FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[bud]

cant tell a 13 year old from an 18 year old? nice excuse.

[Amanda]

cant tell a 13 year old from an 18 year old? nice excuse.

I believe the age of consent was 14 at the time but regardless of that, he knew she was 13 and thus underage. The girl's testimony clearly implies that she was forcibly raped but Polanski took a plea bargain and admitted to statutory **** in order to receive a lesser sentence.

[bud]

cant tell a 13 year old from an 18 year old? nice excuse.

I believe the age of consent was 14 at the time but regardless of that, he knew she was 13 and thus underage. The girl's testimony clearly implies that she was forcibly raped but Polanski took a plea bargain and admitted to statutory **** in order to receive a lesser sentence.

it was 14 in America?

[Amanda]

cant tell a 13 year old from an 18 year old? nice excuse.

I believe the age of consent was 14 at the time but regardless of that, he knew she was 13 and thus underage. The girl's testimony clearly implies that she was forcibly raped but Polanski took a plea bargain and admitted to statutory **** in order to receive a lesser sentence.

it was 14 in America?

I think it varied from state to state, as it does now. I can't find any information about the age of consent in California in 1977 other than what people have stated in articles. Either way, whether it was 18, 16 or 14, she was underage and he admitted knowing that. If the victim is to be believed the umpalumpa wasn't consensual anyway.

“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”

Err, no Roman, that's just the paedophiles. 13 is a little too young for most men and thankfully the law.

[Gaz]

Even if he didn't know her age as he claims, he still drugged and raped her even if she was 30 that's still very very wrong.

I don't get his argument "i thought she was over age"

BUT YOU DRUGGED and Raped Her still?!

the fact it was a kid is even more shocking.

he deserves to go to prison, end of.

[Amanda]

Even if he didn't know her age as he claims, he still drugged and raped her even if she was 30 that's still very very wrong.

I don't get his argument "i thought she was over age"

BUT YOU DRUGGED and Raped Her still?!

the fact it was a kid is even more shocking.

he deserves to go to prison, end of.

THE CLERK: Would you raise your right hand, please?

You do solemnly swear that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this Court shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

. . . .

MR. GUNSON: On March 10, 1977, the day you had sexual intercourse with the complaining witness, how old did you believe her to be?

(Pause in the proceedings while a discussion off the record ensued at the counsel table between the defendant and his counsel.)

THE DEFENDANT: She was 13.

MR. GUNSON: Did you understand that she was 13 on March 10, 1977, when you had sexual intercourse with her?

(Pause in the proceedings while a discussion off the record ensued at the counsel table between the defendant and his counsel.)

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

He admitted under oath that he knew her age.

[Hanwombat]

Whether underage or overage you dont drug and **** someone!

And when its underage, it would just ruin your childhood and most likely your life.

Ive been hearing about kids raping kids - disgusting

[Hanwombat]

cant tell a 13 year old from an 18 year old? nice excuse.

I believe the age of consent was 14 at the time but regardless of that, he knew she was 13 and thus underage. The girl's testimony clearly implies that she was forcibly raped but Polanski took a plea bargain and admitted to statutory **** in order to receive a lesser sentence.

it was 14 in America?

I think it varied from state to state, as it does now. I can't find any information about the age of consent in California in 1977 other than what people have stated in articles. Either way, whether it was 18, 16 or 14, she was underage and he admitted knowing that. If the victim is to be believed the umpalumpa wasn't consensual anyway.

“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”

Err, no Roman, that's just the paedophiles. 13 is a little too young for most men and thankfully the law.

Everyone wants to f*** young girls ? What world is he living in ?

[Gaz]

Even if he didn't know her age as he claims, he still drugged and raped her even if she was 30 that's still very very wrong.

I don't get his argument "i thought she was over age"

BUT YOU DRUGGED and Raped Her still?!

the fact it was a kid is even more shocking.

he deserves to go to prison, end of.

He admitted under oath that he knew her age.

No excuse what so ever then he should of been found and deported 30 years ago.

But he still should serve his crime now no matter how long ago it was hes got away with it and he deserves to go to prison for a very long time.

[Amanda]

cant tell a 13 year old from an 18 year old? nice excuse.

I believe the age of consent was 14 at the time but regardless of that, he knew she was 13 and thus underage. The girl's testimony clearly implies that she was forcibly raped but Polanski took a plea bargain and admitted to statutory **** in order to receive a lesser sentence.

it was 14 in America?

I think it varied from state to state, as it does now. I can't find any information about the age of consent in California in 1977 other than what people have stated in articles. Either way, whether it was 18, 16 or 14, she was underage and he admitted knowing that. If the victim is to be believed the umpalumpa wasn't consensual anyway.

“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”

Err, no Roman, that's just the paedophiles. 13 is a little too young for most men and thankfully the law.

Everyone wants to f*** young girls ? What world is he living in ?

For the last 30 years? In a world where people worship him because of his extrodinary talent, feel sympathy for him because his wife and unborn child were murdered and because he escaped from the Krakow ghetto, all completely forgetting that he drugged and raped a young girl.

[McLaren]

Well my opinion is a suttle one shoot the c t

[Hanwombat]

Hang!

[EwanM]

Well i think I've just been mini sick.

[texasmr2]

He is a sick and perverted man. He fled because he KNEW he would have been found guilty, off with his head and I mean both of them !!

[Amanda]

I want to correct my earlier statement. According to Cornell University Law School:

California's statutory **** law had its origins in the Statutes of Westminster enacted during the reign of Edward I at the close of the 13th century (3 Edw. 1, ch. 13 (1275); 13 Edw. 1, ch. 34 (1285)). The age of consent at that time was 12 years, reduced to 10 years in 1576 (18 Eliz. 1, ch. 7, § 4). This statute was part of the common law brought to the United States. Thus, when the first California penal statute was enacted, it contained a provision (1850 Cal.Stats., ch. 99, § 47, p. 234) that proscribed sexual intercourse with females under the age of 10. In 1889, the California statute was amended to make the age of consent 14 (1889 Cal.Stats., ch.191, § 1, p. 223). In 1897, the age was advanced to 16 (1897 Cal.Stats., ch. 139, § 1, p. 201). In 1913, it was fixed at 18, where it now remains (1913 Cal.Stats., ch. 122, § 1, p. 212).

So 18 is the age of consent and was at the time of the crime, despite what many journalists are saying. Not that it really matters anyway.

He is a sick and perverted man. He fled because he KNEW he would have been found guilty, off with his head and I mean both of them !!

Technically that's incorrect. Polanski made a plea bargain and expected to only get probation. Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney David Wells apparently intervened with the Judge (Laurence Rittenband), he believed Polanski was being too cavalier about the charges (using recent photographs of Polanski in Munich with two seemingly underage girls as evidence) and suggested he serve time. It was after hearing this that Polanski fled, fearing that he would face time in prison, which I personally believe he deserved.