|
In light of recent news about Seagal, it's probably a good time to repeat this CDAN post from a while ago. Rumours have followed him for years (Keep in mind that after their relationship, Kelly LeBrock moved to the middle of nowhere and wanted no part of showbusiness) but here's the whole thing. The backstory has a reporter who at the time of this was writing the full piece and originally named Seagal in it. It'll be interesting to see if anything comes of it. quote:Our actor was just coming off his peak. He was not A list any longer, but he still had that A list name recognition and glow about him. Our actor also had an appetite for women. A huge appetite for women. Because of his status, he had no problems getting women, but he had certain kinks that needed to be satisfied so he preferred to find some women in Asian countries or poorer countries where they could be bought and arrangements made for them to be given a "job" in his production company and a visa arranged so they might be able to travel with him. Our actor did this for many years, even while he was married to, at the time, this B+ list mostly movie actress. At the time of the blind he was divorced from that actress wife, but he was seeing this other C list mostly movie actress who he had met on a film. He also happened to run into a dictator. They had previously crossed paths and were actually friends because if their shared appetite for violence and women and the dictator was a huge movie fan, especially of our actor. He also admired the actress our actor was now dating. Our actor gladly handed the actress over to the dictator for a night. The actress did not even utter a protest because she had been beaten enough by the actor and the dictator had a reputation of his own that she did not want to meet. So, she stayed quiet, but she is also one of three sources the reporter used and the actress has not been seen in almost a year. Whether she is in hiding on her own or is being hidden without her consent, I don't know.
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
El Gallinero Gros posted:https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1769957739689557&id=162172567134757 I don't know whether to be more horrified about the fact that he could have hedged his bets by having her have an 'accident' at any time or that she as a 12-year old was aware of this fact and yet could do nothing about it. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
That's loving awful. And she's not kidding, Kramer was the top stuntman back in the day. Dude was Arnold's double for at least a decade, Commando, Predator, T2, etc. I saw the pic of him hugging a little girl that Dushku mentioned, taken last year. Ugh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
Burn Hollywood to the ground
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 20:50
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:Yeah it says specifically that she came out to set to visit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
I have had a massive fanboy crush on Dushku since she showed up on Buffy. That poor woman, I can't imagine the strength it took her to soldier on each day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:I'm starting to think you Americans don't get how rule of law is supposed to work. I'm not actually American, and I'm curious to know how you think 'rule of law' applies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:I have had a massive fanboy crush on Dushku since she showed up on Buffy. That poor woman, I can't imagine the strength it took her to soldier on each day. Not only that, everything I've ever heard about her indicates she's a delight
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
El Gallinero Gros posted:Not only that, everything I've ever heard about her indicates she's a delight We met her at a con, she initiates hugs with fans, jokes and laughs. She's great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:I'm not actually American, and I'm curious to know how you think 'rule of law' applies. I think they're saying that this is a pretty ironclad thing in France in general and that they don't make exceptions just because someone's Especially Bad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 22:00
|
|
|
El Gallinero Gros posted:https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1769957739689557&id=162172567134757 Gross. Disgusting. The gently caress is wrong with people. I might have found that recent image of Kramer with a little girl that Eliza was talking about. hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:In light of recent news about Seagal, it's probably a good time to repeat this CDAN post from a while ago. Rumours have followed him for years (Keep in mind that after their relationship, Kelly LeBrock moved to the middle of nowhere and wanted no part of showbusiness) but here's the whole thing. The backstory has a reporter who at the time of this was writing the full piece and originally named Seagal in it. It'll be interesting to see if anything comes of it. Christ. What dictators were they talking about, also?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
I'd know he was buds with Alek Lukashenko but I don't think he's dead so I'm curious about this too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
Due to the outcry Mark Wahlberg has announced he's donating his reshoot money ($1.5 million) to the Time's Up legal defense fund under Michelle Williams' name.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
Coffee And Pie posted:Christ. It's gotta be Gaddafi.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:I think they're saying that this is a pretty ironclad thing in France in general and that they don't make exceptions just because someone's Especially Bad. Except that they also protect their own when there's no death penalty involved, as they did for Florence Cassez. Origami Dali posted:It's gotta be Gaddafi. Chechnya's dictator is pretty keen on martial arts poo poo. He pays a few UFC fighters, including former champ Fabricio Werdum, to hang out with him. Never mind, the timelines in no way add up and i missed the part where they said he's dead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
I mean I think France's policy makes a certain level of sense. It's not just protecting individual citizens from execution, it's saying "As long as you have this policy we will not cooperate." Polanski should be serving time but that's on him being a cowardly rear end in a top hat who ducked out of possibly getting a harsh sentence, not on the policy he took advantage of.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:it's saying "As long as you have this policy we will not cooperate, or do anything ourselves and will in fact keep giving him plaudits, awards and money while allowing him to roam free in an industry full of exactly the sort of young girls he's preyed upon before while claiming the moral high ground." Almost like blanket policies can be pretty loving dumb.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:27
|
|
|
It’s also to prevent the government sending a citizen away to be murdered by another state. Take Polanski out of the situation and remember America is one of the few western nations on earth still with this law. In australia we have a similar law and the federal police here helped tipped off the Indonesians that some Australians were smuggling drugs into Indonesia. They ended up being caught with Australian intel in Indonesia and ended up being executed. Quite rightly people were pretty pissed off that the policy of not letting that happen (ie catch them in Australia) wasn’t followed. I wouldn’t trust America not to flip and say “oh now he can be tried for the death penalty” I mean America executes children in some states so it’s understandable to have these laws in place. Either way it’s a bit rich for Americans to accuse the French of supporting Polanski. Didn’t you guys give him an Oscar ten years or so back and have your elite stand up and give him a standing ovation? Isn’t woody Allen a national treasure? Isn’t trump your president? Edit: what I’m trying to say is perhaps the industry and the patriarchy cross country lines
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
teacup posted:It’s also to prevent the government sending a citizen away to be murdered by another state. Take Polanski out of the situation and remember America is one of the few western nations on earth still with this law. I'm not American. And yes, this is a serious problem everywhere. And the French quite deliberately and publicly perpetuating the phenomenon of rich people being able to get away with really awful poo poo while pretending they've got the moral high ground is loving dumb as poo poo. Yes, Hollywood gives him an Oscar every couple of decades, the French government lets him walk free every single day. EDIT: It sort of tells you how endemic the issue is that we're actually having an argument about whether its worth protecting a convicted pedophile to protest a legal penalty that was never on the table for the convicted pedophile. Like, the safety of teenaged girls is less important than making a retarded political point. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Jan 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:33
|
|
|
The government policy does not shower Polanski with awards and plaudits. It merely forbids extradition to countries which practice the death penalty, to encourage those countries to abandon it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:The government policy does not shower Polanski with awards and plaudits. It merely forbids extradition to countries which practice the death penalty, to encourage those countries to abandon it. True, but he is free and able to make films and receive awards and plaudits as a direct consequence and effect of the policy. And it's not like they couldn't have anticipated that, and even if they couldn't have, they've got a fair bit of data now, saving them the trouble of anticipation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:44
|
|
|
muscles like this! posted:Due to the outcry Mark Wahlberg has announced he's donating his reshoot money ($1.5 million) to the Time's Up legal defense fund under Michelle Williams' name. You know, I'll give Wahlberg props for this, it's good that he took some action after that came up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:You know, I'll give Wahlberg props for this, it's good that he took some action after that came up. I too think it's extremely admirable that he did a good thing after being caught doing a lovely thing. It's amazing how consistently Wahlberg is a loving rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:47
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:True, but he is free and able to make films and receive awards and plaudits as a direct consequence and effect of the policy. And it's not like they couldn't have anticipated that, and even if they couldn't have, they've got a fair bit of data now, saving them the trouble of anticipation. And how could they react to that without abandoning the policy altogether? As far as I can see the issue is he was able to flee prosecution in the first place. Maybe don't let your convicted felons get on overseas flights.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:And how could they react to that without abandoning the policy altogether? Lock him up themselves. Place him under house arrest. Limit his ability to make films or be around young women (like the one he raped and was convicted for raping). Are you really asking 'what could a government possibly do to a convicted criminal?' is that really a question you need me to answer? Dealing with criminals is something that governments exist to do. "No, you can't have him, your criminal justice system is inhumane, we will deal with him." gently caress, it's not that hard. gently caress off with this false dilemma bullshit. "They have to leave him completely free, because the only other alternative is to hand him over, since the French don't have police or prisons or indeed any legal apparatus." EDIT: This is really not how I expected this conversation to go here in this thread. We're only a few posts away from the awkward fucker who always shows up in this discussion pointing out that the girl was sexually active already. Snowman_McK fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Jan 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:52
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Lock him up themselves. Place him under house arrest. Limit his ability to make films or be around young women (like the one he raped and was convicted for raping). Are you really asking 'what could a government possibly do to a convicted criminal?' is that really a question you need me to answer? Dealing with criminals is something that governments exist to do. Does the law allow them to imprison someone convicted in another country? Does the French Constitution or body of laws provide for this? You have to actually follow proper procedures, they don't stop existing because someone is a predator.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:55
|
|
|
Last I heard, Polanski's victim had supposedly forgiven him and had been actively petitioning the LA court to close the case and move on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:56
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Does the law allow them to imprison someone convicted in another country? Does the French Constitution or body of laws provide for this? You have to actually follow proper procedures, they don't stop existing because someone is a predator. Oh gently caress off with this. If you honestly think that French law has absolutely no way to deal with this, you're either full of poo poo, or French law is. Australia has laws to deal with people who committed sex crimes overseas, and we're barely a country. Origami Dali posted:Last I heard, Polanski's victim had supposedly forgiven him and had been actively petitioning the LA court to close the case and move on. good, i needed this square in 'polanski bingo'
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:Last I heard, Polanski's victim had supposedly forgiven him and had been actively petitioning the LA court to close the case and move on. Yeah, but it's a felony and not a civil offense so the victim doesn't really have discretion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 23:58
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Oh gently caress off with this. If you honestly think that French law has absolutely no way to deal with this, you're either full of poo poo, or French law is. So you're admitting the possibility that they don't have the legal power to imprison him. Which is bad. They should do something about that. Do you honestly think that either I or Origami Dali are defending Polanski? Because I feel like you're kind of trying to argue a point that nobody's making. Polanski is a rapist. He should suffer a harsher punishment for his crimes than he has. But making that happen probably involves something more complicated than going up to the Palais Bourbon and shouting "YOU BASTARDS!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:06
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:So you're admitting the possibility that they don't have the legal power to imprison him. Which is bad. They should do something about that. If the French have absolutely no legal recourse for someone who has actually been convicted, that is a damning indictment of them. It's also extremely unlikely, since 'committing crimes and fleeing the country' has been an idea as long as crimes and countries have existed. And the idea that France has no legal recourse, now, in 2018, or even 40 years ago, is really stupid. If there was no legal recourse for the government, there's other things the establishment could do. Even if it was something as simple as 'not financing, starring in or distributing his films.' I mean, John Landis hasn't worked in 20 years, despite having not been convicted. And the chain of responsibility is a bit more complicated than 'he hosed a child' which Polanski did.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
Coffee And Pie posted:Christ. The end of the item reveals that it's Gadaffi, that the ex-wife is LeBrock and his new best friend is Putin.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:If the French have absolutely no legal recourse for someone who has actually been convicted, that is a damning indictment of them. It's also extremely unlikely, since 'committing crimes and fleeing the country' has been an idea as long as crimes and countries have existed. And the idea that France has no legal recourse, now, in 2018, or even 40 years ago, is really stupid. Welcome to the complicated world of international law and the interactions between separate legal systems. poo poo is crazy. quote:If there was no legal recourse for the government, there's other things the establishment could do. Even if it was something as simple as 'not financing, starring in or distributing his films.' I mean, John Landis hasn't worked in 20 years, despite having not been convicted. And the chain of responsibility is a bit more complicated than 'he hosed a child' which Polanski did. And nobody here was arguing in favor of his still having a career. Again, you were saying "here come the Polanski apologists" when none of us have done that. I'd like for him to serve time. But it remains a difficult thing to accomplish.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:19
|
|
|
It was my understanding that France's non-extradition policy only applies if the death penalty is a possible sentence for the offense, and not as a general principle concerning any crime. Even then, the US/France extradition treaty grants the state the option to refuse in such a case, not the requirement.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:If the French have absolutely no legal recourse for someone who has actually been convicted, that is a damning indictment of them. It's also extremely unlikely, since 'committing crimes and fleeing the country' has been an idea as long as crimes and countries have existed. And the idea that France has no legal recourse, now, in 2018, or even 40 years ago, is really stupid. No it isn't. I'm pretty sure most countries don't have the ability to prosecute somebody for a crime they committed elsewhere, that's why extradition has to exist in the first place. And since it's been explained why they can't extradite him, unless France has hard proof that he committed a crime, in their country, with evidence and witnesses, they can't do anything. poo poo like jurisdiction and due process matter here. His lawyers would assuredly pounce on the fact the victim just wants to move on, and then he'd probably be found not guilty (especially since rape cases are SUPER hard to process long after the fact). And then you've violated someone's rights for a not guilty charge, and he'd probably sue the crap out of everybody involved with prosecuting him. It doesn't matter what you think, Polanski has rights, regardless of how scummy and lovely he is. You start violating one particularly bad guys' rights, it sets off a huge shitstorm, and it sets a terrible precedent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:29
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:I too think it's extremely admirable that he did a good thing after being caught doing a lovely thing. getting paid for your work....the shittiest of things
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:33
|
|
|
banned from Starbucks posted:getting paid for your work....the shittiest of things Yeah, I think it's more a strike against Williams' agent for not negotiating reshoot pay after Wahlberg's did tbh. Wahlberg himself probably wasn't all that involved in it. If it's lovely it's not entirely on him. But he's donating the money anyway so who gives a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:39
|
|
|
gently caress off with saying it's simple. Polanski is a monster but many people still believe the death penalty is a huge humans rights violation. France has a policy that says it won't extradite to places with it as a way of protesting a huge human rights violation. If it was so simple why doesn't California change their law- if they did then he could be extradited. What a damning indictment on California that they choose to keep the ability to murder citizens over jailing a child rapist. Sarcasm of course but it's your argument so whatevs
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
Yeah, despite being an awful person, Polanski still has the same legal rights as anyone else. I admit I am not an expert on French law, but it sounds pretty illegal to prosecute him in France for a crime he committed elsewhere, especially considering he’s already been prosecuted for that crime in the country where it happened. Like, you can’t just put someone under house arrest because they’re a really bad person, you have to have a legal justification. I don’t consider saying any of that to be “Polanski apologism”. Honestly, if I was going to blame any country for this whole mess, it would be the US because it sounds like he was able to very easily book a flight out after he had been convicted. Like, they weren’t keeping an eye on him? But the blame ultimately lies with Polanski himself and the people within Hollywood and other entertainment industries that continue to support him.
wizardofloneliness fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Jan 14, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2018 00:47
|
|
