And the part about her indicating compliance by taking off her own underwear is particularly disgusting. A child complied with the instructions of a man who had all the physical, social, and situational power. That in no way indicates consent, which she had no legal power to give regardless.

exactly, 13 year olds are idiots and will do anything you tell them to. The onus is on the adult to not take advantage of them. Would it have been ok to order her to hand over all her money and then leave? No, even if she seemed to do it willingly it is still stealing. If stealing from her is not ok then why in the world would it be ok to subject her to rape?

Indeed, whether he is a pedophile or not (he's not) is not the issue. The fact is that he's a rapist. And I don't see how a couple months of jail is a sufficient sentence for someone who raped a person. Sure, she was sexually mature, in a physical sense - but she was 13, unable to give informed consent, and didn't even give UNINFORMED consent. He drugged her. Sure, the laws around age of informed consent can be somewhat arbitrary. An 18 year old should not be locked up for having consensual sex with a 17 year old. But a 40 year old SHOULD be locked up (for quite some time) for drugging and raping a 13 year old. End of story.

I agree with you that he is NOT a pedophile and that this is NOT an issue because he clearly IS a rapist but I was told by at least 10 people that I'm a pervent and sick, so to a lot of these moron it does matter and they have to believe he is a pedophile!

Sadly the 'end of story' in my view is that the DA's office at the time accepted the plea deal for statutory rape, which is defined as consentual sex with a minor. AGAIN, it was RAPE and NOT statutory rape but the DA made a deal and I feel the state has to honor that deal since due process is a big part of the legal system.

My view is that people that want to see Polanski hung should really be upset at the DA's office. They were the ones that didn't respect the girl and created this travesty of justice.

Yet Polanski did not honor his part of that deal. I agree that the DA's office was far too lenient, but I'm not at all surprised by it. I would hope that they are harsher on him this time. I don't want him hanged of course, but he should see more than 40-some odd days or whatever it was.

Polanski must return and let the court decide his fate but I do NOT agree that they should be harsher on him this time since that would NOT follow due process. The deal was made and accepted by the DA. The state needs to honor this and NOT ask for a do-over.

Now the new part of the case is that he fled but the initial part of the case is closed in my view. Again, the DA was WRONG and should of changed him for rape, but they didn't and that is now history and shouldn't be reopened.

Sorry, but I think that Polanski's fleeing the the country for 30 years pretty much negates any plea deal that may have been made at the time. The whole point of a plea bargain is that they give you a lesser sentence in exchange for your full cooperation. Using his money and power to live the good life in Europe for three decades rather than face sentencing for his crime is not my idea of full cooperation with the justice system.

You keep saying the same thing over and over and over again in just about every thread. Why should the court have to honor the agreement that the DA made with him especially considering that he didn't honor the agreement when he fled before sentencing? His fleeing before sentencing claiming that he did it because he believed the judge was going to impose a longer sentence is not a defense as he didn't even make it to sentencing to find out what the judge was going to do. He broke the agreement when he fled and there is no reason why any judge should have to honor the DA's side of the agreement if they choose not to. If you contract someone to do something for you and you state that you are going to pay them so much and they do not do it, do you still have to pay them? He took off without serving the sentence that he was (supposedly promised by the DA) so the plea bargain became null and void.