I thought I shouldn’t have used “statutory”. That was to shorten my sentence. I meant sex with minors in general.
Yes, you’re correct. I should’ve said a successful prosecution.
I meant, of course, pursuing his extradition in countries he may find himself and which would actually extradite him. Of course, France’s stance isn’t what the authorities back in the US wish to agree with.
IIRC, there have been a few cases where the authorities in one country refuse to assist with a fugitive’s prosecution in a second country even when the penalty in the second country is quite likely to be more severe than in the first. National pride, designated as “sovereignty”, seems to be the usual reason proffered for that.
Canada will not permit a person to be extradited if the penalty would contravene section 7 of our Constitution Act’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms by violating fundamental justice. That’s why we don’t ship off people who could be facing torture or death.
When the USA undertakes to ensure fundamental justice, then extradition takes place.
We only have her word for it that she did not consent. According to Polanski she did consent. Furthermore her actions prior to the alleged rape give me plenty of reason to believe it is more likely she did consent. She went alone to a nude photo shoot, in 1970’s LA where trading sex for movie opportunities was an incredibly common occurrence. Nor was she or her mother inexperienced with how the system worked. Both were aspiring actresses. If she were really concerned about Polanski trying anything, she would have brought along either her mother or another adult. They would have had her medically examined after the alleged rape. The entire setup looks like she went there with no purpose other than trapping Polanski with sex. Now whether this plan was completely the mothers or the daughters or more likely a collusion between them both is up for debate.
False – Polanski flat out admits she was his victim.
Hasn’t Canada extradited someone to the US to face a possible death penalty in fairly recent memory?
More like Polanski wants to get on with his life too and is willing to try the public grovel it he thinks it will get people to shut up and stop dwelling on this.
No, this is far, far less likely. It’s baffling why anyone would try to twist themselves into knots to try to defend a man who admits he sexually victimized a 13 year old girl.
No. Check out the “death” link.
In short, the SCC in Burns 2001 changed the law that it had previously made Kindler 1991 and Ng 1991. The linked Burns decision includes links to Kindler and Ng.
nm.
True, but he didn’t try to shake her hand.
That’s nice, but you still haven’t explained why you have no problem with him anally penetrating an intoxicated 13-year-old but you would have a problem with him offering to shake her hand.
Could you please explain that.
Thanks in advance.
Dude the guy survived the Holocaust, give him a break!
Stopped clocks, etc, etc.
That break doesn’t include putting up with the rape of 13 year old girls.
It’s all about consent. Sticking a hand out at woman trying to publically coerce her into touching you is wrong, really wrong. It’s an act of publically trying to compromise and disgrace her. If she consents to that behavior, different story. If the 13-year consents to be anally penetrated, then the matter is between her and the person that penetrates. So far, the alleged victims actions don’t indicate to me that she had a problem with what Polanski did to her other than perhaps it didn’t get her and her mother the financial and professional rewards they wanted.
I don’t consider consensual sex victimization and I think statutory rape laws are ridiculous, especially in cases like this.
She says it wasn’t consensual, and he says she was his victim. Considering how differently people can react to rape and assault, I see nothing in her behavior afterwards that suggests that her testimony was false. I also believe that, morally, an adult male who would be willing to have sex with a 13 year old girl is also probably willing to have non-consensual sex with a 13 year old girl.
So we have her testimony, and we have Polanski stating (finally!) that she was his victim. That’s more than good enough for me to conclude that it’s much more likely than not that the sex was not consensual.