Patrick's Place

(Link in blogroll)
Monday's Morals

You’re the judge who winds up with the Polanski case. Your options are to sentence him to the jail time he should have gotten for the crime to which he pleaded guilty 32 years ago, that time plus additional time for fleeing the country, or no time at the request of his accuser. Which would you select and why.

I'm curious: can the accuser/victim be forced to testify if this comes to court? Even though she has asked charges to be dropped?

My answer to the main question is that I think if she isn't willing to prosecute on the rape charge (and yes, Whoopi, it was rape-rape--how can you be so moronic?), then it should be dropped.

HOWEVER, I do think that Polanski should be tried for fleeing the country to avoid prosecution. The man is 75 and has, in effect, imprisoned himself for 30 years, but he definitely should have to account for himself. I'd like to see him donate a substantial wad of money to agencies that aid the victims of pedophiles and sexual predators. And he should admit that he did something wrong, and apologize to Geimer if he has not already done so. It wouldn't be beyond reason for him to talk to/listen to other men who didn't have the wherewithal to leave the country after they were arrested for similar crimes.

But mostly, this is a horrendous waste of time and resources that would be better spent on catching and prosecuting the evil perverts who are currently sexually abusing children and young teens right this very minute.