Hard to tell. The French and Polish are backing down on their original support, so if the US authorities ask to extradite he will likely be extradited.
But there's no question of a trial for the rape- that's done; he pleaded guility, and on a plea bargain that dismissed any chance of a severe sentence. So there's just a matter of sentencing him for that, and then perhaps a trial for the evasion, which I am pretty sure he'd again come to an arrangement over.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Prison has three functions- to keep the dangerous away from society (via separation and rehabilitation), to give a sense of social justice to the victims, and to act as punishment and deterrent for the crime even if the offender is not a repeat risk.He still qualifies, even if not on the first, and he should be put away.
b) the victim apparently doesn't want the proceedings in the first place
c) jail isn't necessarily a good deterrent
Originally posted by Ushgarak
The amount of risk he poses is utterly irrelevant, especially as it was demonstrated during of years being free that he had no legal right to. Plenty in jail that would like that chance.
You would agree with the statement:
The risk to society posed by a criminal is irrelevant in determining whether they should go to jail when sentencing them.
even if we accept your "tri-force" of reasons for prison, which I do not, the first of those was protecting society, meaning his risk is highly relevant. statistically, it would appear to contain 33% of the relevance.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Not that he will do much as the whole thing is a plea bargained nightmare he got as a result of being a celebrity. He buggered off when he was worried he might actually reecieve a vaguely appropriate sentence. There's no amount of time that lessens that.
indeed, the justice system is lame
no need for it to be overly authoritarian to compensate for those who get an easy ride
Originally posted by Ushgarak
There is no way in hell that anyone should think that it is a good thing to encourage the idea that you can get virtually clean away with raping a minor if you bugger off to another country and wait, whilst still having a good life.
no
I also don't think it is a good thing to start letting the state lock up people who are no threat just because we feel we need to send a message.
Surely, even if we feel that the state is in the parenting business, a more effective punishment which would bring a greater sense of justice could be envisioned than sticking him in a hole, which seems to be everyone's knee jerk reaction.
Dearie me, what a jumble.
First, the victim's thoughts in that respect don't really count for that much- ot is the PRINCIPLE of social justice that is important, not an individual's personal feeling of animosity- especialy as she would have wanted it at the time. It is the stress since then that has changed it, but that does not change the fundamental issue at hand. Also, the victim goes beyond the LITERAL victim onto friends and family affected, and in another sense onto the public at large who have a right to expect such justice.
Secondly, I would not agree with the literal statement you have tried to pin on me, not to mention the clumsy simplicity of saying that risk forms 33% of any sentencing consideration. In THIS case his risk is irrelevant. In any case, risk is definitely secondary as a consideration in trial. Guilt is the only primary consideration. He is guility with malice of forethought. The main part where risk comes in is determining parole.
Whether you agree with my three criteria or not, they ARE the criteria and you are simply wrong to disgaree- both factually and morally.
I think that if you don't think we should lock up people guility of serious crimes just because they won't do them again then you are a dangerous idiot who would encourage such crimes wholesale. Damn right we need to send a message- that serious crime is wrong and you WILL be punished for it and you cannot get away with it.
I cannot believe this even has to be debated.
Just adding my 2cents. Its the principle of the thing. You do right you get rewarded and you do wrong you get punished. I don't see how him not doing it again is relevant.
Basically you give him community service and hes basically getting away with rape. Sending a message doesn't even have to come into the equations. Its the principle.
Originally posted by inimalist
actually, the fact that people react emotionally and this clouds the rational way that justice must be done has been brought up, at least twice.yes, I would want the skin of someone who did something to my family. My desire for physical revenge does not dictate the way justice is done.
I believe you missed my point or can't follow my train of thought. Where I was going is : Experience gives one perspective. Lack of experience leads to ill informed decisions. Theories are wonderful things but reality is what it is. I never mentioned vengeance for Mary Jo's dad, just that justice was never served.
Originally posted by Bardock42
The idea that only 30 years of badly run prison could teach him his wrongs. Why not five years? Or 2? Or a week of civil service? Or making him watch Michael Bay movies for two days? Or a long debate about the pros and cons of child molestation?Not to forget whether he even did something wrong beyond consensual sex with a 13 year old.
Why not make murderers work a week as a Walmart greeter, that should serve all around. You're being silly now.
Wrong, what he pleaded to wasn't 'consensual sex'. What he actually did was carefully plan the drugging and rape of a child; he happened to get an easy plea bargin because of his connections. The cowardly bastard couldn't even face up to those minor (by comparison) charges.
Originally posted by Robtard
Why not make murderers work a week as a Walmart greeter, that should serve all around. You're being silly now.Wrong, what he pleaded to wasn't 'consensual sex'. What he actually did was carefully plan the drugging and rape of a child; he happened to get an easy plea bargin because of his connections. The cowardly bastard couldn't even face up to those minor (by comparison) charges.
It was to illuminate that 30 years in jail is a random number that has basically no relation to the goal you stated in your post.
So he did plead guilty to the original charges? Or did he plead guilty to the charges that were agreed on?
Since his crime wasn't against society, he should pay some money to the victim and get roughly sodomized by a very big dicked dude...then be treated by a physician so he doesn't die. Community service seems out of place since the crime wasn't against the community. I'm not too sure how the victim ould feel about receiving service since servicing is what caused this problem in the first place...but you guys get the point.
Then, that's the end of it. Serves Ushgarak's triforce of justice while making an apathetic victim happier. (At least for five years.) It serves as a deterrent. It gives justice the the victim and he victim's family. He already removed himself from society for 30+ years, so that's all three requirements met. I'm sure getting his rectum slightly torn from some rough sex would be a nice deterrent from sodomizing children for just about everyone except for those into BDSM type of shit.
Look I can't f*king take this shit anymore because ive been holding this shit back for awhile.
It seems that some or maybe one person is arguing that even if he didn't rape the girl that its ok if the 13yr old gave consent. If thats the case you can **** off and go to hell.
Please dont give me any of the Greeks had sex with boys and they ended up alright bullshit that don't make it alright im pretty sure that women in ancient greece had their rights oppressed and they ended up 'alright' as well.
The fact of the matter is it was wrong and people can actually be convinced that something is wrong is right just because its the norm. We all ****ing know why its wrong for an adult to have sex with a 13yr old its a no-brainer and its not up for debate.
Furthermore you know why kids are so obessesed about sex, its because sex gets shoved down your throat all the time. Im clearly not saying that sex is wrong and its en evil thing but as it stands in socitey people are more interesting in exploiting people than having compassion what the hell do you expect?
Anyway heres the bottom line ask Hitler what he thinks about genocide he'll tell you its ok, ask a scumbag what he thinks about having sex with 13 yrs olds and he'll say its ok.
Get that its-ok-if-she-gave-consent shit the f*k out of here, find the nearest skyscraper and jump the f*k off.
Originally posted by Bardock42
It was to illuminate that 30 years in jail is a random number that has basically no relation to the goal you stated in your post.So he did plead guilty to the original charges? Or did he plead guilty to the charges that were agreed on?
Actually the 30 years wasn't random. I said that the 30 years should be giving to him for his 30 years of fleeing, this would be on-top of whatever amount of time he owes for his crime of 'unlawful sex with a minor'. I wasn't fully serious though, but I do think he should serve extra time for fleeing custody.
He was charged with a 6-7 counts (drugging, rape, sodomy, sex with person under 14 etc.). He plea-bargained it down to 'unlawful sex with a minor' and then fled before he was given a jail sentence for that crime. I suspect he got this much lighter charge because of who he is/knows.
If you read the court transcript, it's pretty clear he carefully planned it out, the photoshoot, the jacuzzi, the drugs, the alcohol, ****ing her up the ass so she wouldn't get pregnant. The man is a pedophile, a predator of children.
Originally posted by Robtard
Actually the 30 years wasn't random. I said that the 30 years should be giving to him for his 30 years of fleeing, this would be on-top of whatever amount of time he owes for his crime of 'unlawful sex with a minor'. I wasn't fully serious though, but I do think he should serve extra time for fleeing custody.He was charged with a 6-7 counts (drugging, rape, sodomy, sex with person under 14 etc.). He plea-bargained it down to 'unlawful sex with a minor' and then fled before he was given a jail sentence for that crime. I suspect he got this much lighter charge because of who he is/knows.
If you read the court transcript, it's pretty clear he carefully planned it out, the photoshoot, the jacuzzi, the drugs, the alcohol, ****ing her up the ass so she wouldn't get pregnant. The man is a pedophile, a predator of children.
If anything he is a ephebophile, a predator of teenagers. Though is there evidence that he is specifically attracted to them and that he preyed on others since then. Also, I'm not going to read the court transcript, but did he in it admit to drugging, raping, sodomizing, etc. or did he admit to what he was then charged with (it's the latter, isn't it?).
And are you serious about 30 years for evading arrest? Or did you just knee jerk that in there because it's about "a poor poor innocent child cryoh cryoh"
Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Look I can't f*king take this shit anymore because ive been holding this shit back for awhile.It seems that some or maybe one person is arguing that even if he didn't rape the girl that its ok if the 13yr old gave consent. If thats the case you can **** off and go to hell.
Please dont give me any of the Greeks had sex with boys and they ended up alright bullshit that don't make it alright im pretty sure that women in ancient greece had their rights oppressed and they ended up 'alright' as well.
The fact of the matter is it was wrong and people can actually be convinced that something is wrong is right just because its the norm. We all ****ing know why its wrong for an adult to have sex with a 13yr old its a no-brainer and its not up for debate.
Furthermore you know why kids are so obessesed about sex, its because sex gets shoved down your throat all the time. Im clearly not saying that sex is wrong and its en evil thing but as it stands in socitey people are more interesting in exploiting people than having compassion what the hell do you expect?
Anyway heres the bottom line ask Hitler what he thinks about genocide he'll tell you its ok, ask a scumbag what he thinks about having sex with 13 yrs olds and he'll say its ok.
Get that its-ok-if-she-gave-consent shit the f*k out of here, find the nearest skyscraper and jump the f*k off.
No
Originally posted by Bardock42
If anything he is a ephebophile, a predator of teenagers. Though is there evidence that he is specifically attracted to them and that he preyed on others since then. Also, I'm not going to read the court transcript, but did he in it admit to drugging, raping, sodomizing, etc. or did he admit to what he was then charged with (it's the latter, isn't it?).And are you serious about 30 years for evading arrest? Or did you just knee jerk that in there because it's about "a poor poor innocent child cryoh cryoh"
You should read the court transcript, especially the second part. You'd be better informed on the situation.
He plea bargained all the charges down to 'unlawful sex with a person under 14', which would have been a couple years in jail, probably less for good behavior. I.E., he got lucky with his connections and I suspect the Manson-thing helped him in the sympathy department some.
I was being factious in giving him an extra year of jail-time for each year he was a fugitive. He should get whatever time added to his sentence for that crime though, be it 1 or 30 years, I don't know the legalities if it; he'll probably use his notoriety and his Hollywood connections to reduce that too, the pedo.
Edit: As to your question about him doing it again. It's hard to find anything online now other than his current arrest. But iirc, he was quoted in saying something like "I can't help it if all the little-girls love me", years after he fled to France.
Originally posted by Robtard
You should read the court transcript, especially the second part. You'd be better informed on the situation.He plea bargained all the charges down to 'unlawful sex with a person under 14', which would have been a couple years in jail, probably less for good behavior. I.E., he got lucky with his connections and I suspect the Manson-thing helped him in the sympathy department some.
I was being factious in giving him an extra year of jail-time for each year he was a fugitive. He should get whatever time added to his sentence for that crime though, be it 1 or 30 years, I don't know the legalities if it; he'll probably use his notoriety and his Hollywood connections to reduce that too, the pedo.
Edit: As to your question about him doing it again. It's hard to find anything online now other than his current arrest. But iirc, he was quoted in saying something like "I can't help it if all the little-girls love me", years after he fled to France.
This might be interesting.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-09-30/polanskis-lost-alibi/