erotha_wills

A very interesting, insightful analysis has appeared, done by Brendan O'Meill at 'Spiked'.
here: http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7464/

My take on it - commenting both on O'Neill's article and on the situation is as follows:-

This... is brilliant, measured, insightful.
As a lawyer- I agree that it would have been helpful to have a debate about arrest warrants for long ago crimes (e.g Nazi war criminals).

I happen to think that with certain crimes, there should be no time barring as regards prosecution.

As a 'liberal' I don't see how this type of case is a positive example of 'pushing back the boundaries of..' anything.

As a mother- I do think Britain is in the grip of hysteria about paedophilia, but I dont think raping and sodomizing children-however eminent the perpetrator- is something that should be a matter of artistic licence due to a)the passage of time and b) the forgiveness of the victim.

The factors the pro-Polanski side want taken into consideration are perhaps relevant when it comes to sentencing. Not whether the man should be held culpable. Ultimately, the furore about this boils down to that current obsession, celebrity. If Polanski had been a Mexican-American, senior citizen who worked as a labourer, found in Central or South America after 3 decades as a fugitive, no one would be defending him.