Polanski will probably get a couple years time, or more, and die in prison. Then most people will feel bad: He lived as a vagabond as a child to avoid mass murderers after him; Americans murdered his beautiful wife and unborn child in one of the most brutal and gory murders ever documented--and then gave him life in prison for...an interaction with an underage girl that the girl herself didn't seem to have too much of a problem with (let's remember that she never even bothered to TELL her mother about it--her mother overheard the topic as she discussed it with her boyfriend).

Even though I really do disapprove strongly with what he did; still, he should get the time he was slated for for that crime (which he already served), and get a short sentence (say 3-6 months, max) for skipping out on sentencing.

[Apologies to those who note I've posted this twice. The first time I was merely in "jurisprudence" and not "jurisprudence>>The los angeles DA on Roman Polanski," hence my post would never been seen by anyone coming to the fray straight from the article. I WONDER how hard Slate really had to work to make their forum SO BAD--especially when there are PERFECTLY FINE canned forum programs available for free]

The fact that the victim did not tell her mother does prove that it was not a problem for her. In fact many children abused inside or outside their family do not tell anybody. In our country (Czech Republic) we had a case of famous choirmaster and conductor who abused scores of young girls in his choir; none of them told their parents at the time the crime was happenning. It was investigated after many years only because a sister of one of the abused girls told about her sisters trauma to her husband who is a clinical psychologist.

I meant of course "does not prove"

I wouldn't dare to try (very hard) to imply that what he did wasn't harmful. But I DO know that if children feel they have been badly harmed they tend to tell their parents.

I wonder how you come to conclude that children not telling their parents in ANOTHER case proves anything about how this girl felt? Maybe they DO did not see it as something extremely harmful to them?

I have no way of knowing how people feel about things unless they TELL ME how they feel. So far, all this woman has told is that dealing with the legal authorities and the media has been MORE of a burden than what happened with her regarding Polanski. To my mind....well....it doesn't sound like she found it that damaging an experience--although, again, I'm hardly defending it.

Only she can know how she feels.

if he dies in prison, that's the breaks. He had his whole life living free without paying for his crime. Now it's time for him to pay the piper.

Bondsman:

if he dies in prison, that's the breaks. He had his whole life living free without paying for his crime. Now it's time for him to pay the piper.

I don't necessarily disagree. I'm only saying, if that happened, then in the end his life would be overall seen as tragic. One really does have to ask how the little runt could REALLY come to deserve such ominous and powerful forces being focused on him so destructively over an entire lifetime....

If the little runt didn't flee this would of been over with 30 years ago. He would of done his year or so back then and it would be over.

The fault is 100% his for fleeing in the first place and then for NOT saying in countries that would NOT have arrested in for this. I believe he could of stayed in France and thus the LA DA would never of got an arrest. France is very nice. He should of just stayed there.