Ask a Question
or
Create a Poll
  1. Home /
  2. Questions /
  3. Health
  4. / Mental Health
  5. / Mental Illnesses A-Z
  6. / Pedophilia

by nutmegcollector on September 29th, 2009

nutmegcollector

Question

Help answer this question below.

Roman Polanski was arrested in Switzerland for raping a 13 years old girl over 30 years ago. Do you think they should let him go free?

  • Like
  • Report
Share:
Other

Answers. 16 helpful answers below.

  • by Spicy Hot on September 29th, 2009

    Spicy Hot

    Hell NO!!!!!

    The &$#*$&$% should pay for his crimes

    • Like
    • Report

    3 comments | Post one | Permalink

  • by Jane on September 29th, 2009

    Jane

    no i do not

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by Davids Girl on September 29th, 2009

    Davids Girl

    I don't care if it was 80 years ago! A rapist is a rapist and should NOT be allowed to roam the streets.

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by ConservativelyLiberal on September 29th, 2009

    ConservativelyLiberal

    Rapists should be executed.

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by Shatzee coming back? on September 29th, 2009

    Shatzee coming back?

    Hell no

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by Fiddle Playing Creole Bastard on September 29th, 2009

    Fiddle Playing Creole Bastard

    A crime is a crime whether it was committed yesterday or thirty years ago.

    He should be prosecuted fairly and to the furthest extent of the law.

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by Midnighttoker on September 29th, 2009

    Midnighttoker

    No.

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by Mountain Momma on September 29th, 2009

    Mountain Momma

    No way!

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by Yarnlady is happy every day on September 29th, 2009

    Yarnlady is happy every day

    To be fair, the girl herself has asked that the charges be dropped, and the court wants him to come back because they are considering overturning the conviction due to judicial misconduct during the trial.

    The whole thing has been a mess since it happened. There are some allegations that the girl exaggerated to try to blackmail him, but it was so long ago, who knows the truth?

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by The Chief on September 29th, 2009

    The Chief

    Hell yeah!

    Just as soon as he serves his time for his prior conviction.

    Oh yeah...and whatever other time he may get for fleeing justice the first time around.

    When he's done with all that, he can feel free to go back home to France any time he wants.

    • Like
    • Report

    2 comments | Post one | Permalink

  • by philosopher on September 29th, 2009

    philosopher

    No way.

    • Like
    • Report

    1 comment | Post one | Permalink

  • by call_me_ishmael on March 15th, 2010

    call_me_ishmael

    techniqually hes not being left to go free, he's in France, abusing French law which doesnt allow french authorities to extradite their own citizens.. Should he leave France he will be most likely arrested under an international warrant in an extraditional country and will be sent to the US and tried for his crimes.

    This is all in theory, but he certainly isn't being let off the hook, just a clever little f@@ker but he will get his comeuppance one day, rest assured.

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by Im Alec has abandoned this account on March 15th, 2010

    Im Alec has abandoned this account

    The only reason not to is that the victim has stated that the furore is causing her further harm. His crime was most unpleasant, and should be prosecuted as far as it can be - without causing harm to others. Generally I would be entirely for prosecution - byt the victim should be considered.

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by killdrphil - reasonable for a madman on March 15th, 2010

    killdrphil - reasonable for a madman

    Yes. Two reasons why:

    1. Polanski was railroaded by a corrupt judge the first time around. That's the only reason why he fled. He was prepared to suffer the consequences otherwise.

    2. The victim herself doesn't want to go through another trial. The people saying it should happen are disrespecting the victim's wishes. The decision should be up to her and her alone.

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

  • by adamjohn on March 15th, 2010

    adamjohn

    Yes, I do.

    Two reasons. The offence was not rape as far as his victim was concerned. The State saw it as rape, his victim did not. A 13 years old can say "yes" or "no" to sex just the same as an adult. What can reasonably be questioned is the validity of the consent. Was the girl in question (I have forgotten her name) able to think about the long term consequences of her "consent". The principal issue with the Roman Pawlanski case was the way it outraged public decency, which is very different from empathy for the young lady in question.

    Roman Pawlanski's survivor is 43, has forgiven him this mistake and does not wish for him to be treated severely. I think we should respect her wishes.

    4 comments | Post one | Permalink

  • by Jamie "Relentless" Booker on March 15th, 2010

    Jamie

    cut his fuckin cock off and stamp on his bollocks!!

    No comments. Post one | Permalink

Want to attach an image to your answer? Click here.

Did this answer your question? If not, then ask a new question or create a poll.

More Questions. Additional questions in this category.

You're reading Roman Polanski was arrested in Switzerland for raping a 13 years old girl over 30 years ago. Do you think they should let him go free?

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Ads

Related Questions

Professionally Researched

Answerbag

a Demand Media company