|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Captain Corea

Joined: 28 Feb 2005 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
Not only that, but this man's mother was killed at Auschwitz, and his wife murdered by Charles Manson's gang. |
What in the world does that have to do with this case?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Julius

Joined: 27 Jul 2006
|
Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
polanski possibly didn't actually pay Geimer the sum from the settlement.
At least thats implied by this latest report:
Roman Polanski's victim asks court to drop charge against director
Los Angeles Times
October 26
The victim of Roman Polanski�s 1977 sex charge has asked an appellate court to drop the charge against the film director, saying the unceasing publicity has disrupted her family, job and health.
Since the director�s arrest last month, Samantha Geimer and her attorney have received close to 500 phone calls from media as far as Germany, Israel and Japan, attorney Lawrence Silver wrote in a statement filed Friday.
In 1993, Polanski settled a civil suit with Geimer and agreed to pay her at least $500,000. It is not known whether the director has paid the sum.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/10/samantha-geimer.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
Not only that, but this man's mother was killed at Auschwitz, and his wife murdered by Charles Manson's gang. |
What in the world does that have to do with this case?? |
Not necessarily anything, but courts often look at extenuating or peripheral circumstances in sentencing and even determining guilt. In this case, we can decide that them an has suffered enough and deserves the fair treatment we all do - namely, that the court follow the wishes of the victim, state, defendant, two judges (not to mention his many supporters).
| Julius wrote: |
polanski possibly didn't actually pay Geimer the sum from the settlement.
At least thats implied by this latest report:
Roman Polanski's victim asks court to drop charge against director
Los Angeles Times
October 26 |
If he hasn't paid here, and she STILL wants the case dropped, it only makes her wish that much more compelling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Polanski granted bail
Swiss: Polanski in jail until at least Monday
By BRADLEY S. KLAPPER, Associated Press Writer Bradley S. Klapper, Associated Press Writer � Fri Nov 27, 8:15 am ET
GENEVA � Roman Polanski will remain in a jail outside Zurich for at least three more days until he meets the security conditions of his bail, a Swiss official said Friday.
Polanski wouldn't be placed under house arrest in Switzerland before Monday, because he has yet to fulfill all the requirements to ensure that he stays in his chalet in the Swiss luxury resort of Gstaad, Justice Ministry spokesman Folco Galli said.
Galli did not elaborate, but the 76-year-old director must post $4.5 million bail, surrender his identity papers and be fitted with a monitoring bracelet.
Polanski cannot leave the chalet because the ministry is still deciding whether to extradite him to the United States for having sex in 1977 with a 13-year-old girl. Authorities in Los Angeles want him sentenced after 31 years as a fugitive.
Doubts over Polanski's whereabouts were answered Friday when the filmmaker's lawyer Lorenz Erni entered a prison in Winterthur, a city 16 miles (26 kilometers) northeast of Zurich.
Erni declined to speak to reporters after his 80-minute visit in the prison, where Polanski is being treated as an extradition detainee with more privileges than prisoners who have committed crimes in Switzerland.
...
The bail decision Wednesday was a major win for Polanski after a series of legal setbacks following his Sept. 26 arrest on a U.S. warrant as he arrived in Zurich to receive a lifetime achievement award at a film festival.
Polanski was accused of raping the girl after plying her with champagne and a Quaalude pill during a modeling shoot in 1977. He was initially indicted on six felony counts, including rape by use of drugs, child molesting and sodomy, but he pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of unlawful sexual intercourse.
In exchange, the judge agreed to drop the remaining charges and sentence him to prison for a 90-day psychiatric evaluation. The evaluator released Polanski after 42 days, but the judge said he was going to send him back to serve out the 90 days.
Polanski then fled the U.S. on Feb. 1, 1978, the day he was to be sentenced. He has lived since then in France, which does not extradite its citizens.
Polanski claims the U.S. judge and prosecutors acted improperly in his case, and his attorneys will argue before a California appeals court in December that the charges should be dismissed.
full article at link |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Junior

Joined: 18 Nov 2005 Location: the eye
|
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 4:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Another step closer....
US court rejects Polanski appeal
BBC , December 21st 2009
Film director Roman Polanski's attempt to have his sex case dismissed has been rejected by a California appeals court.
"Polanski's allegations urgently require full exploration and then, if indicated, curative action for the abuses alleged here."
Switzerland is expected to decide whether or not to extradite Polanksi within weeks, but he could appeal.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8425538.stm |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
As seen in so many of these cases, the reaction of people and systems in the victim's immediate environment, or adverse secondary effects, is often greater than any effects occurring from any sex which may have occurred.
Polanski victim wants director given time served
AP
Thu Jan 21, 6:39 am ET
LOS ANGELES � The attorney for the victim in Roman Polanski's 32-year-old sex case is joining his lawyers' bid to have the director sentenced in absentia to time served.
Attorney Lawrence Silver on Wednesday faxed to other lawyers in the case a motion he planned to file Thursday in Los Angeles Superior Court, asking that the director be sentence in absentia. On behalf of the victim, Samantha Geimer, Silver also is supporting a motion by Polanski's lawyers urging that Polanski be sentenced to time served.
Silver accused prosecutors of violating the California Constitution when they failed to tell Geimer of their plans to seek Polanski's extradition to the U.S.
Geimer was 13 when she met Polanski for a modeling shoot in Los Angeles in 1977.
Polanski ultimately pleaded guilty to one count of unlawful sexual intercourse as part of a plea deal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nautilus

Joined: 26 Nov 2005 Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
Posted: Mon Jan 25, 2010 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Polanski victim wants director given time served |
request denied.
L.A. judge denies plea to be sentenced in absentia
Jan 24
In denying Polanski's request, Espinoza cited a legal doctrine of fugitive disentitlement, which holds that a defendant who flees cannot call on the court for help.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118014222.html?categoryId=19&cs=1
Unless the Swiss authorities come to his rescue (which I think is likely) then its a relentless path back to the courtroom for Polanski.
Part of me hopes the swiss will let him off as I think the US is being unreasonable and inflexible. Another part of me relishes the entertaining prospect of a celebrity trial I suppose.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NovaKart
Joined: 18 Nov 2009 Location: Iraq
|
Posted: Mon Jan 25, 2010 2:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I know some people will shoot me down for this but I wonder what the point of this trial is. The victim doesn't want it. Roman Polanski hasn't been to America in 30 years so he's not a threat to the American public. The crime happened over 30 years ago. The most serious part of the crime, the fact that it was a rape, is not even up for prosecution. My guess would be those involved want to further their careers by bringing down a celebrity. He deserves what he gets but I think the justice department could find a better use of their time and money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
You can bet that if she wanted him to fry they'd listen to her!
Prosecutors argue Polanski victim can't alter case
By ANTHONY McCARTNEY, AP Entertainment Writer � Fri Apr 16
LOS ANGELES � Roman Polanski's victim cannot ask for the 32-year-old sex case to be dismissed against the fugitive director or otherwise impact the case, prosecutors argued in a court filing Friday.
In a filing to the California Second District Court of Appeal, Los Angeles County prosecutors argue a recent constitutional revision spelling out crime victims' rights does not grant them the power to determine the outcome of criminal cases.
They are also asking the appeals court to reject requests by Polanski's victim, Samantha Geimer, to have the case heard in another county and unseal recent testimony by a former prosecutor.
Prosecutors argue that granting her request for dismissal would "fundamentally alter the way in which crimes are prosecuted." The filing argues that if victims were parties to criminal cases, cases could be dropped either through intimidation, coercion or public pressure.
Geimer petitioned the appeals court to dismiss the case and make the other rulings in a March petition. That filing argued a 2008 constitutional amendment, dubbed Marsy's Law, gives victims more input into criminal cases. Geimer's attorney, Lawrence Silver, has argued twice before that the amendment meant his client's request for dismissal should be considered.
Silver did not return a phone message seeking comment Friday.
Geimer's filing is a separate appeal from one being pursued by Polanski's attorneys that seeks the appointment of a special counsel to investigate alleged judicial misconduct in the case.
The court has not yet ruled on Polanski's appeal.
California voters in November 2008 approved a measure that wrote specific victims' rights into the state constitution, including giving them more notice about criminal proceedings.
Geimer has repeatedly sought to have the case dismissed, arguing that renewed interest of the case and media coverage has led to her being repeatedly victimized.
Polanski was accused in 1977 of plying Geimer, then age 13, with champagne and part of a Quaalude pill then raping her at Jack Nicholson's house.
Polanski was indicted on six felony counts, including rape by use of drugs, child molesting and sodomy. He later pleaded guilty to one count of unlawful sexual intercourse.
Authorities are seeking Polanski's extradition from Switzerland so he can be sentenced on the charge. The Academy Award-winning director fled the United States on the eve of sentencing in 1978.
He remains on house arrest in his chalet in the Swiss luxury resort of Gstaad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sun May 09, 2010 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Don't trust extradition filing, Polanski argues
By ANTHONY McCARTNEY, AP Entertainment Writer � Fri May 7, 9:23 pm ET
LOS ANGELES � Roman Polanski's attorneys argued in court filings Friday that the Swiss government should not automatically assume an extradition request by Los Angeles prosecutors is accurate.
The statement is in response to a comment by a Swiss justice official, who told The Associated Press last month that officials there assume facts in an extradition request are correct. The official said the justice ministry was not interested in the transcripts of testimony offered in secret earlier this year by the former prosecutor who handled Polanski's case.
Polanski's attorneys contend the transcripts will show the extradition papers contain information prosecutors know is "false and materially incomplete."
The filing also argues that prosecutors want the Swiss to only consider what's included in official court records and ignore other evidence that proves misconduct in the case.
Los Angeles County District Attorney's spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons says the office won't comment, but will argue their position during a hearing Monday.
The office has opposed the transcripts' release, stating in a filing Thursday that they should only become public once Polanski is returned to Los Angeles. They say the Oscar-winning director's request should be rejected because he remains a fugitive.
Prosecutors want Polanski returned for sentencing on a 33-year-old unlawful sexual intercourse charge.
He pleaded guilty to having sex with a 13-year-old girl and fled in 1978 on the eve of sentencing after a judge said in private remarks that he intended to renege on a sentencing agreement.
The "Chinatown" and "Rosemary's Baby" director remains on house arrest at his chalet in the Swiss resort of Gstaad.
Swiss authorities have not said when they will rule on the extradition filing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kabrams

Joined: 15 Mar 2008 Location: your Dad's house
|
Posted: Sun May 09, 2010 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NovaKart wrote: |
I know some people will shoot me down for this but I wonder what the point of this trial is. The victim doesn't want it. Roman Polanski hasn't been to America in 30 years so he's not a threat to the American public. The crime happened over 30 years ago. The most serious part of the crime, the fact that it was a rape, is not even up for prosecution. My guess would be those involved want to further their careers by bringing down a celebrity. He deserves what he gets but I think the justice department could find a better use of their time and money. |
It's called The People v. Roman Polanski for a reason.
And the victim is not saying Polanski isn't guilty--she's saying "renewed interest of the case and media coverage has led to her being repeatedly victimized." She is also sick of hearing the details of her rape every time this case comes back.
It's so strange that everyone is acting like this woman is in Polanski's corner. She's not. She just wants it to be over so she can move on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NovaKart
Joined: 18 Nov 2009 Location: Iraq
|
Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I didn't suggest that she was in his camp. What I was saying , was that I think this trial is really a waste of time since there must be more important cases to deal with. The victim herself doesn't want to go through the trial again, probably because of the media attention that she will have to go through. They should just drop it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kabrams wrote: |
And the victim is not saying Polanski isn't guilty--she's saying "renewed interest of the case and media coverage has led to her being repeatedly victimized." She is also sick of hearing the details of her rape every time this case comes back.
It's so strange that everyone is acting like this woman is in Polanski's corner. She's not. She just wants it to be over so she can move on. |
She most certainly IS in his corner.
Samantha Geimer, Polanski's victim, doesn't back prison time for the director
| Quote: |
| Geimer, now a mother of four, has said repeatedly and publicly that she thinks Polanski was treated unfairly and expressed a desire for the case to be resolved without prison time. |
http://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/2010/04/19/samantha-geimer-victimized-by-roman-polanski-again/
| Quote: |
| In her attempt to end the case against Polanski, Samatha�s lawyer said "Samantha Geimer was first victimized by Polanski. Whatever harm was done to her 33 years ago by Polanski is now a memory. Samantha Geimer is currently victimized by the judicial system in the maintenance of a prosecution, stale of fact and devoid of current purpose." |
Last edited by bacasper on Mon May 10, 2010 9:55 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jeonmunka
Joined: 05 Oct 2009
|
Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
How come you can write 'vagina' and 'anus' on this site but you can't write '*beep*'(pen1s)?
It's very strange. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Mon May 10, 2010 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeonmunka wrote: |
How come you can write 'vagina' and 'anus' on this site but you can't write '*beep*'(pen1s)?
It's very strange. |
Because that is what gets people hot.
In a study of heterosexual pornography shown to heterosexual men and women, both groups responded most to scenes depicting erect male genitalia. Presumably this also applies to censors and those who manage swear filters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|