I'm interested to hear people's views on Roman's arrest which looks to me as being set in motion by an LA DA, probably intent upon a political career.

Personally I believe it's a scandal. 30 years after the crime-there has to be a statute time limit on everything except murder.It's another example of 'pedo hysteria'.

As for Polanski-if this guy hasn't had his own personal share of tragedies I don't know who has. The Hollocaust and the horrific Sharon Tate murder plus his own personal exile from the USA.

My prediction-the Swiss will find a technicality to allow Polanski to go free.Most of Europe regards Polanski as one of their own admire his artistry and the Swiss government to be seen handing him over to the Yanks will not be popular.

## and contrast it with the detention of the mass murderer Pinochet who was allowed to go free.

Whilst obviously, like all normal people, I'm horrified for the guy, I'm basically delighted that the dark forces are so stupid; unaware that blatant and vicious vengeance, spite, nastiness and bile can only get those sitting on the fence considering that there is something wrong with our species.

I agree 100% with both Veritas and JK.

Even the victim of 30+ years ago has filed unsuccessfully for the case to be dropped, citing the fact that the constant publishing of lurid details in the media is damaging to both herself and her young family.

Once again, just as in the recent forcing of a 15 year old girl to testify against her lover/'abuser', it shows that our pedohysteria and judicial system has NOTHING to do with preventing harm to young people.

However,I find the support for Polanski both heartning and rather hypocritical. Apparently the Polish foreign minister has described this as an outrage and appealed to the USA for clemency. This, two days after Poland introduced compulsory castration for sex offenders. Also, under this French government, France has introduced similar castration treatments. Not only that, it has built a special prison for 'paedophiles', the idea being that once in, these subhumans will never leave. In other words, Sarkozy has had built the first concentration camp in Western Europe since the Nazis.

Clearly, this is a vicious, irrational persecution of a 76 year old man who isn't a threat to anyone, who has suffered more trauma than any of us can imagine, and yet who has enriched the culture of Europe. The fact is, he has been accused of doing something that is arguably far worse than what panto pedo Gary Glitter did, and far, far worse than what JK was (falsely) accused of (almost as long ago). As in the Michael Jackson idolatory, some of this defence of Polanski smacks of 'some of my best friends are x (x=subhumans)'.

On the subject of imprisoning paedophiles for life, I have heard several comments to the effect that the government's proposed 'Super Prisons' might be used to intern all registered sex offenders and other long term undesirables. While this would be a popular move with tabloid readers, I truly hope no British government would be stupid enough to go in this direction. Britain doesn't need Soviet style gulags where anyone considered a threat by the state are denied basic legal rights and hidden away from society under the guises of public protection and national security. Especially as all that is needed to condemn someone to such a place is the uncorroborated word of an accuser.

Under the old House of Lords, run by those who's families had put the interest of the nation before politics for many generations, any such proposal would be rejected. But now we have political peers who put party before country and will vote as the whip dictates. Anything can happen.

funny JC but you bring up some very relevant points.

It's odd that the old House of Lords was possibly more democratic than the new set-up with political appointments.

I viewed it as an assembly of village elders-not appointed but one of those peculiar British institutions that work.

The new incarnation of the Lords is really an abomination despite there being many noble people there who could only be regarded as honorable (in every sense of the word). And BR is so right in many things he says if somewhat emphatic in his presentation.

I remember 25 years ago accompanying a friend whose father was in the Lords with a mutual friend who was rather a brassy blonde and buxom lady. This guy's dad was always on at his son to visit and-in they wonderful eccentric manner, didn't see anything bizarre in me in full make-up and World's End clobber and our busty friend in leopard print dress.

It's tradition (now gone)for the son of a Lord's member to sit in a particular chair reserved for the sons of nobility (on the understanding that he will eventually take his own seat).

We were welcomed by the Speaker who welcomed the son, and then aknowledging us as friends said "and I see Lord **** ( divorced)now is going for the Diana Dors look " referring to our blonde friend. The chamber applauded heartily.

Imagine that happening under Blair/Brown and all the timeservers.

As for Polanski-I recall an interview he did long before his rape charge when he described hiding under a bridge in Poland and watching the Nazis line-up the Jews of his village including 2 of his aunts and machine-gunning the lot.

It was in response to his brilliant Rosemary's Baby film when he concluded-"I've seen more horrors than you could ever imagine"

veritas wrote:


P30 years after the crime-there has to be a statute time limit on everything except murder.It's another example of 'pedo hysteria'.



So man who raped a 4 year old child in 1978 shouldn't face prosecution. ? What a strange mind you have....

Anyone see a similarity between this and Matthew Kelly's arrest on stage in pantomime?

The forces of justice have really learned how to use the forces of media.

he was arrested and prosecuted but fled.

He also claims the judge at the time welshed on a deal with his lawyers about sentencing and the victim has confirmed this as have her lawyers.

Polanski got wind that the prosecution and the judge were conspiring which is why he did a runner. What was going to be a 12 month sentence which he would have done was to be an 8 year sentence.

You can't have it both ways-either the law operates as it is meant..and I don't agree with the reduced sentence deals that operate in the USA as they are now designed to obtain convictions from the innocent so they can avoid costly trials...or when it is corrupted anyone should do what suits them best.

This is the result of electing District Attorneys as happens in the USA which politicizes policing.

I well remember at the time Sharon Tate got murdered-Polanski was criticised in the media endlessly for what was regarded as a "swinging" lifestyle with implications those murdered were somehow responsible for it. He is correct-there was plenty of racist hate directed towards him and if anyone doesn't think the LA justice system is thriving with corruption then..well that would be strange thinking.

Stranger thinking is not taking into note the hollistic thinking of the whole case...the victim herself claims every time the case gets mentioned it becomes pure horror for her all over again and this Polanski's arrest is causing her family distress.

If life were only as cut and dried as people believe.

I don't like comparisons but I'm seeing more outrage about Polanski because it's sex related than I ever saw about Pinochet-freed by the British government-a man who had hundreds of Chilean students machine-gunned in a football stadium.

Plenty of strange thinking in this world.

and yes-there should be time limits on all crime cases as there is ...except sex related and murder. Sex accusations are the easiest to make and difficult to disprove and could easily be made against you mikemacca if someone knew where you were on a certain day 20 years ago.

And as in my case, when someone THOUGHT they knew where you were 25 years ago but actually were wrong; the British justice system believes we Vile Perverts are capable of Time Travel (according to them I committed a crime in London when I was in New York).

Any crime that took place over 5 years ago should not be able to be prosecuted unless it had already been on file e.g a murder etc. To create new "cases" out of thin air is obviously wrong and means that no one can defend themselves in any meaningful way.

However, in this particular case justice was done at the time - and Polanski admitted the offences.

I dont agree with his arrest this weekend - but I do agree with his attempt to get the case ended for his sake and the sake of the Woman involved.

It seems that the whole thing has become the LA police dept. against Polanski and has nothing to do with the orginal offences anymore.

It should now be thrown out and he should offer to serve the 12 month sentence in a French jail as was orginally agreed - so that there is closure.