Roman Polanski arrested (discuss)...

[jimbob]

Why do I put more credence on the victim's claim than the perpetrator in this case?

Her description of what happened fits with many other cases of sexual abuse. Her story hangs together.

In an attempt to plea-bargain, he admitted to drugging her and having sex with her in a situation, which is serious, he had made an attempt to reduce her ability to decide by chemical means.

What had the girl to gain? Maybe she wanted to get Polanski into trouble for something he didn't do, when he was already in trouble for what he did do.

I am not an expert, but victims of bullying often try to not show their emotions after the event if the bully is around. In many respects this is similar; so "sullen" fits with her story that she had been made to do something she didn't want to, whilst it doesn't fit with the idea that both parties had just done what they both wanted.

Remember that Angelica Huston was generally considered to be a friend of Polanski and not the girl.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Nice dodge. You're not fooling anyone.

The fact of the matter is you are arguing about things you see as numbers rather than judging it from the point of view that these people are... well, people. It's easy to be detached, even cynical, about people you simply see as statistics. But the point is that if it were your kid, you'd want her protected by the law, "sexually mature" or not. Why should it be different for people you don't know ?

Once again we see mobbing behaviour at work, along with the mythologisation of the target. As far as you're concerned you know what I really believe, and the pesky text that I actually present is merely a charade to hide my real beliefs.

If it was my kid I'd want the law to discourage people from having sex with her even if she wants to have sex with them until she's fifteen or sixteen to be on the safe side, and gee whiz, where I live it does just that. If she did end up having sex before that age then I'd be concerned but I wouldn't see any reason to take it as seriously as a rape or a murder. Correlation isn't destiny and plenty of people who are sexually active early go on to have lives which are statistically indistinguishable from the lives of their abstinent peers.

While I wouldn't at the moment support a change in the local laws to lower the age of consent to fourteen or fifteen (as it is in Germany, Austria, Iceland, France and I think one or two other civilised nations), if I did happen to live in one of those jurisdictions the lower age of consent wouldn't get my underwear bunched either.

Except that... Kevin is claiming the statistics support his case when they don't:

As I stated in the post Varwoche dishonestly dismisses as "a wave of my arm", he's wallowing in statistical errors which were ironed out in great detail in a previous thread. The short version is that no factual statement about "child sexual abuse" is meaningful unless it's accompanied by the specific definition used, because different scholarly studies used quite different definitions, and a list of the controls used, because correlation is not causation. Varwoche knows this, but has no ethical problems with spamming the same shallow, discredited garbage over and over again because (as you've demonstrated) some people are dumb enough to swallow it.

I wonder how many studies have been done on the harm of a man having sex with an unwilling girl 31-years his junior.

I'm not sure why the age of the rapist matters. Could you explain that to me?

As for whether we should believe the girl in the Polanski case or not, nobody here has yet come up with a remotely plausible story that explains the conflict between her statement and the forensic evidence other than that she lied about those aspects of what happened. Why she lied is anybody's guess, and whether the other aspects of her story uncorroborated by Polanski are true or false is also anybody's guess.

 

[Belz...]

Once again we see mobbing behaviour at work

Hey, if you're already in the dodging business, why not expand your product line and simply change the subject entirely ?

As far as you're concerned you know what I really believe

Do I ? I'm not a mind reader, and you're "argument" is so all over the place that I can't make heads or tails of what you truly think.

If it was my kid I'd want the law to discourage people from having sex with her even if she wants to have sex with them until she's fifteen or sixteen to be on the safe side, and gee whiz, where I live it does just that. If she did end up having sex before that age then I'd be concerned but I wouldn't see any reason to take it as seriously as a rape or a murder. Correlation isn't destiny and plenty of people who are sexually active early go on to have lives which are statistically indistinguishable from the lives of their abstinent peers.

Kevin, you are either uniquely dishonest or you have unique reading disabilities. We are not talking about a 13 year-old having sex with another teen. We're talking about a 13 year old having sex with a much older adult in a position of authority.

But I'm sure you already know this, so I'm going to cast my vote on uniquely dishonest.

 

[jimbob]

Kevin:

The age difference matters if you are discussing the results of studies. If you are claiming that Polanski is being hard done by, and using studies of willing sex between children of similar ages (if not with informed consent) to defend Polanski.

This was a situation where at the very least* the girl had been drugged, and the male was an adult significantly older (FTR the age difference is greater than between me and my youngest daughter)



*Polanski agreed with these facts.

 

[applecorped]

I'm not sure why the age of the rapist matters. Could you explain that to me?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Hey, if you're already in the dodging business, why not expand your product line and simply change the subject entirely ?

Thanks for the suggestion but I'll discuss whatever topics interest me out of those that are currently being discussed. Generally speaking, I'm not terribly interested in trivial problems or posting "me too!" so you'll find me in threads where there's significant disagreement and important facts or arguments are being overlooked.

Do I ? I'm not a mind reader, and you're "argument" is so all over the place that I can't make heads or tails of what you truly think.

If you read and understood what I wrote, as opposed to what others write about me or what you guess I "really mean", you'd see I've been quite consistent, and when I've been "inconsistent" it's because I've changed my mind based on new evidence.

Kevin, you are either uniquely dishonest or you have unique reading disabilities. We are not talking about a 13 year-old having sex with another teen. We're talking about a 13 year old having sex with a much older adult in a position of authority.

But I'm sure you already know this, so I'm going to cast my vote on uniquely dishonest.

No we're not. Go read this subthread again. I was responding to a specific question which did not specify anything about much older adults in positions of authority.

Also if you have any hard evidence that it's better for a thirteen year old to have sex with another teen than a much older adult I'd like to see it. It's commonly asserted, and it's one possible factual basis for Romeo and Juliet laws, but I've never seen any evidence for it.

Kevin:

The age difference matters if you are discussing the results of studies. If you are claiming that Polanski is being hard done by, and using studies of willing sex between children of similar ages (if not with informed consent) to defend Polanski.

Since I've stated clearly that I think the sentence he got was well within the realm of what is reasonable for what he pleaded guilty to, this seems a strange question.

However it does bring up an interesting point. Do you have any hard evidence that it's better for a thirteen year old to have sex with another teen than a much older adult? It's commonly asserted, and it's one possible factual basis for Romeo and Juliet laws, but I've never seen any evidence for it.

This was a situation where at the very least* the girl had been drugged, and the male was an adult significantly older (FTR the age difference is greater than between me and my youngest daughter)

*Polanski agreed with these facts.

If this is news to anyone at this stage of the thread, then their reading comprehension problems are even more serious than I had feared.

 

[Checkmite]

I did bow out of this thread, but this sounds like relevant information about the case I have not seen. Can you please link us to whichever site has the details of this? I won't return to comment on it here but I would very much like to read it.

*shrugs*

 

[JayJayJay]

In response to this thread, I am 100% behind the phrase "Y do the crime, you do the time." I don't care if Roman Polanski is a famous movie director, I don't care if he is old, I don't care if he has a lot of friends, etc. He would have already served his time had he not ran away.

Kevin Lowe, here are some links for ya. The teen sex thing is REALLY complicated.

http://insciences.org/article.php?article_id=5101
http://www1.umn.edu/urelate/newsservice/NS_details.php?release=070522_3344&page=UMNN
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/139938.php
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/04/17/adult-child-sex.htm

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

In response to this thread, I am 100% behind the phrase "Y do the crime, you do the time." I don't care if Roman Polanski is a famous movie director, I don't care if he is old, I don't care if he has a lot of friends, etc. He would have already served his time had he not ran away.

Kevin Lowe, here are some links for ya. The teen sex thing is REALLY complicated.

http://insciences.org/article.php?article_id=5101
http://www1.umn.edu/urelate/newsservice/NS_details.php?release=070522_3344&page=UMNN
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/139938.php
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/04/17/adult-child-sex.htm

Interesting stuff, but most especially the USA Today article which tends to confirm something I'd suspected. I thought it very curious that so much of the literature failed to differentiate between consensual sex with minors and the rape of minors, and that so much of the literature lumped large age ranges together, and I wondered to myself whether they did so deliberately to try to avoid backlash from self-righteous conservatives who attack any research that uncovers facts that clash with their preconceptions.

It looks like that's exactly what happens when you publish such research.

To quote from that article:

One of the authors — researcher Robert Bauserman, who was with the University of Michigan in 1998 — now says, "I have the feeling that if you don't say anybody under 18 is permanently psychologically harmed by any type of sexual experience," then you are called a supporter of pedophiles by critics.

Sounds exactly right to me. Some people get very, very angry when the facts don't support their prejudices, and don't have any compunction about attacking the messenger. I might have to track that one down at the state library, although it's seven years old now so it won't be completely up to date.

 

[Belz...]

If you read and understood what I wrote, as opposed to what others write about me or what you guess I "really mean", you'd see I've been quite consistent, and when I've been "inconsistent" it's because I've changed my mind based on new evidence.

Then would you mind making it clear what you think ?

No we're not. Go read this subthread again.

Does anybody here care, really, about teens having sex with one another ? I certainly don't. We're talking about Polanski, here.

I was responding to a specific question which did not specify anything about much older adults in positions of authority.

Fine, then. Fair enough.

Also if you have any hard evidence that it's better for a thirteen year old to have sex with another teen than a much older adult I'd like to see it. It's commonly asserted, and it's one possible factual basis for Romeo and Juliet laws, but I've never seen any evidence for it.

I'd think that any activity, especially intimate ones, are healthier when coercion is absent, wouldn't you agree ?

 

[Tailgater]

"One of the authors — researcher Robert Bauserman, who was with the University of Michigan in 1998 — now says, "I have the feeling that if you don't say anybody under 18 is permanently psychologically harmed by any type of sexual experience," then you are called a supporter of pedophiles by critics. ".

Such a generalized feeling.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Then would you mind making it clear what you think ?

So you don't have to do the hard work of keeping up? Not happening. Read the thread.

I'd think that any activity, especially intimate ones, are healthier when coercion is absent, wouldn't you agree ?

You must have misunderstood the question. Look, I'll ask it again.

Do you you have any hard evidence that it's better for a thirteen year old to have sex with another teen than a much older adult? It's commonly asserted, and it's one possible factual basis for Romeo and Juliet laws, but I've never seen any evidence for it.

I wasn't asking for handwaving explanations, appeals to pop or folk psychology, or appeals to existing laws. I was asking for hard evidence.

"One of the authors — researcher Robert Bauserman, who was with the University of Michigan in 1998 — now says, "I have the feeling that if you don't say anybody under 18 is permanently psychologically harmed by any type of sexual experience," then you are called a supporter of pedophiles by critics. ".

Such a generalized feeling.

I read that use of "anybody" and "all" to be in the more inclusive sense. In context I believe he's saying "If you don't say that everybody under eighteen is permanently harmed by any type of sexual experience they have...".

 

[Segnosaur]

Looks like Polanski is having a few health issues when in prision...

From: http://www.seattlepi.com/tvguide/411302_tvgif19.html
Roman Polanski reportedly has been taken from jail for medical attention for a second time since his arrest. "His general condition is no longer satisfactory," Polanski's lawyer, Herve Temime, said in a radio interview.

 

[Belz...]

So you don't have to do the hard work of keeping up?

No, so you don't feel good about yourself accusing me of misunderstanding or misrepresenting your position.

Not happening. Read the thread.

Ah, yes. I'll just go back and read the entire thing, when you could take 1 minute of your time to make it entirely clear to me and anybody else who might be confused about the issue. I'll have to chalk this one up as an admission that you have no clear position, here.

You must have misunderstood the question. Look, I'll ask it again.

Do you you have any hard evidence that it's better for a thirteen year old to have sex with another teen than a much older adult?

This is exactly what I was saying, Kevin. I'd think that any activity, especially intimate ones, are healthier when coercion is absent, wouldn't you agree ? I notice you didn't answer.

I wasn't asking for handwaving explanations, appeals to pop or folk psychology, or appeals to existing laws. I was asking for hard evidence.

I was asking for your opinion. Do you ever have any of those ?

 

[johnny karate]

Then would you mind making it clear what you think?

Ah, yes. I'll just go back and read the entire thing, when you could take 1 minute of your time to make it entirely clear to me and anybody else who might be confused about the issue. I'll have to chalk this one up as an admission that you have no clear position, here.

I'll second this sentiment. I've participated in this thread from the beginning, and I've yet to suss out Kevin's overall point.

Any cogent and coherent argument should be able to be summed up in a concise thesis statement.

Kevin, what is your thesis statement as pertains to this thread?

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

No, so you don't feel good about yourself accusing me of misunderstanding or misrepresenting your position.

Ah, yes. I'll just go back and read the entire thing, when you could take 1 minute of your time to make it entirely clear to me and anybody else who might be confused about the issue. I'll have to chalk this one up as an admission that you have no clear position, here.

What if I've been making a variety of points which can't be summed up with a sound bite like "Roman Polanski good!" or "Roman Polanski bad!"?

This is exactly what I was saying, Kevin. I'd think that any activity, especially intimate ones, are healthier when coercion is absent, wouldn't you agree ? I notice you didn't answer.

I was asking for your opinion. Do you ever have any of those ?

Since I'm aware of no hard evidence either way, no, I have no opinion that I can back up. If you're asking for my guess, and I emphasise that in my terms a guess is weaker than an opinion, I'd guess that the age of the older partner would make little or no difference once you controlled for everything else, but that older partners might well correlate with worse outcomes with limited controls.

I'll second this sentiment. I've participated in this thread from the beginning, and I've yet to suss out Kevin's overall point.

Any cogent and coherent argument should be able to be summed up in a concise thesis statement.

By the same token, multiple cogent and coherent arguments should not be able to be summed up in a single concise thesis statement.

Kevin, what is your thesis statement as pertains to this thread?

What's yours?

 

[Belz...]

What if I've been making a variety of points which can't be summed up with a sound bite like "Roman Polanski good!" or "Roman Polanski bad!"?

Then I'd expect you to answer the question, anyway.

What's yours?

I asked first.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Then I'd expect you to answer the question, anyway.

Bully for you.

I asked first.

Unless you're Johnny Karate's sock puppet, I don't think you did.

 

[Belz...]

Bully for you.



Unless you're Johnny Karate's sock puppet, I don't think you did.

Well, then. I guess you won't make your position clear, then. I guess that suits you just fine, eh ?

 

[Segnosaur]

Little more Polanski news...

Looks like it was actually the Swiss government that tipped off the U.S. authorities about Polanski's trip there...

From: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091021/ap_en_ce/eu_switzerland_polanski
According to the e-mails, the Swiss ministry sent an urgent fax to the U.S. Office of International Affairs on Sept. 22 stating Polanski was traveling to Zurich. The director was to be feted at a film festival, and Swiss officials wanted to know if the U.S. would be submitting a request for his arrest as he was the subject of an international law enforcement "Red Notice."
...
Polanski has until Oct. 29 to appeal the decision on his release. He also can continue attempts to persuade the Swiss Justice Ministry to release him.... Legal experts said no path offered Polanski much hope for a speedy release from jail... It is not clear how much time in jail Polanski faces now, either in Switzerland or in the United States. With appeals, the extradition process in Switzerland could take months. In the United States, Polanski fled before sentencing was complete and is expected to face additional penalties for jumping bail.


I wonder, does the time Polanski spends in Swiss jail counted against any sentence he gets in the U.S.? If not, is it really a good idea to fight extradition? After all, he could end up spending longer in a Swiss jail than he would if he simply came back to the U.S. and accepted his punishment.