Roman Polanski is Not a Victim

[...] Swampland A blog about politics. Swampland Feed   Daily E-mail Updates   « PreviousRoman Polanski is Not a Victim [...]

Well, Amy, very very well put. But you know, your colleague's reporting has some issues too. And it's a pity that you don't have the moxie to take him on.
.
First of all, one of the odd defenses of Polanski's flight was that he was going to be sentenced by a biased judge. (And an appeal is the remedy, particularly where, as here, there is no doubt about the crime that was committed.) And Time Magazine leaps to the defense:
.
"However, fearful that the Los Angeles judge in the case was about to renege on the deal and slap him with a long prison sentence, Polanski fled the U.S. in 1978 and never returned. "
.
That, to borrow a phrase, is correction-worthy garbage. The judge wasn't bound by the plea deal and thus could not renege. That construction makes Polanski look like a victim. Amy, will you call for a correction?
.
And then there's this:

"Polanski, who won an Academy Award in 2003 for directing The Pianist, admitted to having unlawful sexual intercourse with 13-year-old Samantha Geimer as part of a plea bargain in which other charges — including drugging and raping the girl — were dropped."
.
But the reality is that he did drug the girl. So why is Time Magazine not making that clear? He admitted to it, and no one seriously denies that it happened.

One of the more horrifying defenses of Polanski's actions by Anne Aplebaum of WaPo:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2009/09/the_outrageous_arrest_of_roman.html

Why has France allowed him to hide there all these years?

"Hmm. Dramatic much? You know what is actually horrifying? Raping a child."

Bravo.

By no means defending the man, but a quick scan of his wikipedia shows that he has truly had one of the most difficult lives in human history. The only way to top a holocaust taking your mother and your childhood is by having your pregnant wife murdered in your own home.

To some extent the victim's personal settlement in a civil action and her request that the prosecution drop this issue may well cloud any proceedings. Without her co-operation it is not an open and shut case.

It is a pity the the victim's husband and children will have to endure the publicity and pain while we can sit back and ask for an accounting. Tough. And I am not sure the case will end favorably for the Swiss authorities.

F%^k Polanski.

and even more so the French idiot who said that wanting Polanski back is a scary part of the US.

He needs to be sentenced to a month of listening to talk radio.......

Spob: it is not so cut and dried. Swiss laws on extradition, based on protecting dictators and other scumbags with millions in bank accounts, will make this a tedious process. Don't look for relief any time soon.

Oh, and another thing--look at Anne Applebaum's title. She calls the arrest "outrageous". It's one thing to call the arrest ill-advised or not in the best interest of justice or whatever . . . . but she called it "outrageous". She has basically called everything she has ever written into question.

Polanski gave champagne and pills to a 13 year old girl and then engaged in oral, vaginal, and anal sex with her despite her protests. This is SICK. I don't give a damn whether it happened last year or 50 years ago. Makes ABSOLUTELY no difference when it happened. It happened, and he must face justice. I'm completely sickened that some people are defending this guy.

some questions:
what was that 13 yo girl doing at that party?
didn't she know what she was getting into?
where were her parents?
she already got some money from a settlement with Polanski and spoke to the press about dropping all charges
was she really raped ?- if that was what happened to her, wouldn't Polanski go to jal right away instead of making some plea deals - maybe that wasn't that obvious after all?

ROMAN POLANSKI IS INDEED A VICTIM.

This is a poorly researched article from someone who doesn't know what actually goes on in these cases (and certainly doesn't know what happened in this particular case). This is Roman Polanski and Samantha Gailey's story, not yours, and you probably have no idea what went on (legal or illegal). It probably doesn't fit your image of forceable child rape.

None of us on the outside of this case know for sure whether Roman Polanski "drugged" and "forced" the girl into having sex. In fact those were "charges", that's all, and they probably came from the judge. All you know is that he accepted a plea bargain, which almost surely implies that what he pled to is not what actually happened -- something he did in the hopes that this would lessen his sentence. It's a common practice but one which plants false information in the public sphere. Besides which, the charges of "drugs" and "alcohol" were dropped. So all you know is that there was some kind of sexual activity and the younger person is not, and was not, in favor of pressing charges.

Also, just because something is illegal, and considered "immoral" by many, does not mean that it is a terrible crime. In some states in the US is it illegal to "blaspheme in the name of Jesus Christ." So, if I say Jesus Christ instead of a four-letter word, I am a criminal in the eyes of the law. So am I to be extradited if I travel abroad? Sometimes a young person and an adult fall in love, and don't have any kind of a negative experience. It happens, even when the older person is not famous. When I was thirteen, I loved an adult man, and it was my right to pursue a relationship with him. Roman Polanski did not appear get any special good treatment for being who he is, only special bad treatment from this crazed judge.

And no, Oscar Wilde was gay by today's definition, he liked having mutually loving relationships with boys (under 18) and that was his crime. It's the same thing with Roman Polanski. Orientation towards minors is indeed an orientation. It is not considered a mental illness by DSM criteria unless it is causes other serious mental health impairment. You're wrong to say that it's not considered acceptable to target people based on their orientation. Look at how you're treating Roman Polanski and you will see that.

Surely forced rape of minors does exist, and it is not to be marginalized completely, although it is fairly rare. It consists primarily of paternal or fraternal forced incest against females, and usually it's not lovey-dovey. If you think that "children cannot consent to sex" you have to explain the thousands and thousands that have, in clinical psychological studies, said that they did consent (a substantial portion of them actually pursuing the encounter) and that it was not a negative experience. No one is arguing over whether those cases of consensual adult-minor experiences exist.

ar9011 - You've got to be kidding and out of your mind. First of all, the case is available for all to see in the public domain and the case docket from the grand jury is available on SmokingGun - all 36 pages of it. We know quite a few things for sure, and the bottom line is Polanski decided to leave this country and never to return for well, 37 years, and I would have to say that is what we know for sure. Anyway ar9011, continue to philosophize about gender, rape, how it happens, when it happens, who says it happens, and if it's OK or not, whether it is a mental illness or a love connection or relationship. You get a little to emotional about connecting your love life with this case - Polanski was not in love - he was a 44 year old man who was a predator, and she was 13 and barely knew him. Surely we can all agree - the man did not come back to the US for a reason. And now he will. God Bless.

Polanski raped a 13 year old girl. Soon he will face justice. CASE. CLOSED.

Pass the tissue..having a horrible childhood, your wife and unborn child murdered, does not make it ok to take a 13 year old girl, give her qualudes and alcohol, perform oral sex, intercourse and then sodimize her.
Being a great talent does not make it ok.
Young girls all over the world are being subjected to this brutality on a daily basis. Roman Polanski's karma is finally catching up tp him. I have no sympathy. None!

I find this event to be sickening. It was someone baby that was rapped and all people can say why she was there. He should be accounted for his action. People “RAPE is RAPE” there's no gray area in this. He drugged her and had his way with her. I'm sure if it was you daughter things would be a different story. What I find disturbing is people are defending this child rapes. Monster like Polanski need to rod in jail and hey he can make some inmates sexual desires come true. Eye for Eye I say.

Considering how corrupt out police system is, I would not be surprised at all if they forced Polanski to lie and confess. It happens a lot. Sadly, as is evidenced by most of the posts here, in the USA, one is guilty until proven innocent. Never mind that the alleged victim is telling everyone not to do this...

The fact that he is famous is not the issue. The fact that so many in this country want to see him hang without knowing the facts IS.

The whole thing is suspect. Why would they offer a plea bargain if the case was cut and dried? As with the Rodney King business, something is rotten once again with so-called "American Justice."

If Polanski does go down for this, then so too should the parents. As with the parents of those children allegedly abused by Jackson, they probably were pimping that kid all over the place if any of this DID happen.

Has anyone bothered to ask his victim what she wants? By the way, nobody from here cares about French opinions and furthermore nobody would care if was a nobody instead of a celebrity. The point is, he his a CHILD RAPIST, and it should not matter if he is a movie director or a janitor at the local Burger King, we should want to protect our children.

I think some folks are forgetting one important thing. Polanski already went to trial, he pled guilty, and he skipped out on sentencing. This isn't even about someone being rightfully or wrongfully tried or presenting evidence or any of that. He skipped out on the sentencing phase and he needs to face that. As for ar9011, I am concerned for you since it seems to me that you are in favor of condoning pedophilia as an acceptable practice. It is not now, nor will it ever be ok to prey on children. This includes slipping them a mickey or giving them a drink to help them relax and then completely ignoring their requests that you stop.

Well it was definitely a strange historical moment, after the shackles of Puritanism had been thrown off (obviously much earlier for a European libertine like Polanski), but before the concept of women's equality was fully accepted (see the young Anjelica Huston's totally enabling testimony from the time) even/especially among the libertine set.

Quite the opposite of an outdated morality: if, say, Quentin Tarantino or Lars von Trier had drugged and raped a 13-year old girl recently, there's no way either would have been able to plead out (at least not to less than a 5-year sentence), let alone given the slip to the lawmen.

Let them know who they are getting and then release him into general population at Riker's Island. I give him 48 hours and he's either dead or receiving the same treatment he dished out.

How can you possibly defend someone that has already pleaded guilty to the inappropriate sex with a 13 year old girl. THIS IS WRONG ON ANY LEVEL YOU CAN PUT IT ON.

I don't care when it happened or how long ago it happened, he must pay for his crime.

There are a lot of interesting comments on this board, many of which make me ashamed to be American.

Why is everyone so quick to assume that this was nonconsensual, when the facts are really not known by any of us? For sure, if there was sexual activity that took place, it was illegal. But, did it amount to anything more than someone running a stoplight? We will never know. Even from 36 pages of court documents it would be extremely difficult to see through to the real story, this I can say from real life experience from when I was younger than 18. This judge had a mission -- just like many people here on this board who seem to eager to call Polanski a rapist.

Many people on this board seem to have a 'protect the children' mantra. But why does sexual activity bother people so much more than physical and emotional abuse and neglect of children, which is much more prevalent, and proven by the whole field of psychology to be much more damaging? I don't see the same people getting as angry. I have a theory: it's that most adults have some kind of unarticulated erotic attraction to young people (including parents towards their own children), and it's particularly therapeutic for them to come onto boards like this and say "kill that evil child molester", i.e. place the blame on other people. They resent it when someone else "has sex with a child" because they want it themselves. Two separate studies found that 22% of the general population is sexually attracted to "small children." You go figure out what that means.

I suggest to you that most people who go onto web boards and say "kill that evil child molester" are a prime suspect for being a closet case potential child rapist. Look at the plank in your own eye before hurling a stone at someone else.

To all the people who said in response to my original post, "it will never be ok to prey on children," why is this solely about what adults can or cannot "do" with "children"? Not everyone below 18 is a child, and not all of these cases are adults taking advantage of the younger person. For instance, about 15% of adult men who are gay once actively pursued sexual relationships with adults. I was one of them. It had nothing to do with any adult being a predator. What part of that are you having a hard time understanding? Some people like others who are older than them, for varying reasons. So who's the victim?

ar9011 for shame all these post make me proud to be an AMERICAN. We have the rare privilege to speak our opinion, and you have the right to disagree. Never be ashamed of that!!

I've finally figured out what to do with the pedaphiles and child molestors here in America when they get out of prison. Let's send them to France. Apparently child molestors are heroes in France. This way we don't have to worry about them repeating their crimes here in the US. Apparently the French people and their government don't mind exposing their children to pedaphiles.