|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: If he wasn't sentenced then the verdict is held in absentia. posted by Audiophilander on April 01, 2003 at 05:27:09:
>>you claim that I make political remarks elsewhere on a regular basis on other Audio Asylum boards beside the Outside Asylum; I do not! I'll gladly call your bluff if you wish to pursue this line of reasoning. It is EXTREMELY rare for me to make a political comment, even a humorous aside, on one of the regular Asylum boards; if you have a list of examples, please post them<<<<<<
I have better things to do than search through your posts to prove a point about political posting on your part, so I will for now withdraw the accusation. I think you are just unaware of the degree to which your extreme left wing slant enters so many topics. You can bet I'll notice and call you on it if the mood strikes me and I see evidence in the future. ;^)
Polanski was convicted, and fled while waiting sentencing. That is not speculation, that is fact. Why he was not returned is beyond me.I find your ability to excuse any left wing politician or artist to be extrodinary. Is there any act any "artist" could undertake that would upset you ? The girl was 13 and he drugged her with qualudes. Somehow I think your propensity to see crime by an artist as just a misunderstanding or Faux Pax would change if it was your daughter.
Just a bit more on Pete Rose...
He did plead guilty, though not to betting on baseball games he was involved in. He did the time that was part of his plea bargin. He underwent counseling and has performed community service, yet he is still shut out of baseball. This for placing a wager on the outcome of a sporting event. Certainly not something he should have done in his position. He plead guilty and did the time. His crime did not, could damage the psyche of anyone, let alone a child, yet you do consider his crime to be worse than Polanski's rape (stautory) Polanski was convicted yet did not apologize nor do the time
I said in my post I liked Polanski's work, and I do pity him for the murder of his pregnant wife. Yet you seem to feel that that balances the equation. "Lose a wife, get a teen"I can not santion the giving of Academy Awards to fugitives from US justice.
Regards
Follow Ups:
... read the attached URL. Polanski, who can fairly be faulted for poor judgment and should have been aware of how statuatory sexual misconduct with a minor was frowned upon in the United States, wasn't "convicted" by a jury, but rather a Grand Jury who pressed for indictment. There was a plea bargain, but the judge appeared to renig on the deal which would've meant prison. If you read the entire enclosure, you'll see that he felt that he was justified in fleeing and extradition back to the US was denied by France; later, his fugitive status whittled down to a civil case and the underage girl, now an adult, negotiated for a settlement and requested NO prison time for Polanski.As for fugitives from US justice, there are lots of folks who have been abused by the justice system in this country as I stated earlier when mentioning the cases of Chaplin and those who were blacklisted under McCarthy. The bottom line is that art should not be constrained by the narrow perspectives of judges and legislators who would impose their biases on our lives. ART, in my informed opinion, exists for art's sake and should be appreciated without the imposition of any unrelated bias based on prejudice against the person or persons who created it.
nt
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: