maybe her mom should have used more sense but it really gets me that (some) people actually hold her more accountable then polanski.whats wrong with some people?
@malkisern - 13 is too young to give consent. Also, she was drugged, and was in an altered state and thus unable to give consent. Therefore, on 2 technicalities, as well as on a moral basis, it IS RAPE!
Your assertion shows NO respect to the victim or her family. Things would NOT be different if she got the staring role. This is a child we're talking about, not an adult.
@Slipknotyk06 you talk about girl, which was not virgin since she was 8 y.o.
you talk about girl, having sex with few partners before R.P.
and you talk about director, in his time known as very controversial because of his satanic occult movies. It is not about respect to the victim, but realise the circumstances to understand whole situation.
I do not try to defend Polanski, I wouldn't touch girl, rather kick her off to her mother.
But in Hollywood in 70' mothers wasn't thinking like u now
@malkisern - Those are irrelevant, and the fact the child had been subjected to previous trauma makes what he did all the more sickening. The fact is HE had control over the situation and made the bad call. You're basically assigning guilt to people that are victims. Yes, the mother screwed up, but ultimately the mother didn't rape the 13 year old child. RP did.
@malkisern - He still is a sick bastard. The mom fucking up and getting the blame is like saying that when I'm riding in a friend's car and it gets rear ended that my friend is guilty for me getting hurt and my friend should pay for my bills and not the person that rear ended us. It enabled the situation, but my friend didn't directly cause me the injury just as the mother did not directly rape her own daughter.
@Slipknotyk06 not rly. Girl is not a car. And problem is, in hollywood 70's mothers was sending 8 years old girls to directors, to fuck them to get cast.
Srsly, comparing him to his environment, he isn't sick bastard.
Roman Polanski did what any normal human being with a sex drive and a private jet woulda done and all the fuckin hypocrites out there should quit with the witch hunt and stop blaming him for THEIR shortcomings in life
Stop excusing rapists in any way, or you get directly connected to his seriously dark, dark karma and God angry at you as well. Try to understand, that GOD made it happen that he is getting hunted for it after he managed to flee so long. God is getting him back to Justice. Merry Xmas all of you.
About the lawsuit over smoking. There's load of evidence that passive smoking is almost as big a scam as global warming. The difference is that the global warming scam affects every single person on the planet so more people know about it. The bottom line is, the freedoms are receding and even the science is being fudged to justify it. It's really disturbing.
It's not rape if people are consenting to sex. Statutory rape laws are stupid as fuck. Who gives a fuck about Roman Polanski. This is just in general, for all your crying whining dumb shits out there. If two kids in middle school or high school consent to have sex with each other, holding either of them on statutory "rape" is ridiculous. Young girls have been married off as young as 13 or whatever the fuck they used to do in ye olde days.
The personal tragedies Polanski endured are irrelevant to the crimes he committed. Imagine those who are wrongfully incarcerated for decades, only to be freed by DNA. Are they free to sodomize a 13 year old upon release because of the gross injustice they endure? It's ridiculous.....Polanski is an easy call. He should be punished severly, and his flight should factor into it.
If it were not for Polanski, the anti-satanic-cult would never started. Satanic Ritual Abuse would have gone unnoticed. Satanic Cults have tried to silence Polanski before - the Charles Manson Family even tried to assasinate him, but only succeeded in murdering his wife, Sharon Tate, and their unborn child. The International Satanist Movement has struck again, framing Polanski for the "statutory rape" of a 13-year old girl. This is a lie. ROMAN POLANSKI IS INNOCENT.
When you say England you mean the UK. Man I hate that. Also the laws where brought in to stop people abusing children and to make sure they could look after them. Yeah its an extreme case but on the whole the laws have made children safer.
how the hell do you spell his name wrong in the very first part of the video description so everybody who looks at the video sees it even if they don't click more info
you said you were sick when you made it but wouldn't you like want to look back at a video you made when you were sick once better to ensure that everything was alright? like how does this happen i do not understand
also he is a shithead rapist. he can make damn good movies but he is still a shithead rapist
If he was your run of the mill perv, people would be demanding he be locked away for life. But because he's famous, it's ok to drug and molest a child. Where's the consistency in the morality? He harmed a child and must be punished. What's there to think about?
This Polanski situation is interesting. If he wasn't a renowned director people might not be defending him, but also if he wasn't such a recognizable name the Swiss probably wouldn't have caught him and the US justice system might not even bother with him.
My opinion: time and popularity shouldn't give people a free pass on committing heinous crimes, if you don't think rape is cool you should be all for Polanski facing justice, it looks I can actually agree with HTWW on something, for once =)
If this gov't had the balls, we'ed demand to get him, or else. And than act on the "or else." we've done it before, and that was before we became a world power.
Certainly rape is not a behavior that is conducive to a functioning social order, though I imagine it has been more prevalent, and even socially acceptable throughout history.
However, locking rapists up in jail is certainly NOT going to alleviate the problem. Prison is an incredibly inhumane, in-efficient, and unsuccessful means of reforming or curbing peoples choices of behavior.
A crime like rape clearly has an underlying psychological basis, what the perp needs is therapy not punishment.
The girl, now 45, has said more than once that she forgives him, that she can live with the memory, that she does not want him to be put back in court or in jail, and that a new trial will hurt her husband and children. There is evidence of judicial misconduct in the original trial. There is evidence that Polanski did not know her real age.
Her forgiving him doesn't alleviate his guilt. It is great that the victim was able to recover from such a horrible crime and be able to forgive the monster. He was convicted because he was guilty. When he comes back he will have plenty opportunity to explain himself to a judge and jury. I like most of his movies and he should feel lucky he had the chance to make them.
Well lets say he really thought she was 18, why did he have to drug her then? Why didnt he take her home when she begged to go home and said no? I would think despite age that he would realize forcing sex is still wrong.
the founding fathers did not know about how easy it is to get a AK-47 on the street ..... in 2009.... back in 1791... we should all consider that me thinks
I like Polanski. I think that if any one who has great talent is put into jail then he should be able to exercise it. If society can benefit from it then he should be able to do it. In exchange for that he would be able for example to get the VIP cell that VIP's get now anyway.
Tenth Amendment is pretty clear Mr. Constitutional expert. There is no "power" to infringe the right to bear arms which is explicitly prohibited from the Federal goverment "to the states." Therefore it is a power reserved respectively to the people. Meaning only an individual can decide for themselves whether they choose to be armed.
Doesn't mean half the idiots on the SCOTUS will understand plain english, but that IS what it means.
It's funny how liberals never give a shit about taxpayer money but now have all these concerns over 50K per year to incarcerate a person who commited a heinious crime against a child. Why not just come out and say the real reason is because you adore his work and he's a lovely liberal because we all know that if we were talking about a conservative here you'd be foaming at the mouth for revenge. What a transparent phony.
For the authorities do not frighten people who are doing right, but they frighten those who do wrong.-Romans 13:3
He knew what he did was wrong. That's why he left.
"You like to look good in public, but God knows your evil hearts. What this world honors is an abomination in the sight of God."-Luke 16:15.
He's not geting away with anything...even if they do let him go scot free. One day he will have an appointment with death and will have to give an account on what he did to that child.
English people don't have rights. One of the reasons that America and my country are both better then England is that we both have constitutions. Britain does not have a constitution, and they don't seem to want one.
Roman Polanski is a pedophile. He should face the death penalty, and if he uses the defence of "Wah, wah my parents died in the holocaust" defence then he should be going to a mental hospital thingy.
about the roman polanski thing you should have adressed what the victim said ("I think he's sorry, I think he knows it was wrong. I don't think he's a danger to society. I don't think he needs to be locked up forever and no one has ever come out ever — besides me — and accused him of anything. It was 30 years ago now. It's an unpleasant memory ... (but) I can live with it.") no matter what you think about it, you should have stated your opinion on that.
She also said that it's never too late to correct a wrong and that it's never too late for justice to be served. My guess is that you probably went and took a leak during that part of the film otherwise you wouldn't have omitted it. Right?
I see. Well the next time you have a violent criminal in your community get sentenced to prison why don't you put your money in your mouth and suggest to the court that he serve his time in your home? Afterall you're so enlightened that I'm sure you'd know how to cure him of his evil ways.
No no..its a British government telling people that a childminder must be licensed and therefore submit to safety checks when looking after someone else's children. They should not make exceptions on these rules because where then will the lines be drawn? This may be a cheap point against govt interference for you but it remains important to license childminders. Okay..Lee??
So what if Polanski is an artistic genius? He is a human being just like the next man, and he is just as responsible for his actions as the next criminal.
The only thing that would make me hesitate to jail him would be the fact that his victim Samantha Gailey, now 47 is asking the judicial system not to drag her through this again. I don't suppose Polanski may be convicted without her testimony?
The fact that the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment does include individual rights and cut out a huge portion of the 2nd Amendment was absolutely appalling. There is nothing special to gain from saying that there are constitutional rights. Anyway, as for the power of the states? I say, sure. I just hope people realize that even if there was a ruling for a right to bear arms on the individual level, it's not a right to own whatever you want.
He was convicted on only one of many charges due to a plea bargain. His only charge is unlawful sex with a minor.
Most people believe Polanski drugged and raped her, even if some evidence in the case is contrary to those beliefs. They also believe Polanski is a pedophile, which is also contrary to the opinion of legit psychiatrists (not a phD or Md in Youtubing) that actually interviewed and examined Polanski after the accusations.
The first Amendment in a clear basic reading refers only to the federal gov. "Congress shall make no law with regards to" The second amend simply says "shall not be infringed", clearly covering any and ALL infringement. ANY law (regulation, etc.) infringing someones right and ability to "keep and bear arms" is unconstitutional under a basic reading of the 2nd amendment.
I personally adore the fried goldfish story. It's the neatest tidbit in years.They didn't feel a thing! Hopefully the court costs were non-existent, too!
Of course Roman Polanski should face criminal charges! That's a pretty big no brainer really. And I have to say, I like this less flashy version of your newscast. I feel like I learn more, and it gives me less of a headache haha.
The reason is because drugging and forcibly ass-raping 13 year old girls is a right of passage for Europeans. They all do it.
At least that's the only way their opinion makes any sense. What monsters.
Let this be a lesson not to look to the European or Hollywood elite for anything good. They drive nice cars but inside they are the worst garbage on earth.
That's a pretty unfounded hasty generalization based on a few rash opinions.
Public polls in France show that the majority of the public wants Polanski extradited back to the US, and Poland chemically castrates child molesters.
Hollywood backs Polanski up because they are bias and possibly in a level of denial. "Polanski is a good guy, that is who I know, he couldn't have done this!" The same thing is said by most friends and family members of all criminals.
I strongly agree. The fact that he's a brilliant director doesn't make him any less of a pedophile or rapist. If you're convicted via due process, then you serve your time. When we start making exceptions, the system falls apart.
The way the victim feels about the situation is unfortunate, but to simply let him go would carry his own set of nasty implications itself.
He isn't a pedophile. Polanski was interviewed and examined by psychiatrists after his offense, and they concluded he is not a pedophile. There is even reasonable doubt as to whether he "raped" her or not.
He hasn't been convicted of actual rape, just statutory rape. The other charges were never put through due process.
Agreed. I think there is a lot of misleading going on here on Youtube. When you say he drugged her and raped her you are certainly giving a false impression. As TheMadStangler has said he was convicted for statutory rape. Not only this but so many people are being all high and mighty about it, I think he was also charged with sodomy are you all for that charge too? I think we should all move on with the victim's wishes.
I'm some what ambivalent on this issue, not because of time, but because the now-45-year-old woman he raped wants the charges dropped. While I certainly feel that he needs to be punished, if punishing him makes it harder for her to get on with her life...
Absolutely Polansky needs to be punished. He is an ADMITTED rapist, under heinous conditions. The punishment is as much for the victim as it is for society as a whole. You do this, and this is what will happen to you. That Hollywood elite is upset by this shouldn't come as a surprise. They are so out of touch with middle America it's amazing.
Being from AZ I believe the states do have the rights, but not to disarm. I have a right to protect myself from the thugs who will always get them.
Polanski seduced and intoxicated a minor who was there because of a discussion and promise of a role. But he drugged her, performed oral sex on this 13 yr. old, raped her sexually and then performed anal sex on her. This is a clearcut case and he confessed afterwards. Hollywood always have been poor judge on morality..that is why they influenced a lot of people and destroy lives through their movies which promote promiscuity and violence. I hope these stars should be boycotted.
Polanski needs some help. I wouldn't send an 18-year-old boy to jail for having sex with a 16-year-old girl, but the Polanski case wasn't just statutory rape.
It involved other crimes and he was a LOT older than his victim. Polanski is sick.
The way I understand the constitution is that it was written for a federation of states. I may not be using the word "federation" in a 100% accurate sense. What I mean is that the States are sovereign, and delegate some of their authority to the federal government for certain common goals. Just as the people of the US delegate some of their power to their representatives, the people are considered to be ultimately in charge.
So, I think the constitution only restricts the federal government.
The way I understand it, if an individual state wants to outlaw guns, it has that legal prerogative.
See, if the Court takes the side of the NRA, then the Federal government will be considered the master of the states. So for example, Arizona cannot opt out of Obamacare [it has already resolved to do so].
However, if my interpretation is correct, it is curious as to how Abraham Lincoln could justify using force to keep the southern states from seceding.
So a state can take away your freedom of speech too? Take away writ of habeas corpus or right to a speedy trial? Force you to quarter national guard troops in your house?
So if the constituiton only restricts the federal government, does that mean that the state governments have the right to nullify your protection from illegal search and seizure? Does that mean that the state has the right to nullify protection from self incrimination? What about freedom of the press? See what I'm saying? If the bill of rights are truly inalienable rights, then NO ONE state, local, or federal has the right to nullify or place burdensome restrictions on constitutional rights.
Exactly. Sotomayor said the Fed Gov't can't take away our right to keep and bear arms, but the states could. No, they can't, just as they can't take away any other rights like free speech, writ of habeas corpus, et al. The 2nd amendment says "The right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." the same way the 1st amendment says "The right of the People to peaceably assemble..."
The Constitution is not able to be interpreted. It says what it says, and means what it says.
Sotomayor doesn't give a crap about the constitution or justice, she just wants a racial spoils system.
Obama attended the most vicious racially charged hate rallies at Rev. Wright's church for twenty years. The audience cheered when the preacher screamed that AIDS was invented by whites to genocide blacks.
Look at Sotomayor's trial history, she always decides with the constitution. In fact thats what some dems where complain about, that even though she personally is liberal she has been known to make conservative rulings when she believes the constitution is on that side.
And I'd hardly call Rev. Wright's church the "most vicious racially charged hate rallies". Nobody got killed, I think the KKK or the Nazi's might be just a bit more entitled to that name then anyone else.
A judges whole job is to interpret the constitution. Its not as black and white as you'd like to think. Its just like any other written document, like the bible or the quran, it can be taken and manipulated by people to mean what they want it too. Thats why we appoint judges who are supposed to be well educated on the law and constitution. And thats why people make a fuss about a judges political views. Even the founding fathers new it was complicated, thats why they created the judicial system.
A judge does not interpret the constitution, the same way they don't set policy. If they could interpret it, it's the same as them making their own laws or setting their own policy (which is what Sotomayor said is her job)
The Constitution has laws, and they are clear as black and white. That is why it's not a 1000 pages long like the stimulus or health care bill. Good grief...
Ok... my take. 1. I do believe the states have the right determine and run their own government, however I do not believe that applies to negating the amendments in the bill of rights. Would it make sense if the state had the power to negate any other amendments in the bill of rights? What cities like Chicago and states like Illinois, Mass., NJ, and CA are doing is without a doubt unconstitutional. 2. Read Finemans blog on Newsweek. True its biased, but even they are sensing Chicago will lose.
Yea her parents should be put in prison also. For child abuse, considering somehow she was 13 years of age taking drugs and in a jacuzzi at 11:30pm at night.
Sure that is the American way let your kids do what-ever the fuck they want and help ruin their future. Oh yes the irony of young independence without parental supervision.
Give me a break. If her parents were there to stop all of this. None of it would of happened. The parents were SLOBS. Simple.
I truly cannot believe the comments on this subject. One comment truly shows the lack of any intelligence or morality self imposed or otherwise. The comment that 14 year olds having sex has nothing to do with drugging a minor and having forced sexual relations with her. Really all other arguments are moot. Unless you are a criminal you do not drug women( regardless of age) to rape, but doing it on a 13 year old really shows the level of depravity one will seek (and those defending such actions)
How about the fact that the girl who was raped says he should walk free because he's suffered enough? I think that pretty much ends the discussion. The victim should ultimately get the last word.
IT'S POLITICAL--did you listen to the French TV clip? He has a house in Switzerland. The balance of justice requires he be freed immediately. Many attractive 14 yo girls (though I won't say 13) have sex. Corruption as usual here. All these creeps who write Bible-Bash garbage are probably either exactly that, or are from the political dealers.
truthgroove: I agree. This is all tactics to promote what hey see if fit. They could careless about real news coverage or the corruption that continues to run ramped in our own government for that matter.
This is not justice rather entertainment regardless of outcome. Its self-interest, and their means of self-preservation. Just promote bullshit rather than prosecute their criminal buddies. You have a millionaire news casting spokesman talking about morality. Ha!
Well, he was having an obvious mental break down. His wife was also pregnant with his child when she was murdered. The girl who was raped has also said that she has forgiven him or something along those lines, and I think that that is the main arguement for not being punished.
But with all that said, I do think he should be prosecuted, because it'd be pretty disgusting for him to have literally nothing happen to him. but I think the person he raped should definitely have a say in what happens.
If that girl is still alive, I think we should leave the punishment up to her. Of course she'd be a woman by now. But I am curious what she would say.
What does she want done to the man. Go from there.
Perverts like Polanski never stop. I believe they should be made to dig their own grave, and then shot in the head. But, isn't there a 7 year time limit on criminal prosecutions (other than murder)? Was he tried and convicted without being present?
Hollywood's arrogant promotion of cesspit filth is mind-boggling.
Polanski should go to trail in the states for the rape of the 13 year old girl. Doesn't matter when it happen. Anybodyd else would have been jailed long, long ago.
That's one nice herpe! I mean cut, shave, boo boo! Didn't the judge give him a plea bargain and then back off from it so he Polansky left, I can't blame him. Hey lee I'd like you to admit that Mexicans and most illegals coming into the country from S American countries are Native Americans. By that I mean their ancestors were INDIANS or indigenous to this continent no Ellis Island check was needed cuz they were here since Columbus. Illegals don't pay a consolidated property tax do you?
Oh please don't put Roman Polanski in jail. This is something he did many years ago so it doesn't matter anymore. I'm sure her hemorrhoids have healed by now. He is so cool just ask all the Hollywood people who support him. It's not like he was some evil hypocritical conservative guy. I mean if he was, people in Hollywood would want him hunted down years ago and given the death penalty right? Feel sorry for him. He is so talented and important and has contributed so much to our culture. NOT!
HTWW, I don't think there is an issue forr the state's and gun ownership. The states can't decide what religion you worship, they can't decide what you can and can't say, they can't limit any of the other rights (barring those actions that might infringee on another's rights). So why should states have the right to limit individual's right to bear arms?
HTWW check out TYT's video titled "Rep. Grayson - Repub HC Plan, DONT GET SICK" and watch after 5 mintues in and you will see lunatics.
I like how to take that guy completely seriously, I don't just to state. And also how you don't call the republicans talking about death panels "lunatics."
what's wrong with death penalty? The death penalty varies upon states and the US government should respect states rights which is a non partisan issue.
? I said "panels" dude lol /=D ...be sure to check exactly what I said.
but for death penalty, how can you dictate who gets to live? just because it is a governing body doesn't give it the right to say who shall live and die because of what they did, that fact doesn't justify the act. For me it is a gross thought to have power decide who gets put down when they are there to provide safety and service to the people. Living is a bigger punishment, imo.
I'm still stunned at who in Hollywood is coming out on Polanski's side -- lots of folks' movies I'll be avoiding now. Shouldn't the laws apply to everyone? Apparently not, according to the elitists on the left. I expected that Woody Allen would support it, of course, but good grief. "It's not 'rape' rape" indeed -- I don't care how you parse it, you gotta be kidding me.
Roman Polanski the ARTIST is great. Roman Polanski the MAN has lived through numerous tragedies, but he's guilty, and admitted so.If he wants to make his case for appeal he has to come to CA,PERIOD.Otherwise, hes a fugitive.
There are two reasons that I can see. One would be to expedite the process of criminal justice. The second would be to spare the victims the ordeal of a criminal trial. Few would ask a thirteen-year-old girl to voluntarily re-live her experience of rape in front of a courtroom audience.
In either case, though, it's a moot point. The man pled guilty to the crime, hence it has been decided in court. He fled sentencing, and thus broke the law.
Aardvark, you say he pled guilty to the crime...but he pled guilty only to unlawful intercourse with a minor...this is far other than the original charge of drugging her and then viciously raping her as she tried to resist.
Your second reason makes more sense than your first reason. Maybe they didn't want to put the girl through the pain of reliving the rape. I think he partied with a minor, which is pretty sick,but it isn't the ted bundyesque crime that they originally accused him of.
The "victim" of Polanski's wish the whole case would go away. She doesn't want him to be punished, something she presented before the courts. Why would they pursue this so vigorously anyway?
BTW, according to her, the courts perpetrated more harm to her life, then the supposed "rape" by Roman!
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
The best thing i have ever heard you say Howtheworldworks :) I couldn't agree more! The prick needs to face the consequences of the crime he committed and his fame should not grant him immunity.
If Polanski had sex with a willing, un-druged 13 year old, it would be stat. rape.
If he had drugged an 18 yo and knowingly had sex against her will, it would be rape. Rape-rape, Whoopi.
What I don't understand is that feminists insist men don't take rape seriously enough, yet are remarkably silent on Polanski/Whoopi.
2d Amd: The BOR restricts state action (see preamble), the BOR does not GRANT rights. The RIGHT to keep and bear arms SHALL not be infringed. Pretty clear to me.
Read Polanski's 1979 Tattler interview with Martin Amis. The interview is also in Amis' book "Visiting Mrs Nabokov: And Other Excursions"
His quotes are extremely disgusting.
I forgot the latest rumor. Is Glenn Beck going to slaughter Hutu's, Tutsi's, or Bette Midler? And does Glenn Beck agree to do it? I don't think he has the time.
Fucking idiots sitting here arguing. If YOU raped a little girl you'd go the hell to jail. Stop challenging the system. He should have been in jail decades ago.
The thing about punishing crimes isn't just about taking a dangerous person out of society. It is important for people to know that you will get justice for doing something really wrong. We don't want people who dream about rape to think, "oh, so as long as I move away, I can get away with it."
so how old he was when that happen 18-19 ?
aquaoceann 6 months ago
the system sucks, the girl wanted to do it, thats not rape.
M23MATERAZZI 9 months ago
Comment removed
Siva3Enthroned 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@M23MATERAZZI The girl said otherwise actually you dimwit. She was forced to have anal sex.
Siva3Enthroned 9 months ago
death to all peados
GonzosTwinbro 11 months ago
maybe her mom should have used more sense but it really gets me that (some) people actually hold her more accountable then polanski.whats wrong with some people?
ptsmmrs 1 year ago
to be honest, he fucked not raped this lil girl. Her mother should burn in hell letting her be young bitchslap gurl.
what is 13' y.o. kiddo girl doing in Jacks Nickolsons house in swimming pool with director.
And he escaped, because there is 243234 that kind of actions like this in Hollywood between girls and directors.
Only ONLY! problem is he gave her no starring so court mode: ON.
Regards haters.
malkisern 1 year ago
@malkisern - 13 is too young to give consent. Also, she was drugged, and was in an altered state and thus unable to give consent. Therefore, on 2 technicalities, as well as on a moral basis, it IS RAPE!
Your assertion shows NO respect to the victim or her family. Things would NOT be different if she got the staring role. This is a child we're talking about, not an adult.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06 you talk about girl, which was not virgin since she was 8 y.o.
you talk about girl, having sex with few partners before R.P.
and you talk about director, in his time known as very controversial because of his satanic occult movies. It is not about respect to the victim, but realise the circumstances to understand whole situation.
I do not try to defend Polanski, I wouldn't touch girl, rather kick her off to her mother.
But in Hollywood in 70' mothers wasn't thinking like u now
malkisern 1 year ago
@malkisern - Those are irrelevant, and the fact the child had been subjected to previous trauma makes what he did all the more sickening. The fact is HE had control over the situation and made the bad call. You're basically assigning guilt to people that are victims. Yes, the mother screwed up, but ultimately the mother didn't rape the 13 year old child. RP did.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06 yeah, basicallly my point is, RP wasnt sick bastard rushing this girl arround, like they was going to make him looking like.
malkisern 1 year ago
@malkisern - He still is a sick bastard. The mom fucking up and getting the blame is like saying that when I'm riding in a friend's car and it gets rear ended that my friend is guilty for me getting hurt and my friend should pay for my bills and not the person that rear ended us. It enabled the situation, but my friend didn't directly cause me the injury just as the mother did not directly rape her own daughter.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06 not rly. Girl is not a car. And problem is, in hollywood 70's mothers was sending 8 years old girls to directors, to fuck them to get cast.
Srsly, comparing him to his environment, he isn't sick bastard.
malkisern 1 year ago
Polanski raped a young girl he should goto jail;
Whats the next step maybe government should require mothers to be certified to take care of their own children (sarcasm);
Do States have the right to take away any of my other liberties other than guns, say speech;
Ppl who play physical sports are more prone to physical problems who woulda guessed;
Illumified 1 year ago
Good, bring him back.
Kamidake83 1 year ago
Freedom to Roman Polanski!!!
Pmitsou123 1 year ago
@Pmitsou123 You like rapists?
yuffs 1 year ago
@Pmitsou123 and why do you want him free?do you have a reason or are you just throwing that stupid shit out there to try to get people worked up?
ptsmmrs 1 year ago
Roman Polanski did what any normal human being with a sex drive and a private jet woulda done and all the fuckin hypocrites out there should quit with the witch hunt and stop blaming him for THEIR shortcomings in life
epsilon8998 1 year ago
@epsilon8998 You're a pathetic perv if you think any NORMAL human would do such a thing
ocanator 1 year ago
Stop excusing rapists in any way, or you get directly connected to his seriously dark, dark karma and God angry at you as well. Try to understand, that GOD made it happen that he is getting hunted for it after he managed to flee so long. God is getting him back to Justice. Merry Xmas all of you.
MysteryGardenProd 2 years ago
Ask his victim.
Why account his personal history and loss?
You're a d-bag for creating false causes, especially as such.
natholomew 2 years ago
it would be fair if you mention
what charges were dropped
be more precise
he won't get more than 2 years so hold your horses
tom123ek 2 years ago
nice voice
tv is your oyster
tom123ek 2 years ago
yet another eye witness ;
he won't get more than 2 years so
it was a good idea to split when facing a judicial lynch.
tom123ek 2 years ago
About the lawsuit over smoking. There's load of evidence that passive smoking is almost as big a scam as global warming. The difference is that the global warming scam affects every single person on the planet so more people know about it. The bottom line is, the freedoms are receding and even the science is being fudged to justify it. It's really disturbing.
pharaoh337 2 years ago
Google "Sierra Peterson Elite Human Trafficking"
A woman's experience as a sex slave.
Check out MK-Ultra and Monarch
CIA experiments with trauma induced brainwashing
nasem89 2 years ago
MaicoMoon i agree!
So many girls even younger than 13 have sex with older man!
Just for example arabianO.o
So many men "rape" girls there and nobodys chasinn THEM -.-
KonohaChisai 2 years ago
It's not rape if people are consenting to sex. Statutory rape laws are stupid as fuck. Who gives a fuck about Roman Polanski. This is just in general, for all your crying whining dumb shits out there. If two kids in middle school or high school consent to have sex with each other, holding either of them on statutory "rape" is ridiculous. Young girls have been married off as young as 13 or whatever the fuck they used to do in ye olde days.
MaicoMoon 2 years ago
I think that everyone in Washington should destroy most federal laws and just sit there. I think Roman needs to see a shrink.
KyleClarkUSA 2 years ago
The personal tragedies Polanski endured are irrelevant to the crimes he committed. Imagine those who are wrongfully incarcerated for decades, only to be freed by DNA. Are they free to sodomize a 13 year old upon release because of the gross injustice they endure? It's ridiculous.....Polanski is an easy call. He should be punished severly, and his flight should factor into it.
Loved your critique of stuff. Fantastic work.
greengoatcake 2 years ago
Tie him to a rail and feed him to a sawmill feet first.
NikovK 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If it were not for Polanski, the anti-satanic-cult would never started. Satanic Ritual Abuse would have gone unnoticed. Satanic Cults have tried to silence Polanski before - the Charles Manson Family even tried to assasinate him, but only succeeded in murdering his wife, Sharon Tate, and their unborn child. The International Satanist Movement has struck again, framing Polanski for the "statutory rape" of a 13-year old girl. This is a lie. ROMAN POLANSKI IS INNOCENT.
undergroundresistor 2 years ago
When you say England you mean the UK. Man I hate that. Also the laws where brought in to stop people abusing children and to make sure they could look after them. Yeah its an extreme case but on the whole the laws have made children safer.
doddsoreric 2 years ago
Full of crap too about cutting yourself shaving. It's herpes.
FlexManE 2 years ago
He got herpes from your mother.
gnsexe 2 years ago
how the hell do you spell his name wrong in the very first part of the video description so everybody who looks at the video sees it even if they don't click more info
you said you were sick when you made it but wouldn't you like want to look back at a video you made when you were sick once better to ensure that everything was alright? like how does this happen i do not understand
also he is a shithead rapist. he can make damn good movies but he is still a shithead rapist
kelsbackonyoutub 2 years ago
Its a hard call, I think he's a sick dude and for sure he needs help.
He should pay some kind of price but he's still needs help.
tvshowclassics 2 years ago
Disparate Treatment isn't just for Minorities anymore! at least if the frenchies and Che Wearing Actors get their way.
asderathos 2 years ago
I used to feel sorry for Polanski after having his wife murdered.
But now I regret Manson didn't show up and off him as well.
If Cali does close its prisons I propose making Polanski live with him as a condition of amnesty. That'll teach him.
mainestategop 2 years ago
If he was your run of the mill perv, people would be demanding he be locked away for life. But because he's famous, it's ok to drug and molest a child. Where's the consistency in the morality? He harmed a child and must be punished. What's there to think about?
4gottenhistory 2 years ago
There is one law. Just one.
henrycate 2 years ago
This Polanski situation is interesting. If he wasn't a renowned director people might not be defending him, but also if he wasn't such a recognizable name the Swiss probably wouldn't have caught him and the US justice system might not even bother with him.
My opinion: time and popularity shouldn't give people a free pass on committing heinous crimes, if you don't think rape is cool you should be all for Polanski facing justice, it looks I can actually agree with HTWW on something, for once =)
peterpaulson 2 years ago
He could of had this behind him along time ago,but just like most in Hollyweird, he thinks he's above the law.
gunnyranger2 2 years ago 2
That's hypothetical.
Jcolinsol 2 years ago
If this gov't had the balls, we'ed demand to get him, or else. And than act on the "or else." we've done it before, and that was before we became a world power.
korwinblue 2 years ago
Certainly rape is not a behavior that is conducive to a functioning social order, though I imagine it has been more prevalent, and even socially acceptable throughout history.
However, locking rapists up in jail is certainly NOT going to alleviate the problem. Prison is an incredibly inhumane, in-efficient, and unsuccessful means of reforming or curbing peoples choices of behavior.
A crime like rape clearly has an underlying psychological basis, what the perp needs is therapy not punishment.
Jcolinsol 2 years ago
The girl, now 45, has said more than once that she forgives him, that she can live with the memory, that she does not want him to be put back in court or in jail, and that a new trial will hurt her husband and children. There is evidence of judicial misconduct in the original trial. There is evidence that Polanski did not know her real age.
veramaksymiuk 2 years ago
Comment removed
ETicketM 2 years ago
Her forgiving him doesn't alleviate his guilt. It is great that the victim was able to recover from such a horrible crime and be able to forgive the monster. He was convicted because he was guilty. When he comes back he will have plenty opportunity to explain himself to a judge and jury. I like most of his movies and he should feel lucky he had the chance to make them.
pizzaslapper 2 years ago
There's no judge & jury left! He was found guilty and fled jail. When he is dragged back here, he will be put in jail. No chit-chat needed.
henrycate 2 years ago
Well lets say he really thought she was 18, why did he have to drug her then? Why didnt he take her home when she begged to go home and said no? I would think despite age that he would realize forcing sex is still wrong.
sagebates 2 years ago
The states cannot override the Constitution. They cannot take away freedom of speech, and they can't take away the right to keep and bear arms.
Rajaat99 2 years ago
if he wasn't rich
if he wasn't popular
no one would care even if we gave him the death penalty
bogustube 2 years ago 3
the founding fathers did not know about how easy it is to get a AK-47 on the street ..... in 2009.... back in 1791... we should all consider that me thinks
jweber000 2 years ago
Im always amazed how how angry political comments get! Dude he is one guy, dont expect him to be all knowing, obviously he isnt.
Roman should go through our legal system just like any person who has commited a crime.
Just because we have rights granted by the constitution doesnt seem to stop individual politicians from trying to take them away!
Great show, keep up the great work.
SRT480 2 years ago 9
@SRT480
I like Polanski. I think that if any one who has great talent is put into jail then he should be able to exercise it. If society can benefit from it then he should be able to do it. In exchange for that he would be able for example to get the VIP cell that VIP's get now anyway.
serialkiller1990 7 months ago
FREE ROMAN POLANSKI
raceace1000 2 years ago
Tenth Amendment is pretty clear Mr. Constitutional expert. There is no "power" to infringe the right to bear arms which is explicitly prohibited from the Federal goverment "to the states." Therefore it is a power reserved respectively to the people. Meaning only an individual can decide for themselves whether they choose to be armed.
Doesn't mean half the idiots on the SCOTUS will understand plain english, but that IS what it means.
GT6N8 2 years ago
the question is ...what do you hope to accomplish by bringing him here now- it happened 30 years ago. He has a clean record since.
it would be a waste of taxpayers money....50,000 dollars a year on incarceration.
and i mean this would apply to anyone....not just cuz hes a film director.
in addition, the girl who he raped does not even want this to be revisited. it would open strange wounds for her.
shes now somewhere in her 40,s
no wonder were broke as a nation.
norcal999 2 years ago
It's funny how liberals never give a shit about taxpayer money but now have all these concerns over 50K per year to incarcerate a person who commited a heinious crime against a child. Why not just come out and say the real reason is because you adore his work and he's a lovely liberal because we all know that if we were talking about a conservative here you'd be foaming at the mouth for revenge. What a transparent phony.
BULLD0GBIANSKI 2 years ago 2
I agree that Polanski be charged. He fled the country, and 20 years ago or 1 year ago he's not excempt.
ortoncourt56 2 years ago
For the authorities do not frighten people who are doing right, but they frighten those who do wrong.-Romans 13:3
He knew what he did was wrong. That's why he left.
"You like to look good in public, but God knows your evil hearts. What this world honors is an abomination in the sight of God."-Luke 16:15.
He's not geting away with anything...even if they do let him go scot free. One day he will have an appointment with death and will have to give an account on what he did to that child.
sldeyo 2 years ago
stop invoking god you little bitch.......
your dumb bible should be surnt
norcal999 2 years ago
youre a cheap sinner and going to hell
norcal999 2 years ago
And about the English childcare thing.
English people don't have rights. One of the reasons that America and my country are both better then England is that we both have constitutions. Britain does not have a constitution, and they don't seem to want one.
DieChavScum 2 years ago
For once(Well... rarely I do) I completely agree.
Roman Polanski is a pedophile. He should face the death penalty, and if he uses the defence of "Wah, wah my parents died in the holocaust" defence then he should be going to a mental hospital thingy.
DieChavScum 2 years ago
about the roman polanski thing you should have adressed what the victim said ("I think he's sorry, I think he knows it was wrong. I don't think he's a danger to society. I don't think he needs to be locked up forever and no one has ever come out ever — besides me — and accused him of anything. It was 30 years ago now. It's an unpleasant memory ... (but) I can live with it.") no matter what you think about it, you should have stated your opinion on that.
1schwererziehbar1 2 years ago
She also said that it's never too late to correct a wrong and that it's never too late for justice to be served. My guess is that you probably went and took a leak during that part of the film otherwise you wouldn't have omitted it. Right?
BULLD0GBIANSKI 2 years ago
howz incarcerating someone serving justice?
it seems ur still a barbarian living in the stone age.....cheap, lowlife and spiritually so inferior.
purely pathetic.
norcal999 2 years ago
I see. Well the next time you have a violent criminal in your community get sentenced to prison why don't you put your money in your mouth and suggest to the court that he serve his time in your home? Afterall you're so enlightened that I'm sure you'd know how to cure him of his evil ways.
BULLD0GBIANSKI 2 years ago
No no..its a British government telling people that a childminder must be licensed and therefore submit to safety checks when looking after someone else's children. They should not make exceptions on these rules because where then will the lines be drawn? This may be a cheap point against govt interference for you but it remains important to license childminders. Okay..Lee??
RebeccaDeWinter1 2 years ago
THE LAW APPLIES TO EVERYONE EQUALLY
fuggsakes 2 years ago 8
So what if Polanski is an artistic genius? He is a human being just like the next man, and he is just as responsible for his actions as the next criminal.
The only thing that would make me hesitate to jail him would be the fact that his victim Samantha Gailey, now 47 is asking the judicial system not to drag her through this again. I don't suppose Polanski may be convicted without her testimony?
grungefreak10 2 years ago
She's already given her testimony. It's documented.
lilliansmart 2 years ago
Roman polanski should go to jail btw potatochip it is proven
rainick 2 years ago
A man who has sex with a 13 year old girl is more than a rapist. He is a pedophile.
He is also guilty of flight to avoid prosecution (or sentencing).
He should be jailed for many years.
averagejoe040 2 years ago 3
The fact that the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment does include individual rights and cut out a huge portion of the 2nd Amendment was absolutely appalling. There is nothing special to gain from saying that there are constitutional rights. Anyway, as for the power of the states? I say, sure. I just hope people realize that even if there was a ruling for a right to bear arms on the individual level, it's not a right to own whatever you want.
FrostbittenWolf 2 years ago
That Chester should be shot...you NEVER mess with the KIDS...that is just sickening.
dohcholliday 2 years ago
was he ever convicted? yes I agree he should be brought back to face a jury but remember, its innocent until proven guilty. Not the other way around.
potatochipsunsalted 2 years ago
He was convicted. He pled guilty.
He fled the country before sentencing.
MountAthos 2 years ago
alright, thanks for letting me know. Then I totally agree with how the world works....for once. He should go to jail.
potatochipsunsalted 2 years ago
He was convicted on only one of many charges due to a plea bargain. His only charge is unlawful sex with a minor.
Most people believe Polanski drugged and raped her, even if some evidence in the case is contrary to those beliefs. They also believe Polanski is a pedophile, which is also contrary to the opinion of legit psychiatrists (not a phD or Md in Youtubing) that actually interviewed and examined Polanski after the accusations.
TheMadStrangler 2 years ago
well then, if thats he case I change my mind, lets get all these questions sorted out before we jumped to conclusions. Lesson learned.
potatochipsunsalted 2 years ago
The first Amendment in a clear basic reading refers only to the federal gov. "Congress shall make no law with regards to" The second amend simply says "shall not be infringed", clearly covering any and ALL infringement. ANY law (regulation, etc.) infringing someones right and ability to "keep and bear arms" is unconstitutional under a basic reading of the 2nd amendment.
mssnrykd 2 years ago
wait- if those goldfish were conservatives, I'm upset... If they were just more liberals,well, YAWN...
bsl103158 2 years ago
I personally adore the fried goldfish story. It's the neatest tidbit in years.They didn't feel a thing! Hopefully the court costs were non-existent, too!
bsl103158 2 years ago
Of course Roman Polanski should face criminal charges! That's a pretty big no brainer really. And I have to say, I like this less flashy version of your newscast. I feel like I learn more, and it gives me less of a headache haha.
glramer2007 2 years ago
Why do Europeans want Roman Polanski freed?
Why do they empathize with him so much?
The reason is because drugging and forcibly ass-raping 13 year old girls is a right of passage for Europeans. They all do it.
At least that's the only way their opinion makes any sense. What monsters.
Let this be a lesson not to look to the European or Hollywood elite for anything good. They drive nice cars but inside they are the worst garbage on earth.
MountAthos 2 years ago
That's a pretty unfounded hasty generalization based on a few rash opinions.
Public polls in France show that the majority of the public wants Polanski extradited back to the US, and Poland chemically castrates child molesters.
Hollywood backs Polanski up because they are bias and possibly in a level of denial. "Polanski is a good guy, that is who I know, he couldn't have done this!" The same thing is said by most friends and family members of all criminals.
TheMadStrangler 2 years ago
I strongly agree. The fact that he's a brilliant director doesn't make him any less of a pedophile or rapist. If you're convicted via due process, then you serve your time. When we start making exceptions, the system falls apart.
The way the victim feels about the situation is unfortunate, but to simply let him go would carry his own set of nasty implications itself.
zegeck 2 years ago
He isn't a pedophile. Polanski was interviewed and examined by psychiatrists after his offense, and they concluded he is not a pedophile. There is even reasonable doubt as to whether he "raped" her or not.
He hasn't been convicted of actual rape, just statutory rape. The other charges were never put through due process.
TheMadStrangler 2 years ago
Agreed. I think there is a lot of misleading going on here on Youtube. When you say he drugged her and raped her you are certainly giving a false impression. As TheMadStangler has said he was convicted for statutory rape. Not only this but so many people are being all high and mighty about it, I think he was also charged with sodomy are you all for that charge too? I think we should all move on with the victim's wishes.
curzmg 2 years ago
I'm some what ambivalent on this issue, not because of time, but because the now-45-year-old woman he raped wants the charges dropped. While I certainly feel that he needs to be punished, if punishing him makes it harder for her to get on with her life...
Mustex4 2 years ago
Jail him. Morality is not relative nor is it arbitrary.
52blades 2 years ago
time, not doing time, is doing your time?? WHAT?
No, he should pay his debt regardless of when the payment starts.
thiswaythat 2 years ago
Absolutely Polansky needs to be punished. He is an ADMITTED rapist, under heinous conditions. The punishment is as much for the victim as it is for society as a whole. You do this, and this is what will happen to you. That Hollywood elite is upset by this shouldn't come as a surprise. They are so out of touch with middle America it's amazing.
Being from AZ I believe the states do have the rights, but not to disarm. I have a right to protect myself from the thugs who will always get them.
katleroy 2 years ago
Folsom State or San Quentin
Let him pick
DyeTyme 2 years ago
Polanski seduced and intoxicated a minor who was there because of a discussion and promise of a role. But he drugged her, performed oral sex on this 13 yr. old, raped her sexually and then performed anal sex on her. This is a clearcut case and he confessed afterwards. Hollywood always have been poor judge on morality..that is why they influenced a lot of people and destroy lives through their movies which promote promiscuity and violence. I hope these stars should be boycotted.
DarthMai 2 years ago
Polanski needs some help. I wouldn't send an 18-year-old boy to jail for having sex with a 16-year-old girl, but the Polanski case wasn't just statutory rape.
It involved other crimes and he was a LOT older than his victim. Polanski is sick.
UTubekookdetector 2 years ago
Polanski should be jailed like any other pedophile and get a taste of what its like to be anally raped.
sammietr 2 years ago
I feel that you have the right to own a weapon, but licenses should be extremely difficult to get, along with bullets.
FuckGodAndFuckChrist 2 years ago
The way I understand the constitution is that it was written for a federation of states. I may not be using the word "federation" in a 100% accurate sense. What I mean is that the States are sovereign, and delegate some of their authority to the federal government for certain common goals. Just as the people of the US delegate some of their power to their representatives, the people are considered to be ultimately in charge.
So, I think the constitution only restricts the federal government.
gregvs3 2 years ago
The way I understand it, if an individual state wants to outlaw guns, it has that legal prerogative.
See, if the Court takes the side of the NRA, then the Federal government will be considered the master of the states. So for example, Arizona cannot opt out of Obamacare [it has already resolved to do so].
However, if my interpretation is correct, it is curious as to how Abraham Lincoln could justify using force to keep the southern states from seceding.
gregvs3 2 years ago
So a state can take away your freedom of speech too? Take away writ of habeas corpus or right to a speedy trial? Force you to quarter national guard troops in your house?
xiaogoudelaohu 2 years ago
So if the constituiton only restricts the federal government, does that mean that the state governments have the right to nullify your protection from illegal search and seizure? Does that mean that the state has the right to nullify protection from self incrimination? What about freedom of the press? See what I'm saying? If the bill of rights are truly inalienable rights, then NO ONE state, local, or federal has the right to nullify or place burdensome restrictions on constitutional rights.
txngasnguns 2 years ago
Exactly. Sotomayor said the Fed Gov't can't take away our right to keep and bear arms, but the states could. No, they can't, just as they can't take away any other rights like free speech, writ of habeas corpus, et al. The 2nd amendment says "The right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." the same way the 1st amendment says "The right of the People to peaceably assemble..."
The Constitution is not able to be interpreted. It says what it says, and means what it says.
xiaogoudelaohu 2 years ago
Let's not mince words.
Sotomayor doesn't give a crap about the constitution or justice, she just wants a racial spoils system.
Obama attended the most vicious racially charged hate rallies at Rev. Wright's church for twenty years. The audience cheered when the preacher screamed that AIDS was invented by whites to genocide blacks.
MountAthos 2 years ago
Look at Sotomayor's trial history, she always decides with the constitution. In fact thats what some dems where complain about, that even though she personally is liberal she has been known to make conservative rulings when she believes the constitution is on that side.
And I'd hardly call Rev. Wright's church the "most vicious racially charged hate rallies". Nobody got killed, I think the KKK or the Nazi's might be just a bit more entitled to that name then anyone else.
potatochipsunsalted 2 years ago
Oh, ya think Mr. Unsalted? All these attacks on Wright but everyone always seems to forget groups that have outright advocated murder.
FrostbittenWolf 2 years ago
A judges whole job is to interpret the constitution. Its not as black and white as you'd like to think. Its just like any other written document, like the bible or the quran, it can be taken and manipulated by people to mean what they want it too. Thats why we appoint judges who are supposed to be well educated on the law and constitution. And thats why people make a fuss about a judges political views. Even the founding fathers new it was complicated, thats why they created the judicial system.
potatochipsunsalted 2 years ago
A judge does not interpret the constitution, the same way they don't set policy. If they could interpret it, it's the same as them making their own laws or setting their own policy (which is what Sotomayor said is her job)
The Constitution has laws, and they are clear as black and white. That is why it's not a 1000 pages long like the stimulus or health care bill. Good grief...
xiaogoudelaohu 2 years ago
Ok... my take. 1. I do believe the states have the right determine and run their own government, however I do not believe that applies to negating the amendments in the bill of rights. Would it make sense if the state had the power to negate any other amendments in the bill of rights? What cities like Chicago and states like Illinois, Mass., NJ, and CA are doing is without a doubt unconstitutional. 2. Read Finemans blog on Newsweek. True its biased, but even they are sensing Chicago will lose.
txngasnguns 2 years ago
Comment removed
gregvs3 2 years ago
Yea her parents should be put in prison also. For child abuse, considering somehow she was 13 years of age taking drugs and in a jacuzzi at 11:30pm at night.
Sure that is the American way let your kids do what-ever the fuck they want and help ruin their future. Oh yes the irony of young independence without parental supervision.
Give me a break. If her parents were there to stop all of this. None of it would of happened. The parents were SLOBS. Simple.
sirHOAX 2 years ago
I truly cannot believe the comments on this subject. One comment truly shows the lack of any intelligence or morality self imposed or otherwise. The comment that 14 year olds having sex has nothing to do with drugging a minor and having forced sexual relations with her. Really all other arguments are moot. Unless you are a criminal you do not drug women( regardless of age) to rape, but doing it on a 13 year old really shows the level of depravity one will seek (and those defending such actions)
YogSoluth 2 years ago
How about the fact that the girl who was raped says he should walk free because he's suffered enough? I think that pretty much ends the discussion. The victim should ultimately get the last word.
JBeatty17 2 years ago
Roman Polanski is a pig. He needs to face up to his crimes against decency and the laws of California and return to the USA.
prysmith37 2 years ago 2
IT'S POLITICAL--did you listen to the French TV clip? He has a house in Switzerland. The balance of justice requires he be freed immediately. Many attractive 14 yo girls (though I won't say 13) have sex. Corruption as usual here. All these creeps who write Bible-Bash garbage are probably either exactly that, or are from the political dealers.
truthgroove 2 years ago
truthgroove: I agree. This is all tactics to promote what hey see if fit. They could careless about real news coverage or the corruption that continues to run ramped in our own government for that matter.
This is not justice rather entertainment regardless of outcome. Its self-interest, and their means of self-preservation. Just promote bullshit rather than prosecute their criminal buddies. You have a millionaire news casting spokesman talking about morality. Ha!
SEX IS IN THE NEWS! Great.
sirHOAX 2 years ago
You are paid by political people to say this garbage.
truthgroove 2 years ago
You commit the crime, you do the time. Decades of running dosnt change the fact that he owes the time.
deadzebramonkey 2 years ago
he didn't commit a crime
truthgroove 2 years ago
Well, he was having an obvious mental break down. His wife was also pregnant with his child when she was murdered. The girl who was raped has also said that she has forgiven him or something along those lines, and I think that that is the main arguement for not being punished.
But with all that said, I do think he should be prosecuted, because it'd be pretty disgusting for him to have literally nothing happen to him. but I think the person he raped should definitely have a say in what happens.
JackBz 2 years ago
@Vid
If that girl is still alive, I think we should leave the punishment up to her. Of course she'd be a woman by now. But I am curious what she would say.
What does she want done to the man. Go from there.
OF course that's just my perspective/opinion.
MRSketch09 2 years ago
@Vid
Also, awesome story about the girl killing the terrorist. That was justice, served cold and hard.
MRSketch09 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why do all the paid trolls have IP's out of Israel?
Do you think this will make us start & fight more wars for you?!
ryanshaunkelly 2 years ago
rot in jail
grisza77 2 years ago
Michael more is a scumbag and almost anything he says is most likely the opposite of what is true.
tiggstah 2 years ago
yes, and glenn beck says the truth.
Youre a fuckn retarded hypocrit.
DavosLogos 2 years ago
Perverts like Polanski never stop. I believe they should be made to dig their own grave, and then shot in the head. But, isn't there a 7 year time limit on criminal prosecutions (other than murder)? Was he tried and convicted without being present?
Hollywood's arrogant promotion of cesspit filth is mind-boggling.
Faiscar11 2 years ago
Pollanski was already tried. The young lady need not be involved because he does not need to be tried again. Put him in jail.
So he had a hard life. Maybe this should make him more compassionate for a helpless child.
ben2theo 2 years ago
Polanski is a sick piece of shit and the pianist sucked
bigsmatchy 2 years ago
Uhuhuhuhuhuh... you said 'pianist'.
Aerodeth 2 years ago
I don't know actually. Apparently even the victim wants the charges dropped, and she wants to just get on with her life.
Anghellik9 2 years ago
Polanski should go to trail in the states for the rape of the 13 year old girl. Doesn't matter when it happen. Anybodyd else would have been jailed long, long ago.
Jkl9559 2 years ago
I also know that they don't pay a car bribe at their by their local court what other tax don't illegals pay. Healthcare reform it's coming.
cutejoker69 2 years ago
That's one nice herpe! I mean cut, shave, boo boo! Didn't the judge give him a plea bargain and then back off from it so he Polansky left, I can't blame him. Hey lee I'd like you to admit that Mexicans and most illegals coming into the country from S American countries are Native Americans. By that I mean their ancestors were INDIANS or indigenous to this continent no Ellis Island check was needed cuz they were here since Columbus. Illegals don't pay a consolidated property tax do you?
cutejoker69 2 years ago
Oh please don't put Roman Polanski in jail. This is something he did many years ago so it doesn't matter anymore. I'm sure her hemorrhoids have healed by now. He is so cool just ask all the Hollywood people who support him. It's not like he was some evil hypocritical conservative guy. I mean if he was, people in Hollywood would want him hunted down years ago and given the death penalty right? Feel sorry for him. He is so talented and important and has contributed so much to our culture. NOT!
smedge7 2 years ago
Roman Polanski is one of the greatest directors ever (and one of my favorites) who, sadly, happens to have raped a minor.
Also, your UK story has already occurred here;
`Babysitting Now A Crime'
/watch?v=swnCJ_B2Dts&feature=related
CRAPCANNONS 2 years ago
Roman needs to be punished...
Goodguygil209 2 years ago
HTWW, I don't think there is an issue forr the state's and gun ownership. The states can't decide what religion you worship, they can't decide what you can and can't say, they can't limit any of the other rights (barring those actions that might infringee on another's rights). So why should states have the right to limit individual's right to bear arms?
sorrian 2 years ago
I agree, Polanski needs to pay for his crime.
psychosophie10 2 years ago 2
he is a homo
KIMBOSLICE66666 2 years ago
u suck faggot
judd204 2 years ago
HTWW check out TYT's video titled "Rep. Grayson - Repub HC Plan, DONT GET SICK" and watch after 5 mintues in and you will see lunatics.
I like how to take that guy completely seriously, I don't just to state. And also how you don't call the republicans talking about death panels "lunatics."
jimiisdabest 2 years ago
what's wrong with death penalty? The death penalty varies upon states and the US government should respect states rights which is a non partisan issue.
ppshchik 2 years ago 2
? I said "panels" dude lol /=D ...be sure to check exactly what I said.
but for death penalty, how can you dictate who gets to live? just because it is a governing body doesn't give it the right to say who shall live and die because of what they did, that fact doesn't justify the act. For me it is a gross thought to have power decide who gets put down when they are there to provide safety and service to the people. Living is a bigger punishment, imo.
jimiisdabest 2 years ago
Comment removed
blade004 2 years ago
I'm still stunned at who in Hollywood is coming out on Polanski's side -- lots of folks' movies I'll be avoiding now. Shouldn't the laws apply to everyone? Apparently not, according to the elitists on the left. I expected that Woody Allen would support it, of course, but good grief. "It's not 'rape' rape" indeed -- I don't care how you parse it, you gotta be kidding me.
VALivingston 2 years ago
2A needs to be incorporated so that states like California, New York, etc can freely use those rights.
USMCDEVILDOG1021 2 years ago
If you can do the crime.....then do the time.
you reap what you so, now reap
kreiglloyd2001 2 years ago
Here's hoping Polanski gets "reaped" constantly.....
sorrian 2 years ago
I like the unedited version better. It's more natural and easier to comprehend.
rocke4444 2 years ago
Roman Polanski the ARTIST is great. Roman Polanski the MAN has lived through numerous tragedies, but he's guilty, and admitted so.If he wants to make his case for appeal he has to come to CA,PERIOD.Otherwise, hes a fugitive.
MSSC73 2 years ago
OK, let's say you're a lawyer, and you believe you have an open and shut case against a rapist. The evidence is overwhelming, etc etc.....
Why would you make a plea bargain?
GreenTeaGarlic 2 years ago
There are two reasons that I can see. One would be to expedite the process of criminal justice. The second would be to spare the victims the ordeal of a criminal trial. Few would ask a thirteen-year-old girl to voluntarily re-live her experience of rape in front of a courtroom audience.
In either case, though, it's a moot point. The man pled guilty to the crime, hence it has been decided in court. He fled sentencing, and thus broke the law.
Aardvark1878 2 years ago
Aardvark, you say he pled guilty to the crime...but he pled guilty only to unlawful intercourse with a minor...this is far other than the original charge of drugging her and then viciously raping her as she tried to resist.
Your second reason makes more sense than your first reason. Maybe they didn't want to put the girl through the pain of reliving the rape. I think he partied with a minor, which is pretty sick,but it isn't the ted bundyesque crime that they originally accused him of.
GreenTeaGarlic 2 years ago
throw him in jail
cblrtopas 2 years ago
I like your videos way more when they are uncut and without any intro / effects. It's friendlier and natural that way.
Schnork71 2 years ago
The "victim" of Polanski's wish the whole case would go away. She doesn't want him to be punished, something she presented before the courts. Why would they pursue this so vigorously anyway?
BTW, according to her, the courts perpetrated more harm to her life, then the supposed "rape" by Roman!
armelix73 2 years ago
Supposed?
He pled guilty.
saron380 2 years ago
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
I believe it comes down to a referendum.
jjmacjjmac 2 years ago
Polanski?....Do the crime you do the time.
gqoniefh 2 years ago
Other than checking your docket aloud like 3 or 4 times, I preferred this sort of "laid back Lee" approach. Hope you're feeling better soon.
Polankski: it's stat. rape. There's no character taken into account for that judgement. He should be sentenced with the corresponding punishment.
samrustan 2 years ago
The best thing i have ever heard you say Howtheworldworks :) I couldn't agree more! The prick needs to face the consequences of the crime he committed and his fame should not grant him immunity.
blade004 2 years ago
you are like sxephil only 10 times more boring
mronionsalad 2 years ago
If Polanski had sex with a willing, un-druged 13 year old, it would be stat. rape.
If he had drugged an 18 yo and knowingly had sex against her will, it would be rape. Rape-rape, Whoopi.
What I don't understand is that feminists insist men don't take rape seriously enough, yet are remarkably silent on Polanski/Whoopi.
2d Amd: The BOR restricts state action (see preamble), the BOR does not GRANT rights. The RIGHT to keep and bear arms SHALL not be infringed. Pretty clear to me.
Troglodite13 2 years ago
your videos are better when you do them like this
dragonspider4 2 years ago
Read Polanski's 1979 Tattler interview with Martin Amis. The interview is also in Amis' book "Visiting Mrs Nabokov: And Other Excursions"
His quotes are extremely disgusting.
I forgot the latest rumor. Is Glenn Beck going to slaughter Hutu's, Tutsi's, or Bette Midler? And does Glenn Beck agree to do it? I don't think he has the time.
cloudberry121 2 years ago
Fucking idiots sitting here arguing. If YOU raped a little girl you'd go the hell to jail. Stop challenging the system. He should have been in jail decades ago.
Jenga666 2 years ago 2
The thing about punishing crimes isn't just about taking a dangerous person out of society. It is important for people to know that you will get justice for doing something really wrong. We don't want people who dream about rape to think, "oh, so as long as I move away, I can get away with it."
horvay 2 years ago
and we're watching you too so LOOK OUT!
Xtro2005 2 years ago
anyone know or hear about the list of Polanski supporters who are organizing with wood e allen?
Fockersnextdoor 2 years ago
I don't think states should be able to trample individual rights just as much as the Federal governme