Recently, Roman Polanski appeared to make the news again. Roman Polanski is the Bill Cosby that everyone in Hollywood still defends because he raped a long time ago and made a few good movies. Now, this is just one of the many reasons we should trust the Hollywood elites to gain your moral compass. They dine with killers and rapists so long as it doesn’t hurt the brand. The reason Polanski made the news cycle is because one of his victims appeared to say that her rape was not a big deal. She was 13-year-old Samantha Jane Gailey when Roman Polanski drugged her and raped her.
Roman Polanski’s Victim Claims Assault Was ‘Not A Big Deal’ (radaronline.com)
But it is also known that this goes further than that:
Barnard, who says she was inspired to break her long silence after watching the downfall of Harvey Weinstein, is the third of Polanski’s accusers to come forward this year. Earlier this month, former actress Renate Langer filed a report with the French police alleging that Polanski raped her twice when she was a child model in 1972. And in August, a woman who gave her name only as Robin M. accused Polanski of raping her when she was 16 years old. Robin M. said she would not be pressing charges, as the statute of limitations had run out on her case, but she would be willing to testify in court if Polanski were extradited to the US for sentencing in the Geimer case — which Geimer herself has said she is opposed to. “I’m speaking out now so Samantha and the world will know she is not the only minor Roman Polanski victimized,” Robin said.
Barnard’s allegation is only the latest entry in a long, labyrinthine story that’s spanned decades. The story of the Polanski trial is the story of a fiendishly complex case of extradition requests and potentially corrupt judges and discretionary plea bargains and secret off-the-record meetings, but the whole thing is built around one very simple, generally uncontested fact: In 1977, Roman Polanski fed a 13-year-old girl champagne and quaaludes. Then he raped and sodomized her.
Roman Polanski is now facing a 5th accusation of sexual assault – Vox
The culture folks perpetuate is toxic. But this is another reason we should embrace the death penalty. Often, most politicians operate on optics. If we had a set of rules that executed criminals than letting them strike again, then we wouldn’t have modern high society degenerates saying drugging and raping teenage girls isn’t a bad thing. Liberals may talk about the golden calf of consent while celebrating those that don’t value it. I wonder if Liberals have a good rebuttal to retroactive consent.
Take for example, the recent release of serial killers such as Patrick Mackay (the Devil’s Disciple) and Eric M. Smith. Each released while being guilty of brutal crimes. The point ultimately that society fails and often will not care about those it fails after the fact. If your parents pass away (or even if they don’t) some parole board may arbitrarily decide how many years your life was worth. For these cases, a four-year-old child, Derrick Joseph Robie who was brutally beaten, tortured, and raped by Eric Smith. Robie’s life was worth 28 years. Is that somehow more just than the death penalty? How much are your children’s lives worth? Will strangers care when your gone? In fact, God is necessary for true justice. For he never forgets, even when generations pass and facts become more obscure. God knows and will not let the crimes of the past remain in vain.
You may suppose governments have some reason to execute justice, but this isn’t the case:
During the postwar era, the punitive components of the criminal-justice system withered. The incarceration rate declined between 1961 and 1976; by 1981, murderers averaged a sentence of just five years, while rapists got 3.4.
Contra “Root Causes” | City Journal (city-journal.org)
Why are there fewer serial killers now than there used to be? (phys.org)
This type of thinking has taken hold in most cities. The result is that we have had a surge in crime in recent years. Do you really think the elimination of the death penalty solves any of these issues or perpetuates them?
Price, a 43-year-old stalwart member of the Bloods street gang, was convicted in 2003 of shooting and killing 22-year-old Carl Smalls Jr., a college football player, at a Columbia nightclub.
Another point is that you don’t have very good reason to suppose these people won’t or can’t eventually escape or will eventually be released willingly because modern beliefs about justice or convenience.
Green River Killer: A Timeline of His Murders, Arrest and Conviction (biography.com)
In fact, they will just try to find another way for degenerates to be free:
Washington Legislature considering bill to end ‘life without parole’ (fox13seattle.com)
I suggest these things be thought about deeply from those that disparage the death penalty.
The Council 