I didn't realize that. Tho, it makes sense that they would get put to the test sooner or later.
Sexual assault and rape laws may have different counts for different acts. For example, Count 1 of the indictment is for the vaginal rape=X years in prison, Count 2 for anal rape=Y years in prison, Count 3 for forcible oral sodomy=Z years, so the sentence is X+Y+Z. I'm making this up, but that could be why it is relevant. Plus, it wouldn't surprise me if there are laws against child sodomy, even if sodomy among consenting adults is legal. I don't recall all the counts that Polanski was charged with, but it is probably available online.LooseCannon said:Sodomy laws in the US were struck down in 2002 in Lawrence v. Texas, iirc, but old statutes may still apply.
cornfedhick said:Know your facts before opining. As pointed out in the documentary about this, prior to final sentencing, the judge saw photos of Polanski cavorting with more teenage girls -- which were taken AFTER he was arrested for raping a 13-year old. This is what enraged the judge and caused him to rethink the shorter sentence agreed to by prosecutors. That is why Polanski fled, because he got wind that the judge was going to impose a heavy sentence. Also, he openly dated Nastassia Kinski when she was underage, after directing her in Tess. Going out on a limb here, I realize, but I assume he had sex with her. So, the dude liked to bang underage girls. In the ass. After drugging them. Yet he walks free. Fuck you, Switzerland.
Technically he hadn't been sentenced yet.char_da_harlot said:Is it legal to rethink a judgement already given? And if those pictures were taken after the fact on him being sentenced for the rape of the 13 year old can you use this against him fairly?
Suicidehummer said:I didn't read the whole thread, but here's my twenty thousand pesos...
The laws regarding underage sex are really messed up. For example, kids have been arrested and jailed for sending pictures of themselves naked to their girlfriend/boyfriend just because they're under 18.
You're right, what is wrong with just having a picture? I mean, I went to a strip club and even though I knew the stripper was a crack head I still gave her ten dollars for a dance. I mean, she's just going to use those ten dollars to feed her habit, or her pimp, but I didn't harm anybody right? WRONG. Just like the ten dollars to the crack head stripper, "just having a picture" is enabling the vice/crime. Sure your schoolmate didn't kidnap and dominate the underage girl into taking pictures, but his hunting for said porn is essentially giving license to a serious exploitative crime.Also, I have a (somewhat) personal experience in that a kid at my school (I had met him before but we weren't friends) just was arrested for having child porn on his computer. Apparently the local police put some "bait" on LimeWire and he uploaded it, which allowed them to trace it to his computer. He had over 1000 pictures of underage kids, although I don't know what ages they ranged from. He will serve two years starting this summer.
Now, I'm not going to take a pro-pedophile stance here, but I just cannot comprehend how that can be considered justice. He didn't hurt anybody. All he did was have pictures. I can't believe you can be arrested for simply having pictures. And I know people try to rationalize it by saying "that child's knowledge of the photo being out there will hurt them", or something to that extent, but that's just BS.
It's really just become a witch hunt for pedophiles. The same people that accept gays because they know it's not a choice to be gay are supporting these laws. The kid at my school didn't choose his sexual preference either, and he was being damn responsible for a 17 year old IMO considering he kept it to himself and wasn't out raping kids.
Suicidehummer said:The kid at my school didn't choose his sexual preference either
Onhell said:It is exactly the words I would choose for a MAN who is sexually aroused by children. I would not use it for children liking children...
There is tolerance and then there is idiocy... not seeing the severity in pederasty and making excuses for them is ridiculous.
Suicidehummer said:Just to clarify, I think pedos who go out and rape kids should be jailed, but not pedos who mind their own business and don't hurt anyone.
LooseCannon said:The Church has a fuckton of things to admit, and that's just one of them, but I thought we were talking about child pornography?