RE: those silly Italians judges! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


HunterS -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 4:18:02 PM)

quote:

He was never tried because he plead guilty. He admitted his guilt, then fled jurisdiction. There was no trial in absentia.


I believe that was my point.  He pled guilty to sex with a minor....not rape, not giving drugs to a minor and none of the other characterzations that have been made.

H.





tazzygirl -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 4:20:50 PM)

Let me ask... do you consider sex with a minor concensual?




HunterS -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 4:43:48 PM)

What I think is hardly relevant.  The courts obviously do since there are two crimes that  person who has sex with a minor can be charged with...rape and sex with a minor.  Rape by its very definition is not consensual which leaves the other to be consensual.

H.




tazzygirl -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 4:48:12 PM)

A minor cannot consent. But regardless of that, he did plead guilty to the charge, expected a plea deal that they knocked out between his lawyers and the DA to be the final word, agreed to a psych evaluation for 90 days, left after 45 and fled jurisdiction before sentencing.

Now, how is any of that in absentia?




Marc2b -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 4:58:41 PM)

quote:

I'm quite sure you meant to say...we cannot allow the emotions of the victim to trump due process....not the accused.But no matter.


Yeah, I think I’d been writing the word “accused” so many time it just came out again as a matter of habit. Thanks for not being one of those jackasses who consider any grammar or punctuation mistake as grounds for dismissal of somebody’s argument. You irk me sometimes but I’ll give you credit for that. [:)]

quote:

Let me ask you this what if it is not simply a matter of emotion....but rather a stepping stone to pursuing civil judgements?


Then I guess they’re not taking that step until a conviction is secured. Life sucks sometimes. We can't legislate the perfect society.

quote:

In an earlier post you chastised another poster for pointing out Polanski wasn't found guilty of rape......so here you are trumpeting legalities on the one hand ...while on the other you toss them aside to replace them with your own judgements......very curious,not to mention fucking convienent.


My calling Polanski a rapist is my personal judgment of that low life piece of shit. Yes, legally he is not a rapist. But he is a rapist. Read the transcript of the victim's testimony and then come back here and tell me he is not a rapist.

quote:

In this case the accused had every opportunity to face their accuser...had every opportunity to see the evidence arrayed against them...and chose not to.
There is no issue of injustice here....


I’ve already stated, more than once, my opinion on trail by absentia and my reasons why. I’m not answering it any more (well, as least as far as this thread is concerned).

quote:

except yours of course for slandering Polanski with a charge he has not been convicted of......due process and all that.


If Mister Polanski feels libeled he can sue. Once the jury reads the transcript of the victim’s testimony, he will lose. I could use the money (counter suit, media interviews, hell - if I play my cards right – I might even get a reality television show out of the deal).

I also call O.J. Simpson is a murderer.




HunterS -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 4:58:54 PM)

quote:

Now, how is any of that in absentia?


I do not believe I have made that claim.

H.




Marc2b -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:00:13 PM)

quote:

Fair enough, but the point is that they weren't denied the right to a trial, they just chose (or as has been suggested, were more likely told) not to exercise it. Given that this is the case, how are their, or anybody else's, legal rights being harmed by this? It's hardly Guantanomo bay, is it?


"Objection! Asked and answered, your Honor."

"Sustained."




HunterS -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:03:06 PM)

quote:

I also call O.J. Simpson is a murderer.


This is only because you are ignorant of the verdict in that case.

H.




tazzygirl -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:04:36 PM)

quote:

I hve no clue what "relisties" are...do you?
It has been "alleged" that Polanski gave drugs and alcohol to a teenage girl. It is alleged that he fucked her despite her repeted protests...he has never been convicted of the crimes you ascribe to him. Have you tried him in absentia?


Read her account of what happened. Add to that the fact that he paid her off after she filed for a civil suit... even though he still hasnt paid her all of it... and tell me again how much of this is alleged. No one has tried him in absentia... even the public. He never denied giving her alcohol, drugs or using her repeatedly.




Marc2b -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:05:24 PM)

quote:

This is bullshit, you are making your own claims of who does and doesnt get a right to the rights you claim to hold dear. Bin Laden is an indited criminal in the US, this entitles him to a trial. Yet here you are claiming he can be shot on sight, which goes against your own argument on peoples rights.


In a combat situation, of course he can be shot on sight. That's what you do to the enemy in combat situations (what did you think I meant?). If they capture him alive then they can drag his ass to the United States for trial.





HunterS -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:05:40 PM)

quote:

quote:


Fair enough, but the point is that they weren't denied the right to a trial, they just chose (or as has been suggested, were more likely told) not to exercise it. Given that this is the case, how are their, or anybody else's, legal rights being harmed by this? It's hardly Guantanomo bay, is it?



quote:

"Objection! Asked and answered, your Honor."

"Sustained."


This could only happen in the court of your mind and not anyplace where the legal profession is actully practiced.

H.




HunterS -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:14:43 PM)


quote:

Read her account of what happened. Add to that the fact that he paid her off after she filed for a civil suit... even though he still hasnt paid her all of it... and tell me again how much of this is alleged. No one has tried him in absentia... even the public. He never denied giving her alcohol, drugs or using her repeatedly.


Would you like to  read the account of my last date??? It would hold just as much relevency as her grand jury testimony.
Consequently all you have is a guilty plea to sex with  minor which at the time was a misdomeanor.

H.




tazzygirl -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:22:09 PM)

And the flight from justice is just a silly fine and a slap on the wrist i suppose?




Marc2b -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:23:51 PM)

quote:

Unfortuantely, Marc, Italy is not one of the various States of the United States. You are attempting to extend a funamental principle of American law into another jurisdiction, as far as I can see, solely on your humanitarian concern for some notion of universal justice. Others in this thread have already pointed out that Italy and France, etc have a different legal code than the Common Law code of the UK and the US. That is already a given. I will not beat that dead horse.

I have not found any justification in your posts, Marc, for making this transfer from US Constitutional Law to Italian Law except to say it isn't right. It seems that Italy had every right to proceed with the trial in abstentia under their own code of criminal rights as was pointed out over and over again. Unless you can show a legal rationale such as a treaty, I am afraid your argument is little more than a foot stomping tantrum. And that's too bad. I agree with the principle but not with the application in this case. They should not have been tried in abstentia as a Universal principle, but there is no recognition universally of that principle. So, tough luck.



I have at no point argued for a transfer of U.S. Constitutional law to Italy. I’m not trying to push my notions of rights and legalities onto the Italians, or any other nation for that matter. Even if I wanted to stomp all over other cultures, imposing my ideas of justice and rights, how could I? I learned a long time ago that my ability to bring about change in this world of six billion ornery, overly clever, primates is severely limited. People, and nations, are going to do what they are going to do. But this particular ornery, marginally clever, primate does reserve the right to form it’s own opinion and then proclaim them. If other’s don’t like my opinions, or the fact that I proclaim them, oh well.

I also recognize that my opinions are not universally recognized (they should be. I am fairly certain that we'd all be better off for it. [:D]).




tazzygirl -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:36:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterS


quote:

Read her account of what happened. Add to that the fact that he paid her off after she filed for a civil suit... even though he still hasnt paid her all of it... and tell me again how much of this is alleged. No one has tried him in absentia... even the public. He never denied giving her alcohol, drugs or using her repeatedly.


Would you like to  read the account of my last date??? It would hold just as much relevency as her grand jury testimony.
Consequently all you have is a guilty plea to sex with  minor which at the time was a misdomeanor.

H.



quote:

On August 8, 1977 Polanski appeared in Los Angeles Superior Court and copped to a felony count of unlawful sexual intercourse. As seen in the below transcript,


http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0928091polanskiplea1.html

Page 11 of the testimony.




Hierodule -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:47:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterS

Would you like to  read the account of my last date???



[joke] ooooh it was that bad huh?[/joke]




willbeurdaddy -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:47:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

You miss the crucial point that they went to Italy, violated Italian Law, and were tried under Italian law. Trials in absentia are legal in Italy, so that produces two questions for you.

Do you think anyone, American or otherwise, has the right to go abroad, break the law, and not be held accountable by the law of the land ? IE when in Rome ect ect


I have already spoken to this point. Please reference post 54 of thise thread.

I recognize that other nations have their own laws - that is not the point. The point is: are those laws just? Do they protect or violate human rights? In Iran being homosexual can get you arested, thrown into prison, even exacuted. By your "reasoning," this is okay because, after all, it's their law. Bullshit. I recognize that I am utterly powerless to affect Italian law but that doesn't mean I don't have the right to call bullshit on it.

quote:

Next, how would you try someone who doesnt wish to appear in court, such as Bin Laden ?


By catching him (within legal means) and dragging his scrawney ass into court.

I'm not sure if Bin Laden is the best example for that, however, because he is more akin to a military commander who is violating accepted rules of war. Any attempt to capture him would be more akin to a military action than a police action - which means we can shoot the mother fucker on site.

A better example would be Ira Einhorn, the low life, piece of shit, who murdered his ex-girlfriend and shoved her body into a trunk in his closet. He fled to europe to avoid prosecution. He was tried in absentia. That was wrong. The charges simply should have been allowed to stand (there is, after all, no staute of limitations on murder) until such time as he could be located and returned to the United States for a proper trial. He eventually was found and returned (after much international legal haggling) to the States - so it can be done. Unfortunately his convition in absentia was upheld - it should have been over turned and a new trial granted. Then we could have convicted the evil shithead properly, with his rights - WHICH ARE ALSO OUR RIGHTS! - protected.




The problem is that it becomes much more difficult to attain a conviction after long passage of time. Memories fade, evidence deteriorates or disappears etc. Trial in absentia is just the flipside of a right to a speedy trial and is totally appropriate.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 5:51:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterS

quote:

How many years has the U.S. been waiting to jail that child rapist, Polanski?



It is a strange world you live in where you can change the meaning of words to suit your own bias.
Polanski pled guilty to carnal knowledge of  minor not rape...so no mater how much you want it to be different it is not.

H.


It is a strange world where you deny the facts of the situation because of legal semantics. His plea bargain is null and void as a result of his fleeing. As part of the plea bargain he admitted to having sex with a minor who he drugged. That is rape, no matter how much you want it to be different, it is not.




HunterS -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 7:22:03 PM)


quote:

quote:

On August 8, 1977 Polanski appeared in Los Angeles Superior Court and copped to a felony count of unlawful sexual intercourse. As seen in the below transcript,


The article points out that the probation report will be used to guide the judges' decission as to whether the case would be settled as a misdomeanor or  felony.
It also points out that if the judge departs from this protocol that Polanski's guilty plea may be withdrawn.

H.





kittinSol -> RE: those silly Italians judges! (11/7/2009 7:24:38 PM)

It always fascinates me when people whine about foreign countries' justice systems when their own is corrupt and fucked up beyond belief. Time to get a grip on reality: justice is a noble aspiration that remains a goal... at best... and everywhere.




Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125