Insulated from the firestorm, perhaps

[bktheirregular]

I don't hear much about the whole Roman Polanski thing from here in Athens. Maybe it's because there's this snap election coming up, and local idiocy has swamped whatever's coming from France and Switzerland, and the local news from Stateside doesn't penetrate here, anyway.

So what I hear is third- and fourth-hand. And somehow, I can't summon the outrage. Does that make me evil in my own right?

Granted, what Roman Polanski did thirty years ago was sick and wrong and pretty much evil, and if I'd been in the DA's office back then instead of first grade, I probably would have held out for years of hard prison time, instead of offering a plea-bargain that amounted to a slap on the wrist.

That being said ... I can't seem to find the outrage within myself. Don't get me wrong: I'm not asking "why are so many people outraged?" - I'm asking "why am I so 'meh' about it?". Whenever I think about it, I'm drawn to the process of the judicial system - the meat grinder that apparently broke down spectacularly in this case.

It's a bit like the O.J. Simpson case. If I'd been on the jury, I would have voted for a verdict of "not guilty" - not because I believed he didn't do it, but because I believe the state, with its awesome power to deprive a person of his freedom, must be tested every step of the way to make sure that it hasn't just shown that the defendant did it, but that the state itself didn't break the rules of society to demonstrate that.

(Also, I once tried to replicate the thing with the gloves, and I couldn't accomplish it with my own gloves over a pair of surgical gloves, no matter how I contorted my hands. Then again, maybe O.J. bought gloves that fit his hands more snugly than I do. But that's neither here nor there.)

Outrage fatigue, maybe? He committed a grievous act against one person, and he fled the country when it seemed his lenient plea-bargain would be thrown out, instead of staying and accepting the consequences (or demanded his day in court; anyone, no matter what they're accused of, has an absolute right to go to court and insist that the State prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt). But...

...worse things happen all the time. Murders. Mass murders. Bombings. People getting executed by the state for things they didn't do.

Maybe there's only so much energy for outrage before the tank runs dry.

So yeah, extradite Polanski back to the US, have him face a judge (and jury if he so chooses) for the fugitive charge.

Is it OK for me to say I'm sick and tired of the whole thing already?

Comments

[yud.livejournal.com]

Completely at random, my mom's theory on the OJ Simpson glove thing was that since he has arthritis, if he stopped taking his arthritis medicine it would cause his joints to swell, thus making his fingers bigger.

[takaal.livejournal.com]

Yep, that's what Cochran figured, too, to hear one of his baby partners tell the tale. (I heard it fourth-hand at best, though, so I'm not gonna count it as "evidence".)

[aadler]

From what I’ve seen, the outrage seems to be directed not specifically at Polanski (though disgust with his crime can be readily seen when one person or another explains exactly WHY they feel as they do); the majority of outrage comes from two different groups, with different perspectives and different objects for their wrath.

The first group is the intelligentsia, and those who take that side, and their anger targets the justice system that insists that a fugitive felon should, indeed, be apprehended and brought back for trial if the opportunity presents itself. They point to the amount of time that has elapsed (32 years), the desire of the victim to just have the whole thing disappear (understandable, but less than entirely relevant), and — more than anything else — the cultural and artistic importance of the man himself.

The second group tends to look at the crime: Polanski drugged, raped and sodomized a thirteen-year-old girl, and then fled the country to escape the consequences. They ain’t happy with him, but their outrage is directed toward the elitists who would excuse such a vile crime because … because … because he’s so special. And he’s been ‘persecuted’ long enough.

You can probably guess which side I come down on. Like you, I’m not appreciably incensed by the whole thing, but that’s not quite the same thing as saying I don’t care at all.

[captainsblog.livejournal.com]

...worse things happen all the time. Murders. Mass murders. Bombings. People getting executed by the state for things they didn't do.

I think most of the out-sized outrage directed at this incident is over the parade of forgiving intelligentsia who are lining up to excuse this conduct. Especially when Woody "Father of the Bride" Allen is at the front of the parade. Ick. If we start issuing free passes to people who turn tail and run, there's going to be a lot of turning tail going on, and again, if Woody Allen is any indicator, I don't want to look at that.

(Nice way to introduce myself, huh. I saw a comment you left with Mel, then saw you're Friends with her and uC, and you're another Noo Yawk lawyah? Done.

[bktheirregular]

Well, if you count a Noo Yawk lawyah who's currently in semi-exile in the Athens of Greece.

In any case, there's a loooong list of people who would be a total waste of air and energy if it weren't for their art. I keep seeing Amadeus brought up.

Probably just as well that I'm insulated from the whole imbroglio (partly due to conveniently forgetting to string my TV antenna wire from the bathroom window to my TV again this week, but that's probably also partly influenced by the elections coming up this weekend - bet you that you'll never see a Communist Party protest march striding down Fifth Avenue chanting slogans about why they're the best choice to run the country - and I think I'm starting to ramble).