Bob

No problem, worked within the system for 33+ years. Yea, if Polanski is given bail, he'll be in France in a nano second. As noted, I'm a huge fan of Kennedy but he drove drunk and caused his passenger to lose her life. In my state, nobody has done that without getting some jail time. I do realize he also failed to report the incident until the next morning but, although that was cowardly as hell, it's not against any serious law (although leaving the scene of a property damage or personal injury vehicular accident is a misdemeanor in most jurisdictions). I note that, with regard to Polanski's case, the big deal or reason that many of his supporters give is that "geez, it was so long ago...." Well, the fact it wasn't dealt with then is his fault as he's the one that committed another felony by fleeing the jurisdiction in violation of the law and his bond with the Court. Any sentencing judge would indeed take into consideration his good (or bad) works in the interim.

I've seen several television shows (titled something like "When Animals Go Nuts" or the like) showing incidents involving injuries/deaths occurring at zoos, animal shows, etc. I've seen several clips showing elephants going nuts and stomping/goring people and one of the clips, I'd swear, looks a hell of a lot like the elephant place just northwest of Chiangmai (I've been there a few times). The trained elephants are normally docile, of course, and attacks are rare; however, given their size, obviously a good idea to not mess with one that's pissed off.

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.

I certainly did. It's what would have happened to anybody else so why not him? And, in spite of those comments, I'd still rate him as a very decent and caring man who was, in my view, the greatest Senator of my lifetime.

Is leapfrog an official olympic game?

Ah, the good old days. Good ol' Detroit (here in my state) has a population slightly over 800,000 and kills more than that every year! And, compared to parts of Washington, DC, Detroit is safe!

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."

What he did, at least in my eyes, was more than wrong and stupid. I do wrong and stupid things every so often but I don't drug, rape, and sodomize 13-year-old kids. While I understand your view, Wino, I totally disagree with the post-90's view of life that nobody is responsible for anything they do. Yea, Judge, I killed the guy but I played too many violent video games. Or, yea, I did it, but I was drunk when it happened - or my mother spanked me when I was a child - or whatever. This guy did it, admitted he did it, and I don't so easily forgive and forget very serious crimes that harm another human being (let alone a 13-year-old child). I have sympathy for the victim and her feelings about the matter ought to be taken into account; yet, there is prescribed punishment for this type of offense and another relevant sentencing factor here is the message one sends to the rest of society (raping a kid is not tolerable and rich dudes don't deserve a pass on it because they committed another crime by fleeing the jurisdiction). P.S. With respect to the SmokingGun website, I probably should have said that I am not endorsing the website just by posting a link to it. Generally, I have no problem with the site but it has in the past (in my opinion) acted rather right-wing with its postings.

Heck, I get the rush as soon as I know I'm going back to Thailand! But one often lost that rush at Don Muang if you ever had to transfer over to a domestic flight (whereas in Suvarnabhumi, you simply get on the elevator and go up to the fourth floor).

If you want to read the transcript of the grand jury testimony by the then 13-year-old victim, it's posted here: SG It's the Smoking Gun website which I hardly approve of but, supposedly, that's an accurate copy of the transcript. Polanski gave the girl champagne and part of a qualude. He photographed her in various stages of dress (including nude) and then, as I read it, he raped her (performing oral sex on her and then, in spite of her repeatedly saying "no" to him, vaginal and anal sex). The girl was 13 and Polanski was apparently about 45 or so (he's 77 now and it was 31 years ago?). And he pleaded guilty to the charge, allegedly involving some deal that he would undergo 45 days of psychiatric review but would ultimately avoid prison time. He fled the country when he heard that the judge wasn't going to go with the "no prison" time. Had I been his judge, I would have sent the bastard to prison. And I'd also ask for an investigation of whatever idiot prosecutor may have made a "no prison" deal with Polanski for raping a 13-year-old kid.

Yes, I do believe it. Although very big, Suvarnabhumi to me is very easy to use. And a heck of a lot more functional than Don Muang. I also like the airport in Singapore but I don't recall it as any easier to use than Suvarnabhumi. Both are far better than, for example, LAX.

That's also a puzzle to me given how other airlines are losing their asses charging twice what Air Asia does (i.e., Thai Airlines). Maybe Bernie Madoff is financing them? (regardless, I still use them given the prices)

Rucus7 fairly states the facts of the case. He drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl. This whole case, at least to me, is more about how the rich and famous tend to get away with things that others of lesser "stature" can't avoid. Polanski did the crime (a serious one), he admitted to it, and there ought to be consequences. He ought to be very happy that I'm not the sentencing judge as he'd get no mercy from me. I can fathom showing mercy to somebody who's stealing to eat or even somebody who does something out of the ordinary due to substantial pressure or intoxication. But I see no cause for feeling generous towards an educated, affluent, and pampered "star" who, at age 45 years of age, drugged and raped a 13-year old.

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, too, had never heard of Mr. Henderson and his Flying Spaghetti Monster religion. Wikopedia notes that the Pastafasarian's basic tenet is: "The central belief is that there is an invisible and undetectable Flying Spaghetti Monster, who created the entire universe after drinking heavily." I like the "after drinking heavily" part....

Already did just prior to the post above. It won't let me do it twice. (Did you forget to vote? It only shows one vote in total)

Reviewing this entire thread again, I can't believe that nobody has mentioned Wat Doi Suthep, the most famous of temples on Suthep Mountain (which is about a 30 minute drive up the mountain west of the old city). Next to the Grand Palace, it's without a doubt my favorite temple in all of Thailand. They just finished restoring the golden stupa so it now looks the same as in the fifth photo shown here (which I took a few years ago): Main level veranda: View from veranda (that's the airport in the middle): Lower (main level)temple: Lower level temple detail: Golden Stupa (upper level): Some statuary on upper level:

Hmmm, the software copied the same photo three times.....so here's another attempt to add a couple of photos of the ruins: Wat Pupia (like many of the other ruins in the area, was excavated rather recently - around 1985): Wat E-Kang [also excavated in the 1980's, it's name stems from the species of monkey ("kang")that lived here]:

As I understand it (via history books and being told by Thai friends), these ruins are the vestiges of the original city where King Mengrai lived. Because of the annual flooding (the area is very close to the Ping River), King Mengrai decided to build a new city and that was the beginning of Chiangmai around 1200 AD. "Chiangmai" means "new city" in Thai. The ruins [located about 8-10 kilometers southeast of the old (moated) city] are not in great shape and the ruins are smaller than those seen in Ayutthaya; nevertheless, very interesting to see. Here are a few photos I took in October of 2008: First, Wat Chedi Liem. Dates from the 13th century and restoration occurred in 1912. The big stupa behind supposedly contains the remains of one of King Mengrai's wives:

I'd hate to only have once type to eat but, if I must choose, I'm heading to Rome.

Yes, very lovely night parade and other events; however, for the more timid, not too wise to be close to the Narawat Bridge (bridge over the Ping at the end of Taepae Road) as it seems that's the place for the local fireworks war.

Thanks, go there all the time (mostly for seafood) and can't believe I missed it. I won't in a couple of weeks....

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.

Hoping you can give some better directions to the Mike's by the night market (I'm presuming, then, its on Chang Klan?). I've been through there a gabillion times and have sadly missed it. When in Thailand, I generally eat Thai food and have actually developed some favorites I can't do without; however, every couple of weeks I'm drawn like a lemming to find a cheeseburger and fries. Probably not very healthy but, dammit, it does taste so good....

Yeppers, not bad at all. Located on the east side of the moat, about 3(?) blocks north of Taipae Road. And Mike's has a second place now out on Nimmanhaemin Road (sorta near the university).