Jump to content
Thaiway

Wino

Members
  • Posts

    1,886
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by Wino

  1. While I don't know the inner workings of this particular California court, I have serious doubts about that claim. Plea bargains are made between the defendant and the prosecutor and I've never known of a judge who was involved in any negotiations for same. Typically, the plea bargain is made at a pre-trial conference which is usually attended only by defense counsel, the defendant, and somebody from the prosecutor's office. I've never seen a judge at a pre-trial conference.

    In my state (Michigan), a judge normally accepts a plea bargain but I've never known one where the sentence was also part of the deal. The prosecutor can agree to recommend a given sentence and the judge, while accepting the plea bargain, clearly makes it known that, while he will be substantially influenced by the prosecutor's recommendation, the court isn't bound to that when it comes to sentencing.

    Plea deals are made and accepted (or, at rarer times, rejected) by the Court. Then the defendant has to undergo some type of investigation with the probation department which issues a recommendation to the Court. Then the Judge makes the decision at a later sentencing hearing (and the Judges are often constrained by what they can do by sentencing guidelines established by the state legislature).

    Polanski, prior to the sentencing date, was sent for 42 days to a psychiatric unit for evaluation and he fled before the sentencing date. The evaluation (sometimes psychiatric, sometimes not) is mandatory and, of course, gives a lot of information to the sentencing judge (like the defendant's prior history and his prior criminal record, whether the defendant is remorseful, likely to offend again, etc.).

    What I'm puzzled about is how Polanski knows that the sentencing judge was going to not go with the sentencing portion (recommendation) of the plea deal he made with the prosecutor. I suspect (but I don't know) that he or his attorney didn't like what they read in the evaluation reports given to the judge (which also are shared with defense counsel and the prosecutor)and were guessing that the judge was going to give some jail time (what the judge is ultimately going to do at the sentencing hearing is not known or in writing anywhere until that sentencing hearing). If somehow (again, I don't know this) the now-deceased judge did something improper (such as telling somebody outside a court proceeding what he was going to do), the proper course of action was to have that judge removed/recused and have another judge handle the sentencing portion of the case.

    Thanks for the insight on how the judicial system usually works. I repeated what I read in articles pertaining to Polanski. I imagine if he is out on bail in Switzerland, he is likely to flee back to France. Many Americans think Ted Kennedy did no wrong, many Frenchmen think the same about Polanski.
  2. I'm more comfortable playing with the elephants.

    I have seen some elephant stunts that are frightening, as well. The elephant show at Pattaya's Nong Nooch (I think that is the name) asks for audience participation. The person lies on the ground and the elephant puts his leg on your chest. Not something I would do but a lot of people volunteer.
  3. While I applaud the new perspectives of the Obama administration, I feel convinced that nothing will change in Burma unless and until China decides it will change it's policy of non-interference. Borne from the fear that any open condemnation of activities of other governments would lead to international criticism of some things occurring within China itself, China tolerates and even supports a couple of the worst governments on earth that happen to border China.

    How true your statement is. China is not about to change its policy. They are benefiting greatly from Burma's isolation. Burma is rich in natural resources and China is taking advantage of those resources.
  4. In the past, Polanski has asked a U.S. appeals court in California to overturn a judges' refusal to throw out his case. He claims misconduct by the now-deceased judge who had arranged a plea bargain and then reneged on it.

    His victim, Samantha Geimer, who long ago identified herself, has joined in Polanski's bid for dismissal.

    An HBO documentary, "Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired," has suggested there was behind-the-scenes manipulations by a now-retired prosecutor not assigned to the case.

    Why pursue it now? I don't get it.

  5. If you go, I'd suggest you not go into the pen with the "adult" (actually, about 2 year old) tigers. Some tourist was mauled there earlier this year.

    I went into the "baby" and "juvenile" pens and that seemingly was okay. But, when I saw one of the adult tigers yawn (showing teeth and a mouth that could encompass your entire head), I declined entering that pen.

    I would think you would have a better chance of getting hurt by a playful baby or juvenile tiger. For me, I think I will stay on the outside of the pen.

  6. The huge baby has two tiny older brothers. Haha! If you've seen the photos, the child looks he's a year old. Heck, my daughter (who's eleven months) weighs just as much!

    Imagine the pain if she had to give birth normally!

    The pain would be unbearable. A baby that big might not even be able to fit through the mother's pelvic.

  7. They need free wifi. They need to have better lounges. They need an easier way to get from one point to another.

    That said, I think it is beautiful and lovely to look at.

    I thought I read an article where they were thinking of putting in free wifi? True the terminal is beautiful but has a few faults.

  8. Sorry to keep yakking on the subject but I just read the Salon piece that WannaGo linked above. And I totally agree with at least the following portion of the last paragraph of that article which reads:

    "Roman Polanski may be a great director, an old man, a husband, a father, a friend to many powerful people, and even the target of some questionable legal shenanigans. He may very well be no threat to society at this point. He may even be a good person on balance, whatever that means. But none of that changes the basic, undisputed fact: Roman Polanski raped a child. And rushing past that point to focus on the reasons why we should forgive him, pity him, respect him, admire him, support him, whatever, is absolutely twisted."

    I guess everyone feels the same way about Ted Kennedy and that he should have been charged with, at least, vehicular manslaughter.

×
×
  • Create New...