Hello ;) Thanks heaps for this indeed!… if anyone else has anything, it would be much appreciated. Great website Super Piano Links http://www.en.Grand-Pianos.org Enjoy!…

How can you prosecute a man for rape when the victim is a full grown woman? Polanski has produced masterpieces of cinema since then.

Polanski has already pled guilty but has not served one day of prison time. It’s time for him to be sentenced and serve that sentence. I don’t care what he’s done. It. Does. Not. Matter.

Oh, by the way, did you know that two years ago, Michael Vick killed dogs? Why is he out of jail already?

Another lefty with ADD. Can’t stick to the subject at hand but has to play diversionary games. What? No “But Bush sucks”? Michael Vick is not the subject here. A convicted child rapist is. Deal with the subject at hand.

pdigaudio on October 1, 2009 at 5:16 PM

I’m just going to pretend you didn’t write that crap. I don’t believe that you can’t understand that the elites (read leftists and certainly not me) EXCUSE POLANSKI and want to CRUCIFY VICK. What’s a worse crime, raping a thirteen year old or killing a dog? Are you so effing brain dead that you can’t understand that they are making a huge issue out of something that by comparison is almost nothing at all? Don’t waste my time with your ADD crap. You can’t even understand plain english.

Oh, by the way, did you know that two years ago, Michael Vick killed dogs? Why is he out of jail already?

Mr. Grump on October 1, 2009 at 8:21 AM

Because he served the sentence given him by the judge, something polanski avoided by fleeing the country.

Not to equate the two, but this is the follow on to “same sex” marriage. All that is accomplished with that is changing the definition of marriage. Soon, people like the ones defending this child rapist, will seek to change the definition of the words “consenting” and “adult.”

You can call me names for that opinion, but it is coming sooner than you think. The people that shape opinion in what is called the mainstream are the ones supporting the child rapist.

A criminal who has yet to serve his time and an admitted offender. He should be locked away for 20 years.

If he is such a great director why do I not remember seeing a single movie of his? And if he is such a great director, wouldn’t some time in the slammer give him some material?

Its a win for society and a win for him, well except the part where the inmates take turns packing his fudge. But you get the point.

Polanski has already pled guilty but has not served one day of prison time. It’s time for him to be sentenced and serve that sentence. I don’t care what he’s done. It. Does. Not. Matter.

Oh, by the way, did you know that two years ago, Michael Vick killed dogs? Why is he out of jail already?

Another lefty with ADD. Can’t stick to the subject at hand but has to play diversionary games. What? No “But Bush sucks”? Michael Vick is not the subject here. A convicted child rapist is. Deal with the subject at hand.

I’ll never watch again: Jonathan Demme, John Landis, Michael Mann, Martin Scorsese, and, bless his heart, Woody Allen, who I guess was forced to sign lest the press seize on the idea of a guy who married his almost-stepdaughter passing judgment on Po…

Okay, so in the past few days, filmmaker Roman Polanski was finally collared after more than 3 decades on the loose for his rape of a 13-year old in 1977…

For what it’s worth, age of consent in the United States has never been 13 years old for any state.

However, Justice Ginsburg, when she was a law professor at Columbia, helped create a report for the US Commission on Civil Rights advocating that having sex with a child who is 12 years old or older should not be considered rape. The report was released in 1977 and may have had other versions released as early as 1974.

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2005_09_18-2005_09_24.shtml#1127335040

“18 U.S.C. §2032 — Eliminate the phrase “carnal knowledge of any female, not his wife who has not attained the age of sixteen years” and substitute a Federal, sex-neutral definition of the offense patterned after S. 1400 §1633: A person is guilty of an offense if he engages in a sexual act with another person, not his spouse, and (1) compels the other person to participate: (A) by force or (B) by threatening or placing the other person in fear that any person will imminently be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping; (2) has substantially impaired the other person’s power to appraise or control the conduct by administering or employing a drug or intoxicant without the knowledge or against the will of such other person, or by other means; or (3) the other person is, in fact, less than 12 years old.”

Also notice the wording about drugging or using intoxicants to commit rape. In Polanski’s case, if this were actually law, aside from the age of consent help getting him off, the fact that the 13 year old girl knowingly took alcohol and even knew that she was taking a quaalude apparently would have also given him a defense.

So, I wonder, again, if Polanski was right. Everyone, even Ginsburg, wants to have the opportunity to boff young girls/children and that is reason for his vast defense here and elswhere.

I’ll say this slowly and clearly: the victim was THIRTEEN years old. The fact that you consider that a “grown woman” is sick.

BlueStateBilly on October 1, 2009 at 11:18 AM

Those, in case you haven’t been paying attention, are some of the arguements put forth in favor of letting Roman off the hook. Some of you people Billy, are either unbelievably stupid or you just like to see your name in print. I vote for stupid. Here’s what my post should have meant to you. The elites venerate (that means idolize) Polanski, even though he did what he did. They want to eviscerate (that means cut his insides out) Vick for killing dogs. Now, try to figure out which one is more serious.

How can anyone sign any petition for this kind of human action. Now, I know why I quit going to the movies…..

How can you prosecute a man for rape when the victim is a full grown woman? Polanski has produced masterpieces of cinema since then.

Oh, by the way, did you know that two years ago, Michael Vick killed dogs? Why is he out of jail already?

Mr. Grump on October 1, 2009 at 8:21 AM

I’ll say this slowly and clearly: the victim was THIRTEEN years old. The fact that you consider that a “grown woman” is sick.

Thirty two years is a long time to hold a grudge.

Hey, nobody asked him to live so long.

How can you prosecute a man for rape when the victim is a full grown woman?

I THINK you meant “child-rape”, and the victim was not then a woman, and he’s not being prosecuted, having already plead guilty.

Polanski has produced masterpieces of cinema since then.

My Kenyan roommate saw Chinatown in 2001, and declared “That man must be brought back in chains, to make that movie over RIGHT”

Oh, by the way, did you know that two years ago, Michael Vick killed dogs? Why is he out of jail already?

Why not?

That these entertainment moguls would offer their support and call for amnesty for Polanski is beyond the pale. I know everything I need to know about the vast majority of movies coming out of the pit of h*ll we call Hollywood. These perverts are devoid of decency and appropriately placed compassion and deserve no hearing in our society.

Oh, by the way, did you know that two years ago, Michael Vick killed dogs? Why is he out of jail already?