User talk:Andj2134saeo23412

November 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions, including your edits to Roman Polanski. However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources. Thank you. Off2riorob (talk) 20:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Talk:Roman_Polanski. Thank you. Off2riorob (talk) 21:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Polanski

You need to accept the fact that he has never been convicted of rape. If you continue on the course you are taking whether it is calling him a rapist on his page or on the talk page you will end up being blocked. I don't want that to happen but you need to learn when to back away from an argument and in this case that is now. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 22:13, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he pleaded guilty at the court, which you can read at the sources. He said under oath, that he had sexual intercourse with Samantha Gailey and that he was aware of that she was only 13 years old. Because of this Polanski was sent by the judge for psychatric evaluation in prison. This means that he is a rapist, because of her age she couldn't give consent to have sexual intercourse, defined by the californian law. Andj2134saeo23412 (talk) 23:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He was not convicted of rape and since he wasn"t we can not call him that in the article. The only way it can be put in the article is if you can find a reliable source that says he was convicted of rape. Your statements above are your interpretation of California law. It is not the way the State of California sees it since they did not convict him of rape. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 23:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just read the original transcription of his guilty plea at the court. He says clearly under oath he had sexual intercourse with somone who is under 14 years old. In the wikipedia article by itself it is written: " He pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse, a charge which is synonymous under Californian law with statutory rape."

So he pleaded guilty by himself that he is a rapist!

Andj2134saeo23412 (talk) 00:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]