I thought this was a no-brainer: Why the victim does not decide the criminal case.

[howard112211]

The number of people who don't seem to understand why we don't let the victim decide what the penalty for a crime is amazes me. The recently re-inflamed Polanski debate has once again produced many posts here demonstrating such lack of understanding.

So why exactly is the argument „but the victim said to let the topic rest“ complete nonsense? For a number of related reason.

In a general sense, because it is one of the achievements of human society that every person has the right to have their case examined by an independent body, such that they don't have to carry the burden of delivering justice themselves. The theory goes that the independent body can examine the case objectively, without being impaired by personal involvment in the case.

Furthermore, because letting the victim decide seldomly would lead to justice. There are a number of reasons why a victim will evaluate the situation incorrectly. In some cases, the victim might want to „get back at the perp“ and impose a sentence that is much to harsh to be fitting of the crime. But these cases are not the real issue. More problematic is the fact that letting the victim decide will often let criminals walk free.

Not only can victims be bought-off or intimidated (the later being a very relevant factor in rape cases, especially ones involving a family member), also some people are indeed „good natured“
and forgive more easily than the perp deserves.

Let's look at the Polanski case. The victim says „let's move on“. This is only natural from her perspective. Chances are she has really put the issue behind her and doesn't want to dwell on it. Kudos to her for that. However, another factor may be that she does not want her victimhood re-enforced.

Consider that the media were already following her around for decades, and that a number of prominent Hollywood people have voiced support for Polanski. What do you think would have happened if she had said „I want him in jail for life“ instead? Don't you think the tabloid press would have lamented on how vengeful she is, and that the „it wasn't rape-rape“ crowd would be out in full force, calling her a prostitute and all the other crap they have already been implying?

The way our criminal system is supposed to work, is that it punishes people for crimes, without the need for the victim to carry the additional burden of being „vindictive“. And that is a very good thing.

On a side note: One thing I have noted is that conservatives seem to decidedly not be defending Polanski. If one likes, this is a positive developement. Thirty years ago, there would be prominent conservatives defending the rich white male and questioning the character of the victim.

Having said that, I really don't understand what people get out of trying to defend Polanski. Some people really seem to have some sort of emotinal need to stand up for him. Sure he made some movies, some good ones maybe. Actually, I just recently watched my first Polanski movie: „The ninth gate“. I shortly considered whether I should „boycott“ him like some are saying, but then though „oh, what the hell“ and rented the DVD. Yup, a damn good movie. One of the best I had seen in a while. Now throw the fucker in jail already.

[lapislzi]

1. Important also to make the distinction:

Between "justice" and "punishment." Not the same thing. There's a reason justice is supposed to be blind and impartial. Emotions should play no role in the administration of justice. Sadly, that is rarely the case, but we try to stack the deck by the use of a jury system. The expectation being that amongst 12 peers, cooler heads will prevail most of the time.

It's not perfect, but it sure beats vigilantism by a long stretch.

That being said, the fucker needs to be in jail. No fuss, just toss him. Not for the sake of the victim so much, but for society's sake. Rapists shouldn't be allowed to go free. The law says so.

[Deep13]

2. Hasn't he already been sentenced?

If so, there is nothing to decide. He simply has to serve whatever time that court has ordered.

Crimes are offenses against the state for a reason. Part of it is so the victim does not have the burden of being the one to bring the offender to justice. The other is that a person can feel victimized even if no crime were committed. In those cases, the state has an obligation not to prosecute.

[msanthrope]

3. He skipped before sentencing, but after guilty plea.

He did a 42 day stint for psychiatric eval...and jumped when it seemed likely he was going to get jail time, instead of probation.

[BurtWorm]

4. Throw the fucker in jail already? How do you propose to do that?

Switzerland held him for months and decided not to extradite him. Should the US send a special unit to Paris now to grab him?

California had him. California fucked up their chance to throw him in jail. There's no other way to get him there, finally, it seems than to kidnap him from France. Should we do that?

[howard112211]

5. I do realize that.

I'm speaking more about generalities than technicalities. Likely is that he will now not face any additional prison time.

[BurtWorm]

6. That's all the Polanski talk has become and will ever be is just generalities.

A lot of wind over something no one in this forum can do a single thing about.

[howard112211]

7. True, But realizing that a situation cannot be changed doesn't bar discussion.

People have endorsed Polanski being free as the right thing. No reason to not call that out.

[BurtWorm]

8. People can talk all they want, but they wind up saying absurdities like

throw the fucker in jail already.

[howard112211]

9. People have said "impeach Bush" and "stop the Afghanistan war" also.

Not likely that these things will/would happen either.

[BurtWorm]

11. Talking about impeaching Bush is now a waste of time.

Unfortunately it was also more and more of a waste when Dem leaders made clear no way no how would they start that ball rolling.

The war in Afghanistan is another thing entirely, even if it is an extremely painful and difficult process to stop wars. It can be stopped, and it is worth it to work to stop it.

The Polanski matter compared to those things for the average activist? I don't see what good it really does anyone to obsess about it. These discussions always wind up being about generalities we all agree on or technicalities no one can agree on. What a colossal exercise in futility.

[howard112211]

13. The problem is we don't agree on the generalities.

Many people here have suggested he should walk free because the event lies in the far past and the victim got over it. That is ground for discussion IMO.

[WildEyedLiberal]

21. Most things discussed on DU are colossal exercises in futility

I don't understand why you seem so determined to misunderstand or misrepresent the OP's intentions here. His OP is a very good and concise summary of the reason our criminal justice system works the way it does. The OP is necessary because apparently we DON'T all agree on these basic generalities, which demonstrates that even on DU there is a regrettable ignorance when it comes to understanding how the legal system works.

[BurtWorm]

23. Do you mean how it works or how it's supposed to work?

It clearly did not work very well in the Polanksi case. It's never going to work in the Polanski case. It had its chance and it blew it. That should be a generality virtually all of us can agree on (if we are aware of the specifics, which, it seems, most of us are not).

[howard112211]

10. Some people say: "All polticians are bad, and my vote doesn't matter anyway"

and then go and vote Republican.

[BurtWorm]

12. Again, how do you propose to bring resolution to this case?

You had your chance when Switzerland was ready to play along. They're not playing along any more. Now what do you do? Put money in the CIA budget for a Polanski team?

[howard112211]

14. No. But I can write a post about the generalities of the legal system.

[BurtWorm]

16. Well then you're not really advancing the cause, are you?

You're keeping it stuck in 1979, where it all went wrong in the first place.

[uppityperson]

17. Educating other people on the legal system is a good thing to do.

And expressing a desire to see someone get the outcome they should is a fine thing to do here.

[LanternWaste]

20. Along with 99% of the topics...

"A lot of wind over something no one in this forum can do a single thing about..."

Along with 99% of the topics and 99% of the posters on DU. Yet still we discuss... :shrug:

[LanternWaste]

25. Self delete

self delete dupe

[Riftaxe]

19. Poor roman, forced into bondage

in his luxurious Swiss chalet. I guess there is house arrest and *house* arrest...somehow being forced to live in a studio apartment does not seem equivalent of living in a swiss McMansion.

[Kablooie]

15. Often victims DO decide cases by not pressing charges.

Of course in a crime against a minor the minor doesn't have the right to choose whether to press charges or not.

But in general, victims can make the decision.

[LostinVA]

18. Also, the defendant is a possible risk to all citizens in a criminal case

Unlike a civil case.

A rapist will go on to rape again, for example, so the State has a duty to protect its citizens.

Good OP. It always surprises me people don't know thus.

And, Polanski did pay off the victim ion this case.

Also, Polanski admitted his guilt and struck a bargain, and then jumped his sentencing.

[Johonny]

22. well maybe

that's one theory of human activity. That a person once a criminal will act again and again as a criminal. Some do... some don't. People don't behave exactly in such predictable ways.

[Boojatta]

24. Kick

[Boojatta]

26. Kick

[Boojatta]

27. Kick

[NashVegas]

28. Polanski As Both Alpha Male and Nazi Victim

The tribe will protect the alpha male from the consequences of his excesses, as long as he brings meat to the table. Polanski has brought some very nice cuts to Hollywood.

At the same time, he is also famous as a victim.

But this is something we go through every time a famous male is charged with rape. Polanski's case is unique in that the crime is indisputable, but for some, they're doing flips and twists to minimize the reality of what went down.

[blondeatlast]

29. Excellent post. Like you, I was surprised that many DUers misunderstood this concept. nt