Libtard Finally Admits to Raping A Child...Then Declares The Matter Is OVER...Because He Says So.

[JoeB131]

When did you decide to become a liar to support Roman Polansky?

There is absolutely no evidence that the victim- or her mother- had any intention of 'extorting' money out of Polansky when he lured the victim in.

Nor is there any evidence that the mother ever looked for any cash.

Other than the $600,000 lawsuit they settled... and then whined when they weren't paid fast enough.

Why did he settle? Because Polansky didn't think he would win in a trial and didn't want to take the risk.

Well, kind of hard to argue a case when you can't show up because they are still trying to arrest you.

Why do assholes like you attack the victims of rape?

Please stay away from women- for their sake.

Why do you denigrate victims of real rape by conflating them with grifters and con artists?

What's next, a defense of the Duke LaCrosse Accuser? Because clearly, the best way to approach these things is with pure emotion and an assumption of guilt.

Here's the thing. What the State did here was so egregious, I really don't care about what Polanski did. I'm sorry you don't get that, but I have no desire to live in a police state, no matter how "well-intentioned".

 

[Syriusly]

Yep- the McMartin preschool case is a text book account of abuse of power, and abusing children in order to try to get a prosecution.

Of course if it had happened- you would be explaining how those pre-schoolers actually gave consent....

But never mind, let's conflate Little Grifter with a preschooler, that's a strong argument.

You are the one who is calling the victim of rape- 'Little Grifter".

I guess you call the families of O.J.'s victims 'Big Grifters.

 

[JoeB131]

Polanski never served a negotiated sentence. He was enrolled in an inhouse psychiatric facility for an evaluation. That wasn't part of his sentence.

Actually, it was. And even the psychiatric facility didn't want to keep him for the full 90 days.

They concluded he wasn't a pedophile and wasn't likely to ever do that again.

 

[JoeB131]

You are the one who is calling the victim of rape- 'Little Grifter".

I guess you call the families of O.J.'s victims 'Big Grifters.

Well,n o, because those people ACTUALLY DIED.

 

[Syriusly]

[Q\
Why do you denigrate victims of real rape by conflating them with grifters and con artists?\.

Why do you denigrate the victims of real rape- by saying that the rape of a 13 year old by a 40 year old man is not 'real rape'?

If she was 12 would it be real rape- what about if she was 11? Or 10? or 5? or 3?

I am just trying to get an idea if there is any bottom to the age you think girls can 'consent' to have sex with 40 year old men?

 

[Syriusly]

You are the one who is calling the victim of rape- 'Little Grifter".

I guess you call the families of O.J.'s victims 'Big Grifters.

Well,n o, because those people ACTUALLY DIED.

And Polansky's victim was actually raped.

 

[JoeB131]

The victim was so 'money hungry' that she didn't file her lawsuit for 11 years.....you know that is how 'grifter's' work.
And of course the mother never did.

Please stay far away from women.

Guy, if you want to keep up with the personal insults, I can just put your ass on ignore.

Sorry, so the fact they didn't figure out how to sue him for 11 years is supposed to impress me.

Do you know what would have impressed me? Mom not driving her to a wild party at night.

 

[Syriusly]

My last post on the subject- because arguing with someone like Joe who has made it clear that he doesn't give a damn about young girls being raped is like arguing about abortion- Joe will always blame the victim- and lie about what happened.

Meanwhile- going back to the thread itself.

Doesn't matter whether it was Polansky, Hastert or Sandusky- rape of underage minors is always wrong- and I fully support the convictions and punishment- this is not a political issue- even though the OP wants to abuse the issue of child sexual abuse to make it a political issue.

 

[JoeB131]

And Polansky's victim was actually raped.

As Whoopi famously said, it wasn't "Rape, rape". again, you can call it a unicorn, but that doesn't make it a unicorn.

 

[hadit]

Polanski pleaded guilty. Did you miss that part? She said no. Did you miss that part? She was 13. Did you miss that part? Seriously, if you can't condemn what he did, there's no more to be said.

He plead guilty to a misdemeanor because it was less trouble than going through a trial. Did you miss that part, or are you just okay with prosecutors running roughshod over the Fifth and Sixth Amendments in order to get the "Evil Doers".

Hey, I'm sure the prosecutors who went after the McMartin Family thought they were getting "evil-doers" too.

Now, here's the thing. He plead guilty in accordance with a plea agreement, and served out the negotiated sentence. This was after he returned to this country when he really didn't have to.

And then the prosecutor and the judge decided, Meh, fuck it, and did a lot of unethical things in order to get an "Evil Doer".

So I guess we can just dispense with those pesky constitutional rights when we feel we are getting the Evil Doers, right? I'm sure that never ends up badly.

He raped a 13 year old girl and you cannot condemn him for doing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You do know what statutory rape is, do ya?

Just as Moynihan predicted.....Liberals work tirelessly to 'define deviancy downward.'

I suspect a hidden desire to commit what they are ready to claim is not a crime....

Not all that well hidden.

In the forty years since Polanski's crime, we have seen several sick forms of sexual perversion, that were unthinkable then, come to be held in modern society to be socially acceptable, to the point that anyone who calls them for what they are is branded a “hateful bigot”.

And now raping children is among the things to be thus normalized.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

He did get away Scott Free... from a bullshit charge brought by crooked prosecutors. The rest of us, however, could be subjected to this kind of state abuse at any time,and that's the problem.

The rest of us don't rape children, so no, we're not in any danger of being subjected to that sort of “abuse”.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Justifying pedophilia as just another form of sex indicates a truly twisted mind. This is just how child rapists become child rapists. Once it's justified in their minds the pedophile can do anything.

 

[Ame®icano]

You do know what statutory rape is, do ya?

Just as Moynihan predicted.....Liberals work tirelessly to 'define deviancy downward.'

I suspect a hidden desire to commit what they are ready to claim is not a crime....

Not all that well hidden.

In the forty years since Polanski's crime, we have seen several sick forms of sexual perversion, that were unthinkable then, come to be held in modern society to be socially acceptable, to the point that anyone who calls them for what they are is branded a “hateful bigot”.

And now raping children is among the things to be thus normalized.

I said the same over two years ago...

And here we go: Pedophilia is being normalized.

 

[JoeB131]

He raped a 13 year old girl and you cannot condemn him for doing it.

No, can't condemn him for a legal technicality that even the prosecutors couldn't charge him for.

 

[JoeB131]

Not all that well hidden.

In the forty years since Polanski's crime, we have seen several sick forms of sexual perversion, that were unthinkable then, come to be held in modern society to be socially acceptable, to the point that anyone who calls them for what they are is branded a “hateful bigot”.

And now raping children is among the things to be thus normalized.

Yes, because, clearly, teens weren't having sex 40 years ago. Oh, no, wait. they were. Remember well my Catholic Boys School where we were all bragging about our sexual conquests. Some of them were even true.

You see, just because you have a bunch of sexual hangups, doesn't mean the real world isn't out there.

Teens are having sex and some people are gay. Deal with it.

 

[JoeB131]

The rest of us don't rape children, so no, we're not in any danger of being subjected to that sort of “abuse”.

Really? Did you miss the whole McMartin Preschool Trial, where an entire family was accused of sexual abuse of children because therapists planted false memories of things that were patently absurd?

 

[hadit]

He raped a 13 year old girl and you cannot condemn him for doing it.

No, can't condemn him for a legal technicality that even the prosecutors couldn't charge him for.

Condemn him for forcing himself on a 13 year old girl after she said no. Quit hiding behind legal technicalities. If you can't do that, you might as well get used to being known as condoning the rape of a child.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mudwhistle]

That article was published yesterday. It's time to get over it.

Yeah....old news.

 

[JoeB131]

Condemn him for forcing himself on a 13 year old girl after she said no.

There's no evidence she said "no" other than her word.

Quit hiding behind legal technicalities.

Constitutional rights are a legal technicality now?

If you can't do that, you might as well get used to being known as condoning the rape of a child.

Little Grifter was hardly a "child".