just as an FYI

[slumber]

Eight years in debate is enough for me to know that there is a way I can argue for the release of Polanski. There is a way, because of technicality, because of jurisdiction, whatever else, that his arrest may have been technically fumbled.

I can find an argument for it, but that doesn't make him any less deserving of arrest, of justice. Because what's lawful and what's just are not always the same thing, and giving him a free pass for achievements that are irrelevant to what he did is careless and ignorant. Am I missing something? Because I don't understand how people could even think to stand behind this man.