could they protect this guy for 3 decades?!? They should have gleefully thrown this worhtless prick under the bus.
The French aren’t all bad. I mean just check out OLF for example.
…
Okay… so maybe all the French are bad… 
But in all seriousness, the deal with extradition is politics. Czech Republic, Germany, and Poland also didn’t arrest him. Countries that have an issue with US global actions (and there’s quite a long list), tend to uniformly ignore US extradition requests… and vice versa…
My problem with the French and Poland is that they are actively trying to sheild and defend this guy. He drugged and raped a real girl… how the hell can somene defend this? The only thing that could be worse is that these countries are actively pursuing someone that merely looked at a drawing of a girl… seiously though,these countries need to pull their head out of their asses.
I totally agree: it’s all pretty stupid.
Well unless some sort of underhanded deal happens, Roman Polanski is pretty much screwed. In addition to committing rape, he now has “failure to appear” charges and a whole truck load of “default judgments” to face. It also doesn’t matter if the rape victim drops charges (which she has), because he already pleaded and was found guilty.
So it all comes down to if he’s above the law. I believe the French Government has formally renounced their claims to challenge the extradition, because it looked bad from an international and moral standpoint.
I hope so. I abhore rape to the point that I feel it is a far worse crime than murder. At least with murder the suffering ends (assuming a form of re-incarnation, one would hope since remembering the past would defeat the purpose of death). With rape, it seems to be a life-long ordeal that could permanently destroy the quality of life.
Exactly. Criminal justice is about:
Revenge and the intuitive concept of “justice” (as in, “justice has been served”, or “I demand justice!”) are badly veiled attempts at emotional appeal, and skirt these practical sociological reasons for locking up criminals.
Let’s apply these principles to this case. “1” applies; letting him get away with his crime might embolden potential offenders, because they might think they could commit a crime and get away with it by fleeing the country. “2” does not; our legal system exists to protect US citizens, and if he’s in France he’s not a reasonable danger to Americans in America (he’s a common criminal, not a Mafia agent or terrorist). Regarding “2”, he’s France’s (or Switzerland’s) problem, not our’s, and by letting him stay they implicitly acknowledge that they don’t consider him a danger.
By this reasoning, the “logic” for pursuing this case outside the US 30 years later is greatly weakened. The damage to “1” has pretty much already been done, and “2” doesn’t apply. In that light, the arrest appears more like a political stunt than a victory for justice, and it’s easy to see how this case would spark controversy.
Justice is about retribution not safety. He did something wrong. He should be punished. That is justice and that is why so many want this bastard back in the US.
An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand - leaves everyone crippled, toothless, and blind.
Admittedly, it taking 30 years to bring the man to justice does demonstrate neatly that if you’re rich and good at fleeing the country you can probably get away with a lot (unless a bounty hunter catches you!) but still, catching him eventually helps play into the societal narrative of your sins finding you out. It helps boost people’s faith in order, and remind miscreants that they’ll get what’s coming to them eventually.
Everything’s a political stunt. 
I don’t know what the plan is, but yeah, I’m sure someone’s organised this little endeavour to try and either get positive attention for themselves or divert attention away from something else…
At least in this case, I think both will happen. As I understand it, rapists (especially child rapists), tend to have the same thing done to them when they go to prison. Of course, it is also the case that child rapists tend to be murdered in prison as well.
I won’t cry if that happens.
And Papillon, the whole is already “blind” and “crippled”, so I don’t think we’ll lose all that much. Actually, we would actually gain something if people adhered to justice. But things are always measured in monetary value, fame, power, or the insipid “greater good”… I hold out no hope that society is suddenly going to become a compassionate yet tough entity that is not a plague on the individual.
Okay, pessimism has been vented…
“In the Kingdom of the Blind, The one-eyed man is King.” -Anonymous
I think I’d just hide myself.
That’s what it is. It’s done for the political reason, not the justice reason and that’s why while I cannot condone his action, I cannot condone the pursuit of a the case 30 years later that was also settled out-of-court through non-coercive means.
Hmm… looks like he didn’t settle out of court either… or rather didn’t keep his part of the deal.
It would appear the settlement was paying the victim $500,000 - well he DIDN’T pay it. In fact they had to fight tooth and nail to get a small portion of that.
This guy is a total sleaze ball. He drugs and rapes a child. He runs from sentence. He makes an out of court deal to drop charges, but doesn’t pay it. Exactly what has he done to repay his crime? NOTHING willingly evidently. Now he has the balls to demand bail? He’s going to run… it’s obvious from his track record.
They need to punish this jerk because he hasn��t been punished for anything. He thinks he’s so slick he can keep running from the law. I think he deserves every ounce of judgment he’s been weaseling out of. Criminals on the run, are still criminals.
Punishing him 30 years later sets no strange precedence: none of this would be happening if he didn’t rape a child. I agree: what’s done is done. Well now he’s captured. What needed to be done, still needs to be done.
In that light it seems like he got what’s coming to him, then. Evading the legal system is one thing. Making a mockery of it is another, and that can’t be allowed due to reason #1 in my previous post. Looks like he’ll be going the way of the Pirate Bay–down under. Making an example out of him is probably worth the political strutting in this instance.
That does change things.
Everyone should be aware that the Virginia lolicon case should have an answer if the Supreme Court will hear it, either this year (making it a 2010 case) or next year (making it a 2011 case) - or not at all (making it legal to punish cartoon porn in the state of Virginia):
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,470524,00.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28319199
The Virginia court and the district appeals court are challenging the Protect Act from another angle. What the Supreme Court does, will finally remove any “doubt” about the whole subject… since that’s what’s being specifically addressed.
I really don’t like the wording they’re using. “it is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exists”. I don’t know whether to applaud them for interpreting the law as it is and now how they want it to be, or slap them for upholding a law that so flagrantly, broadly and oppressively infringes on freedom of expression.
20 years is far too excessive, I think
I also didn’t like how Whorley’s instruction to the jury to consider the work as a whole when evaluating whether it is ‘obscene’ under the Miller test was not passed on; this seemed reasonable enough given that the Miller test has this very low threshold for ‘artistic merit’ for a REASON. If the material in question was part of any sort of overall story with an actual plot it should have been fine - since the court specifically dismissed the claim that the depictions were protected under the First Amendment on the grounds that obscene materials are not protected under the First Amendment.
He’s a repeat offender though (registered sex offender): and the guy also had real child porn in his possession. 
See the problem is that Whorley is a convicted pedophile, and he’s fighting the charges related to the lolicon art. However he’s still guilty of child porn and violating the “spirit” of his parole. I think he wants a mistrial or something declared on the ruling so his term is lowered. This case isn’t a noble one, and not like the Ohio situation, where the guy was innocent of an actual crime.
This sucks because his actual criminal record, makes the prosecution connect that people who like lolicon are real pedophiles.
EDIT
Cops found 70 images. 20 of them were lolicon drawings. The other 50 were real child porn. (yea… that blog site belongs to a conservative…)