G'Day All,
I apologize for my statement
"Let dead dogs lie" and any offence taken by it
After reading Graham Y's link it is now apparent to me that this is not just a matter of "alledgedly" a one off
Apparently he has "alledgedly" deliberately evaded US Authorities he "alledgedly" has a history of it, He "alledgedly" plied the girl at the time with both alcohol and drugs, He "alledgedly" is quite acceptable in his own mind that it is OK but "alledgedly" is well aware that it is wrong & illegal
The US Authorities are right to test all these "alledgedlies" in a court of Law not only for the offence itself but for justice in the eyes of the people and then "IF" found guilty the full punishment for the "alledged" offences
Thanks All have a good life from Dave

Graham/Cornflower,

Spot on with your last posts.

What the Polanski affair and the ensuing debates illustrate is that you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.

Just because someone is famous should not make them above the law and does not give them the right to hide behind a phalanx of supporters and other interests to evade justice.

All society needs to do is be intrepid in relentlessly exposing what's in its dark corners and justice will take care of itself.

GrahamY writes:

"It's not that relevant that the victim thinks he should be forgiven. While she is one party to the matter, the public also has an interest. And that interest is best served by people like Polanski being subject to the due process of the law."

That well may be, but 'due process' is exactly what it is both contended, and now, on the part of US prosecutors, admitted, has not occurred in this case from the outset. It seems that the claimed 'improper collusion by the [US] judge [in 1978] with prosecutors' and the admitted 'substantial misconduct' in the case may have been in relation to the nefarious practice of 'plea bargaining', whereby prosecutors settle for a guilty plea to lesser or fewer charges in order to be assured of getting at least some 'runs on the board' in their 'pursuit of justice'.

The appearance exists of Polanski having perhaps been tricked by prosecutors in 1978 into making admissions to what may have been represented to Polanski as a 'lesser charge', but that charge in actuality carrying a prospective sentence of 50 years gaol. Add to that the reported 42-day prison hospital mental assessment that was ordered at the time of his plea bargaining 'confession', following which he somehow remained free to leave the country despite the prospect of a 50 year sentence being deemed appropriate for his 'admitted' offence, and one starts to think that a 'flight from justice' was exactly what at least some interests in the prosecutorial process at that time wanted to occur. Perhaps someone other than Polanski had something to hide that might have come out if a trial took place.

The extent to which some posters have overlooked or discounted claims like the one by British writer Robert Harris, that "Polanski had spent much of the [recent] summer at his house in Switzerland" staggers me. If true, suspicions must surely be raised that there is some agenda other than the routine administration of justice at work in this matter. Perhaps such putative agenda counts upon blind revulsion masking upcoming improprieties.

It was inevitable that a comparison would be drawn with Henson.

Frankly, anyone who can't tell the difference between drugging and forcibly sodomising a child, and taking semi-nude photographs of one in an established photographic style, with the consent of them and their parents, is as eligible for psychiatric treatment as Dennis Ferguson.

If Polanski was a Catholic Priest the key would of been thrown away by now (and should be). Why is it that some arty farty types prance around with no shame. Recently our gutless pollies let Henson off for his disgusting antics of photographing a young girl nude. Many are in prison now for far lesser crimes than Pedophile must be shaking their heads. To think it is against the law to photograph your kids on the beach. What a warped world.

There are degrees of guilt in this case,

If RP had had consentual sex with this girl while both were under the influence, then there might be some point to his defense.

However, he deliberately plied her wirh drugs and alcohol (an offense in itself) and then physically forced himself on her.

It was planned, rape of a minor, with the aggravating factor of under age drugs and alcohol.

In many countries he might only now be emerging from jail.

What he has achieved in the interim is irrelevant, that he used money and influence to escape punishment for so long should not be a mitigating factor.

However, the attempt to lump Henson's art with this offense is pure rubbish. One is paedophilia, the other prudity.