Slow crime day in Zurich?
Academy-Award winning director Roman Polanski was taken into custody in Switzerland Saturday on a 31-year-old U.S. arrest warrant stemming from Polanski’s alleged unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old girl, organizers of the Zurich Film Festival said early Sunday morning.
Polanski, who won a Best Director Oscar for “The Pianist” in 2002, fled to France from the United States in 1978 after he was arrested in Los Angeles and pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.
The Polish director, 76, was in Zurich to receive a lifetime achievement award for his work as a director, the Zurich Film Festival organizers said Sunday. The film festival officials said Polanski’s arrest caused “shock and dismay” but wouldn’t derail plans to continue with Sunday’s planned retrospective of his work.
How is this case any of Switzerland’s business? Is this really the best use they can find for their cops and judges? Sorry, but this is the most out-of-sync Swiss Miss since Swiss men finally gave women the right to vote — in 1971. Apologies to our readers in Switzerland, but can anybody name their favorite Swiss film? Didn’t think so. I’ll give the last word to Harry Lime:
In Italy, for thirty years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace—and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.
Background details for anyone unfamiliar with the case, after the cut.
Polanski, a Holocaust survivor who also directed award-winning films including “Chinatown,” “Rosemary’s Baby” and “The Ninth Gate,” made tabloid headlines in the late 1960s when his pregnant wife, Sharon Tate, was murdered by Charles Manson’s “family” cult in a gruesome stabbing.
In 1977, the then 44-year-old Polanski photographed the 13-year-old girl as part of a guest-editing gig at the French edition of “Vogue.” The girl later testified in court that Polanski gave her alcohol and quaaludes and sexually assaulted her without her consent.
Polanski was ordered to take part in a psychiatric evaluation after he pleaded guilty. He fled to France, where he held citizenship and was legally able to avoid extradition to the U.S. — until now.
The victim at the centre of the case, Samantha Geimer, has previously asked for the charges to be dropped, saying the continued publication of details “causes harm to me, my husband and children”.
Polanski, who now lives permanently in Paris, is considered an international fugitive.
His Oscar for directing the 2002 The Pianist was collected by Harrison Ford, who had previously starred in his 1988 thriller, Frantic.
A statement from the organisers of the film festival stated: “Roman Polanski, one of the greatest film directors of our time, would have received an award for his life’s achievement at the Zurich Film Festival.
France’s culture minister says he is “dumbfounded” by the arrest. of the director, who is a french citizen.
Frederic Mitterrand said he “strongly regrets that a new ordeal is being inflicted on someone who has already experienced so many of them”.
180 Responses for "Roman Polanski arrested attending Swiss Film Fest"
WHAT?!?!?!!?
Huge BOO-URNS to the Swiss authorities. The victim herself wants the charges dropped. How is this any of their business?
Anyone who saw “Wanted and Desired” on HBO last year knows what a mess this is. The original case was badly mishandled. Here’s a news clip from last December.
Jeez, let’s waste a little more time on this old bullshit, shall we?
It’s afternoon’s like this were I wish I had a radio show on Sirius, just so I could yell out: LET.IT.GOOOOOOOO!!!
This is a desperate way to get attention and score some kind of “points” in the court of public opinion (which is notoriously ill-informed, dumbed-down and overtly emotional and irrational), and the sad thing is it might work. He SHOULD have the right lawyers or the right team to survive this little publicity stunt, I think he could even possibly avoid the intended US extradition, but who the hell knows? Enough people want him DEAD, and anytime you got that kind of blind populous hatred against you it’s certainly a force to reckon with. I say this could go either way, but I will be very sad and dissapointed if the crooked US prosecutors and the geniuses behind both the shittiest cheese ever AND the most annoying clock of all-time got their way. Good thing he filmed a movie earlier this year, maybe.
No matter what happens, he’ll remain one of the most audacious, captivating, creative, and deeply moving directors of all-time (and, forever, an Oscar Winner), that much is certain.
Wow. Man overall, what a life he’s had.
Absolutely, Ryan. I’ve said this elsewhere and I’ll say it again.
Can we all just get over it? Samantha Geimer has forgiven him about a hundred times for something that happened over 30 years ago which nobody with two brain cells between their ears should care about. Am I defending the deed itself? Of course not. But considering the travesty of justice that was his court case, I don’t blame him for fleeing the country. I would, too. Yet another instance of America’s backwards relationship with sex. We have a non-existent economy, two wars still raging, and a deeply compromised health care bill and yet we’re still focusing on the sex life of Roman fucking Polanski!!
If i rape a 13 year old girl, flee to another country, then the girl forgives me, would I get avoid punishment because I’m soooo creative? Would you? No! Equality means people like Polanski, OJ Simpson, and Michael Jackson should all have died in jail
Hey, some douchebag, Polanski’s case is more complicated than your little fast food poisoned pop addled brain can comprehend, and MJ was not proven guilty of ANYTHING, so why don’t you go back to the playground and let adults discuss the law.
Unfortunately, equality means brain dead nimrods like yourself get to vote once if they’re over 18, regardless of their brain being beneath a 3-year old.
A lobotomy is much needed in your case, shitbag!
I think Mr. Polanski knew what the consequences would be for fleeing the U.S. I have seen the documentary on HBO, and it makes a strong case for Polanski considering this girl was obviously unstable. With that being said, it does not excuse Polanski for his inappropriate behavior. You can’t excuse the man just because he made some really good movies. I’m sure if the woman who accused Polanski of this crime wants the charges dropped, then that is fine. But the fact is he did flee the U.S. after his charge, which is a felony. Celebrities are not above the law.
I have to say XanderLJ, your ad hominem attack really proves that you are in fact an adult. If you want to discuss the merits of this case why don’t you actually say something substantial.
Sexual assault on a minor is not something to take lightly. Someone very close to me was an victim of such an assault and I am thoroughly outraged that by this site’s glib take on the matter.
I am a long time lurker who regards this as one of my favorite all-time blogs but I have to say I will never visit this site again after this…
Absolutely disgusting…
Thank you, Sam, for being a voice of reason.
I love Polanski’s films to death, but I am able to separate the art from the artist. It doesn’t matter if the victim has “forgiven” him, he still broke the law and deserves to serve his time. Having to stay out of the U.S. for 30 years is not a punishment.
and regardless of this case, Polanski isn’t exactly the most moral or honorable person on earth, so I don’t understand why he evokes so much sympathy, even amongst his fans.
Well this is going to put a cramp on the film fest.
“I am a long time lurker who regards this as one of my favorite all-time blogs but I have to say I will never visit this site again after this…”
I don’t know where you like to lurk, CC Predator, but you must have looking the other way when we were all over the Polanski documentary last summer.
Polanski Doc Tonight on HBO
Polanski Does Not Disappoint
The Polanski Ending Non-Story
You think you’re disgusted? I’m disgusted too; disgusted by the judges and prosecutors who botched the original case with their grossly unfair handling and publicity-mongering.
Roger Ebert does a good job summarizing for us:
“Substantial” enough for you?
JC, it’s NONE OF SWITZERLAND’S FUCKING BUSINESS what american laws Polanski broke. Do you get it now?!
It’s a cheap publicity stunt, and the Swizz cops smell just as crooked and agenda-driven as the sleazebag L.A. judge in the 70’s. Polanski looks like the victim with these creeps, and that’s why he has my sympathy. People don’t have to be the most moral or honorable to get my sympathy, they just have to be denied fair prosecution. End of story.
“Having to stay out of the U.S. for 30 years is not a punishment.”
A lot of people would see that circumstance as the Grand Prize.
I dont feel one bit sorry for him, I hope he rots in jail. It doesnt matter if the woman forgave him, he committed a crime and now finally is going to pay for.
This is idiotic.
It’s wrong what he did, but the victim and the victim’s family have forgiven him and find no fault with him.
Hahaha, so predictable, I love these chickenshit cowardly losers who never post here coming in like little baby vulures at any tabloid-headline story. jbf81 = jerkoff boring fuckwad born in ‘81??? Why do I think I nailed your handle!
He’s not going to rot anywhere,douchebag! He might not even have to serve any jailtime. You’re as dumb as the miserable teachers who educated you if you think him being arrested in Switzerland means it’s over. It might not even get to an extradition. He has lawyers and this whole thing smells fishy as fuck. It’s gonna be a fight, and one he’s certainly capable of winning.
So try again precious…
Xander, If I were you I would quit spewing vitriol as all it does it cut into your own credibility. If you’re really SO mature, prove it through your actions.
Ryan, I have read all the arguments but frankly the way they are used here strikes me as a HUGE red herring. He may have been a victim himself, but that does not erase his crime the the terrible effects these crimes have on people.
NO ONE should EVER get away with any kind of sexual crime against a minor EVER.
I am flabbergasted that so many people here believe “forgiveness” erases the states responsibility here to protect our children.
He drugged and sexually assaulted a 13 year old girl. He pled guilty. He fled the country.
Nothing changes that fact. If the judge and D.A. had not been corrupt, if his movies hadn’t been especially good, if the girl hadn’t forgiven him later, for whatever reasons (we can never know), we’d all want him to rot in jail. We’d know him as that criminal perv who made a few really good films and then drugged and sexually assaulted a 13 year old girl. He’s not Jean Val-friggin-Jean. We’re not talking about stealing a loaf of bread here.
He drugged and sexually assaulted a 13 year old girl. He pled guilty. He fled the country.
I am flabbergasted that so many people here believe “forgiveness” erases the states responsibility here to protect our children.
I guess a lot of us are equally flabbergasted that you think our children are (or ever were) in danger from a Polanski predator spree.
“…his crime the the terrible effects these crimes have on people.”
You’re conflating two different things. I’d expect someone writing from such a prestigious email domain to be able to differentiate one crime from a million others and weigh relative severity. They’re all terrible deeds, but do they all demand the same degree of rabid vengeance?
Polanski wasn’t a Kommandant at Treblinka. How many decades of giving back to society and enriching the world’s culture do we need to see from him before we call off the dogs? Isn’t justice supposed to be about rehabilitation, or are you one of those Old Testament Eye for an Eye guys?
Hey, CCP, what the fuck are you still doing here, you bullshiter through and through? You said you were never visiting this disgusting site again. Well, the door’s not locked, what’s stopping you?
Oh, and it’s only a red herring to someone without an objective functioning brain. Anyone else would see it’s the whole point.
But anyway, why am I bothering talking to you? You said you were leaving…bye!
I’ve seen Roman Polanski Wanted and Desired and it’s a damn good documentary. It shows just how much of a mess the trial was. Judge Rittenband was a hack. He was more concerned about his celebrity status more than anything else. Then there’s Prosecutor David Wells who acted unlawfully.
Yes, Polanski did something wrong but one has to take into account that Samantha Geimer has forgiven him and more importantly asked for the case to be dismissed. The whole trial itself should have been dismissed for misconduct.
With that said I do think Polanski made a bad decision in fleeing the country. He may very well face charges for that. Talk about the past coming back to haunt you.
While I’m sure they didn’t HAVE to arrest them, my understanding is that authorities in Los Angeles spurred this arrest, as they knew he would be traveling to Switzerland and re-issued the warrant (or something along those lines, I’m not an attorney). I don’t believe the Swiss were thinking, oh let’s just randomly snatch him up now.
Xander, you still have not said anything of any merit at least Ryan is constructing some kind of argument.
Perhaps I am wrong and I am willing to listen to reason but all you do is attack people personally and swear up a storm. You sir are a child.
Hahaha, so predictable, I love these chickenshit cowardly losers who never post here coming in like little baby vulures at any tabloid-headline story. jbf81 = jerkoff boring fuckwad born in ‘81??? Why do I think I nailed your handle!
============================
LMFAO, NO. that would be the year my football team won the world champion title, but nice try.
Anyway, as I said before, I hope he rots in jail
“If the judge and D.A. had not been corrupt, if his movies hadn’t been especially good, if the girl hadn’t forgiven him later, for whatever reasons (we can never know), we’d all want him to rot in jail.”
If, If, If, Erik — but all your Ifs are the reality, and those aspects of the case can’t be ignored.
So no matter what any corrupt judge decrees, we have to abide by that corrupt sentence? is that what you’re arguing? Malicious Authoritarianism reigns supreme, right?
Trust me, I am leaving. If this site values Xander’s brand of rhetoric this I have completely misjudged it.
I am sure – whether people post as much or not – that others who know people who have been victimized in such a way will do the same…
Good riddance…
“I don’t believe the Swiss were thinking, oh let’s just randomly snatch him up now.”
Funny thing, the Swiss want to stay neutral every time world war is at their doorstep, and they don’t want anybody nosing into their secret bank accounts where billions in ill-gotten gains are hoarded — but suddenly they’re rottweilers when it comes to nabbing a septuagenarian filmmaker.
It seems that Polanski’s people would have made very sure of his safe arrival in Switzerland with the Swiss Film Fest executives. I would think a lot of the blame falls on the film festival for not protecting their honoree. If no precautions were made by the festival to ensure he would be safely received by the Swiss government, then no invitation should have existed.
Is there any foreseeable blame for the festival?
“Is there any foreseeable blame for the festival?”
I can’t see how the festival would have prevented this. I’m sure if the Siwss government wanted Polanksi, they would had him. Even if that meant going to the festival and snatching him up there.
CCP, we value all points of view, and you shouldn’t let yourself be out-argued. My opinion carries no more weight here than anybody else’s, including yours.
I do wish you would have felt inspired to comment about movies once in a while before you left us over an issue like this.
And anyway, don’t be so sure that everyone who’s ever been victimized feels the same way you do, my friend. You can be an articulate spokesman for your own views without trying to presume a legion of supporters who are packing up like you seem to be.
let the courts sort it out. i’m sure he won’t do any jail time. he’ll probably be presenting at the 2011 Oscars.
They will give him a standing ovation, Matt.
It just seems like if the festival were to invite him, they should have cleared it with the government first. Obviously the government can do whatever they want, but I just wonder if the right precautions were made upon his arrival.
With the new documentary release his story is back in the headlines and it seems that he should be more cautious before accepting every invitation to a different country. Even apparently the “peaceful” nation of Switzerland.
it’s definitely not the festival’s responsibility. when you’re a fugitive, you should probably be responsible for checking these things out yourself. who knows, maybe this was orchestrated so he can put all this behind him.
you can just tell how low the quality of the minds are of all these ‘burn the witch’ types on this forum and others,I am with ryan and xander on this one, life isn’t so black and white, especially this particular case.
“No matter what happens, he’ll remain one of the most audacious, captivating, creative, and deeply moving directors of all-time (and, forever, an Oscar Winner), that much is certain.”
Very well said, and yet all his ’scandals’ will always follow behind him from small minded people.. but he hasn’t allowed himself to be a victim, he has fought back against this small mindedness with every movie he made
Some of my favourite Swiss film are «Die Schweizermacher», «Vitus», «Das Boot ist voll», «Hans im Glück», «I Was a Swiss Banker» und «Mais im Bundeshuus». And Harry Lime got it basically wrong. Cuckoo clocks originate from the Black Forest.
I hope they get everything cleared up this time so Mr. Polanski and Ms. Geimer can rest in peace.
Ponyo,
“Polanski was initially charged with rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance (methaqualone) to a minor. These charges were dismissed under the terms of his plea bargain, and he pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.” [wikipedia]
I’m not sure this is a case of people who are upset being small-minded.
I’m a huge Polanski fan, but I’m not a fan of people getting off scot-free because of their celebrity. I hope the plea-deal that he originally worked is honored. But any misconduct on the prosecution or judges does not wipe away the underlying crime. Had he been a common citizen, he probably would not have been able to plea bargain this crime down anyway.
Let the courts figure it out. Don’t blame Switzerland.
what? Ryan, calm down!
There’s a great thing called extradiction (spelling?) and it’s actually GREAT that Polanski has been arrested, innocent or not. He’s accused of abusing a minor (after drugging her) and he should be facing a court since the 70’s. Being a master of filmmaking doesn’t make anyone a man above the law.
There’s a lot of issues the Swiss should be apologizing for (just think of where the money in Geneva comes from) but the arrest of Roman Polanski is certainly not one of them.
Come on Ryan,
How many decades of giving back to society and enriching the world’s culture do we need to see from himm before we call off the dogs?
He’s a film maker, he’s been doing what he loves, whilst living gin France! Thats not rehabilitation, thats getting off.
The guy is a great artist and the trial was a complete sham.
However it does not change what he did, and it does send a very wrong message to say all is forgiven. What the guy deserves is a fair trial. However, after 30years and this much plublicity that is no longer possible, on that case the charges should be dropped. He did deserve gaol time for what he did though.
According to Ryan, you rape a 13 year-old, make some “important” movies and then… You must be forgiven. What an immature thought. We all love movies here, but get real for once.
Free Polansky….!!!!
Gustavo H.R., our resident master of the 10-word oversimplification. Do you ever have a thought complex enough to warrant a complete paragraph, dude?
I’d twist your words the same way you twist mine if you ever gave us enough string to tie a knot.
30 years? They’re getting him on fugitism, otherwise there would be a statute of limitations. Nobody condones what he did — 30 years ago! and probably under duress — and let’s admit it, in France he probably is a “pedophile” because he likes teen girls. But how can a STATE get an arrest & extradition order from a COUNTRY?
The man is 76 y.o….what do they intend to do with a 76 yo?
Sally in Chicago is exactly right. Saturday’s arrest was a fugitive warrant for a case that has already been adjudicated. Polanski left the US because the original judge indicated he was planning to renege on the terms of the plea agreement. Polanski has already been through the US Court system for the rape charge. When he saw that US promises were about to be retracted, he just didn’t show up for the final sentencing.
Wouldn’t it be cool if people could get as angry about kids being imprisoned at Gitmo for years with no trial or lawyer? Where’s the outrage demanding Bush and Cheney face charges for a half dozen of their crimes causing the death and suffering of thousands of people?
Ryan your bias is amazing. So because he is a filmmaker you are pissed off or whatever. Plz spare me. Amazing how some people are willing to look the other way on some matters because they like people’s films. He is technically a fugitive. Should have just done the trial instead of going to france.
Swiss have an extradition treaty with the US that dates back to the 1950s that I believe might still be in force. If he had done is homework he might have known that.
Are you guys even bothering to get familiar with the facts?
“should have just done the trial”? Polanski went through the entire judicial process, followed every step correctly. Promises were made in the plea agreement, and then those promises were retracted. He was about to be strung up to enhance the fame and reputation of a lying judge.
I get the feeling the same sort of assurances and promises were made to Polanski so that he felt safe traveling to Switzerland, and now they’re fucking him over again.
Mony, your bias in favor of corrupt courts and lying governments is amazing.
OMG, that happened only two days after the dead in jail of Sharon Tate’s murder, Susan Atkinks.
Horrid coincidence, isn’t it Joao? Is it any wonder Polanski’s movies are masterpieces of screw-turning paranoia?
Mony, did you know that the prosecutor on the case, THE PROSECUTOR, told Polanski to flee as well? He wasn’t going to get a fair trail.
I’m just going to say one thing about this because I haven’t read the comments – seeing how many there are I assume there is a debate going on. I will read them when I get the time but for me, and we’ve been down this road SO many times before, we are judging a scenario by today’s standards. You might have to be around my age to remember the time that the rape took place; I grew up in Topanga in the 1960s. Polanski has paid enough for his crime – the victim has forgiven him — and anyway, it was the mother’s fault — she ought to have been held accountable too. Why not spend time and energy and money on hunting down thriving child molesters on the internet. They are everywhere. Or better yet, let’s figure out why the child porn industry IS thriving in the first place.
Well said Ryan.
Incidentally, the other day I read that the female member of Manson’s gang who actually murdered his wife Sharon Tate, whilst she was pregnant with his child, has died in prison in her sixties.
What a life of horror and tragedy he has led, and what a body of transcendent work he has produced.
“Under his plea agreement, Polanski would have been sentenced to the 42 days he had already served in jail under psychiatric evaluation. But Polanski believed the judge, who has since died, might alter the plea agreement and require Polanski to spend years in jail, so he skipped bail in 1978 and fled to France before sentence was pronounced”
Correct. 42 days and psychiatric evaluation was his sentence but the judge afterwards decided that wasn’t a fit due. I don’t see why people refuse to see the unlawful acts committed by the justice system 31 yrs. ago. Like so many ppl have said, no one is denying Polanksi did something wrong but due to the circumstances the charges should be dropped. As for Polanski the fugitive, the courts will have to decide what to do with that.
With all this scandal happening, I think now is the perfect time to say that parents should protect their children. In no way shape or form do you allow your underage child attend a strangers home without your presence. It’s the same bullshit that got Michael Jackson. If parents let their children into a strangers home, leave them there and something terrible happens; the parents should be just as accountable for the events. Simple as that.
What is this bullshit thread? He was charged with a crime and fled the country. Then he was caught and might be extradited. That is how the law works, regardless of how you feel about the case, whether you think it should be thrown out or charges dropped. I don’t understand why the hell people care so much.
I thought it was bizarre timing that I had this ready to go on the day Susan Atkins died.
http://nighthawknews.wordpress.com/2009/09/25/great-director-12-roman-polanski/
But to then have this happen? Too strange.
A couple questions:
1) I thought Switzerland was a “neutral” country? When is it not neutral? And what does being “neutral” mean?
2) What ever happened to the statute of limitations? There used to be a statute of limitations in this Country of around 5, 7, or 10 years, if I recall. I can see stretching it for a murder case, but not for this. Even the girl who was “victimized” by Polanski is totally on his side, and doesn’t think he should be tried or convicted.
3) So, if the “victim” is okay with Polanski and feels he should not be prosecuted, why is anyone else getting involved with this?
Jeez, people get over it!
Well RJGinCA, I guess it’s hard for some people to get over the fact that someone drugged and raped a 13 year old girl, then fled the country for 31 years and probably wasn’t punished appropriately.
There are way too many people here giving Roman a pass because the victim is “okay with being raped.”
It’s kinda creepy actually. Remind me to cross you off my babysitter for underaged daughter/son list.
This is a very complex issue, but to RJG:
(1) Neutrality has nothing to do with extradition treaties
(2) Statute of limitations has nothing to do with this since Polanski was charged with a crime in the 1970s but then escaped before sentencing for several reasons
(3) That’s how the criminal justice system works. It’s not Victim x vs. Polanski, but the People of California v. Polanski. It is not about how the victim feels, but rather about prosecution of a crime committed in a particular jurisdiction.
I doubt Polanski will serve hard time, and I expect some sort of plea agreement. I think that once that happens, at the very least, people will hopefully move on.
ARE YOU KIDDING ME, PEOPLE???
I am also flabbergasted and shocked that so many people are surprised at his arrest. He broke the law!! HELLO
It’s about time he was arrested. You don’t get forgiveness from the law just because you are a celebrity. It doesn’t matter if he is no longer a threat to society! You still must pay for your crimes.
And one other thing, it’s not out of the ordinary for a foreign government to arrest someone who has an outstanding warrant in another country. It’s none of the Swiss government’s business???? Is that supposed to be a joke?
“This is a very complex issue, but to RJG:
(1) Neutrality has nothing to do with extradition treaties
(2) Statute of limitations has nothing to do with this since Polanski was charged with a crime in the 1970s but then escaped before sentencing for several reasons
(3) That’s how the criminal justice system works. It’s not Victim x vs. Polanski, but the People of California v. Polanski. It is not about how the victim feels, but rather about prosecution of a crime committed in a particular jurisdiction.
I doubt Polanski will serve hard time, and I expect some sort of plea agreement. I think that once that happens, at the very least, people will hopefully move on.”
That’s probably the best said post dealing with this subject. I have mixed feelings about this. He should serve time, but he did have a plea deal that got retracted that fucked him over. If that didn’t happen then I would say throw the book at him, but it did. Idk how to react other than to say hes been exonerated for so long.
I have one thing to add, and then I’ll leave this alone. Had O.J. drugged and raped a 13 year old and then fled to France, would anyone care if he was extradited after he’d been out of the country for 30 years? Just curious.
Polanski won’t serve time. I actually think he will be relieved if this gets resolved.
To Ryan Ray: Let’s say for example that Roman Polanski was convicted in the 70’s and spent xxx amount of years in prison. The problem with our prison system is that once released, there is about an 80% chance the offender will repeat the same offense and end up in prison again. It’s based on a system of punishment rather than rehabilitation. If I recall, Roman Polanski has spent the last 31 years as a model citizen–no repeat offenses, no infractions of the law, etc. So, how can we say that he hasn’t learned his lesson. He learned better than if he had been in prison. Putting him in prison at this time (30+ years later) doesn’t seem beneficial to anyone at this point. Read the previous posts, and find out what he’s been through since Sharon Tate was murdered–I’d say he’s paid his time.
To Loyal: There is a difference between “rape” and “statutory rape”. I know of a guy in Texas who was sentenced to 10 years in prison (at the age of 18) for having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend. Her parents got upset, and got the “adult” thrown in jail for 10 years out of spite. I think we have to look at the overall picture, and not focus on the label. And don’t worry, I would very much like to not babysit your children.
To Dorothy: Thank you for the info. I hope the judicial process works swiftly, in this regard. Roman’s been “on the lam” for the past 30+ years, and he might actually be relieved to get the whole thing over with.
I think the actions of the judge were deplorable and inexcusable. I think Roman probably was right to flee and put in the same position with the same resources, I’m sure I would do the same.
However, no amount of personal tragedy or individual artistic achievement excuses Roman’s actions. I don’t care that he is not a serial child rapist. I don’t care than the crime was committed over 30 years ago. I don’t care if the girl stripped off all her clothes and begged him to have sex with her. She was 13. She was not capable of informed consent. Her forgiveness now can be explained as easily through a desire to move on from her own pain as it can by believing Roman to be innocent. Should he be put in jail now for the rape? No, that plea deal should stand. Should he be prosecuted for fleeing? Yes, he broke the law. Period. It will be up to a hopefully very honorable judge to decide his punishment – which should probably be very, very lenient, given the circumstances. He is, and forever in my mind will be, a rapist. Those who don’t want to give him this appropriate label need to take a long hard look in the mirror.
I know this is probably for another topic, but people in the U.S. are waaaayyyy to hung up on sex. Sex offenses are what I call “hysterical crimes”–in that you get people screaming for the death penalty, where other crimes (such as murder, attempted murder, maiming and mutilations) aren’t dealt with similar severity.
Please don’t get me wrong–I dont’ have a lot of empathy for anyone that commits a crime, but let’s as a society put things a bit more in perspective. It’s the hysteria that forces people to believe (mentally) that they cannot recover from a sex crime. My sister was raped at the age of 24, and with counseling and good family support bounced back rather quickly. However, that “crime” was more severe (from a legal perspective) than if someone had broken into her home and chopped off her legs (and she had lived). So, if I were to ask her if she would rather have had sex with someone that she didn’t want to, or have had her legs chopped off, which would she chooose?
And again, I am not “soft” on crime. But we need a better legal system that focuses on rehabilitation and allows the victims an opportunity to be better heard at the time of sentencing. Yes, “sex crimes” can have a severe, long-lasting and detrimental effect on people “if they want it to”. There are other crimes, such as those listed above, where the effects are irreversible.
Polanski was arrested for drugging, forcibly raping and sodomizing a 13-year-old. Samantha Geimer has never wavered from her original testimony, that he forced her. Although they reached a plea agreement on the lesser charge of statutory rape, it’s very probable that it was actual, forcible rape.
There’s a huge difference between an 18-year-old boy having consensual sex with his 17-year-old girlfriend, and a 43-year-old man forcing himself on a 13-year-old.
The year after he fled to France, he used his casting couch to seduce 15-year-old Nastassja Kinski, who had her first starring role in his film, Tess. Since 15 is the age of consent in France, he wasn’t prosecuted. We have no idea how many other young girls he seduced or raped, before and after these two.
That said, I doubt he poses any danger to society now, and every time this case is reinvigorated, his victim has to suffer through it again. She wants it to end, and I don’t blame her.
I’m of two minds. Of course I’m disappointed about this as a longtime Polanski fan who has followed this case for years and felt (ambivalently) sympathetic toward someone who effectively lost his career in the U.S. at least partly for fleeing a trial that would’ve ruined him with a last minute plea deal retraction. What the criminal justice system feels it can do to right the wrongs of a 77 year old man 30 years ago is beyond me.
On the other hand, Roman Polanski is or was, depending on how long you feel the term should stand, a rapist. And I feel like every time we say “She forgave him” we should not neglect to add “For raping her.” She forgave him for raping her. Bad as we may feel about the tragic circumstances of his life, those of us who love his films especially should not think that Roman Polanski is any less a 43 year old man who fed drinks to and had sex with a 13 year old girl at one point just because we also admire his work. And if we think of him in these terms, we realize he’s also a fugitive who got apprehended yesterday for never having stood any time for his crime.
Now we can argue that he has served a kind of sentence (debatable) and we can say that surely some clemency ought to be granted at the age of 77, especially given the corruption of the case he fled, and the general unfairness of the punishment he’d have received. But let’s not erase what actually happened to the girl, whether she forgives him or not, and let’s not act as if he has already been to jail — he hasn’t.
you are absolutely out to lunch rjginca. i’m glad your sister’s rape experience wasn’t that bad, but for you to sit there and say “sex crimes” can have a severe long-lasting and detrimental effect on people “if they want it to” is disgusting. not all victims have a choice on how severe, long-lasting and detrimental those impacts are – especially defenseless 13 year olds. raping a 13 year old has nothing to do with the US being waaaaayyyy to hung up on sex. I am agreement on your first sentence, but pretty much everything else you have to say is vile and revolting.
The main point of this is that the victim wishes the charges to be dropped, so technically he shouldn’t be charged. He has accepted he did wrong and the victim has gotten over it, if she still wanted something to happen to him then wouldn’t she be calling for his arrest?
Matt,
Your response is right up there with the “hysteria” that I mention (“vile”, “disgusting”, “revolting”…) and pretty much the hysteria we would expect in this Country. This is how we have been conditioned to think.
The point I’m making, which has obviously been missed over all the hysteria, is that an individual, whether a victim of a petty crime, a burglary, an assault, a rape, or an attempted murder or maiming, has the mental capacity to determine how he or she is going to cope with it, and go forward with it for the remainder of his or her life.
This is why there are counselors and psychiatrists out there to help people deal with these setbacks and misfortunes in life, and help them deal with these issues in a healthy and productive manner. It is up to the victim to decide how he or she is going to tackle these demons and overcome them, so it does not debilitate the rest of his or her life.
For whatever reason, Roman Polanski’s victim has decided to put the past behind her, forgive Roman, and move forward with what is left of her having a healthy and productive life. She has moved on.
Whether the legal system agrees with her, remains to be seen. Think of it as “Sophie’s Choice”. If someone had to choose between the worst of many evils out there, how would those evils be prioritized.
Once again, I’m not conveying empathy for any of those evils, I’m just trying to put them in perspective. What are the crimes out there, with support and counseling could you possible bounce-back healthy and strong, and which ones are irreversible? Think about it.
“#29:Funny thing, the Swiss want to stay neutral every time world war is at their doorstep, and they don’t want anybody nosing into their secret bank accounts where billions in ill-gotten gains are hoarded ”
The reason why the Swiss gov’t probably did this was because the US gov’t (IRS)is pressuring the Swiss gov’t about these secret bank accounts.
Polanksi will be used as an example to others. Regardless of how long it takes, you will be found and brought to justice.
Just curious RJGinCA, are you on a watchlist by chance?
“The main point of this is that the victim wishes the charges to be dropped, so technically he shouldn’t be charged.”
It’s not up to her.
“I’m just trying to put them in perspective. What are the crimes out there, with support and counseling could you possible bounce-back healthy and strong, and which ones are irreversible? Think about it.”
Sick. Rape is just as irreversible and psychologically destructive as any other assault, if not more so.
I think it’s time for everyone involved in the case to make it right. Polanski has to answer for the rape and fleeing the country. Does that mean I think he should do hard time now? No – I can’t imagine he poses a risk to anyone anymore, but he needs to finally deal with the consequences. Maybe he can make another film and give the proceeds to a charity dealing in sex crimes against minors or some kind of other financial restitution. Maybe that’s far fetched…I don’t know.
BUT the hack job done regarding his prosecution needs to be revisited and made right as well. Like others have stated, the plea deal should stay, but he must deal with the fleeing. And lenience should be considered since his fleeing was a result of the botched job of his prosecution.
I think it’s unfair to pardon him completely just as it’s unfair to start the prosecution over as if this just happened.
Hopefully some cool heads and common sense will prevail, and then Ms. Geimer will not have to revisit this anymore. And Mr. Polanski can freely roam the states again, perhaps taking in a Raider’s game.
If he thinks there was prosecutorial misconduct, he can appeal. Evading the law by escaping to another country is not a viable option in our criminal justice system. In fact, it’s another criminal violation.
There seem to be 2 different camps arguing about two different subjects here. One camp says that the justice system was perverted and was about to screw Polanski over before he fled. This camp sees to justify his fugitivity for these reasons. Doesn’t sound to me like they are trying to justify his actions with the 13 year old girl.
The other camp seems indignant that Polanski has not served what they feel is the appropriate punishment for said actions. So much so that they seem to be reacting with incredulity at the other camp’s excusing of Polanski’s actions (which the other camp isn’t even doing). To this camp I say, “Yes, you are absolutely right. Polanski broke the law. Now get mad at the American Justice system for f-cking up his case. If a judge reneged on a deal made with me, I’d want to get as far from this f-cked up system as I could, too.”
Conclusion: As broken and corrupt as it can sometimes be, thank God we live in the American Justice system and not in the Court of Public Opinion.
wow… this string of talkback posts… wow… really, people? really?
think about this for a second… take Roman Polanski out of the equation… say, it was just Joe Schmo from LA…
would you be saying the same thing? would you be defending a rapist simply because the woman wanted to move past it years later (which is her way of healing, because she has to relive it every time Polanski makes a movie… which would be a horrify experience for any rape victim).
so… what would you be saying if it wasn’t Roman Polanski?
some of you had said that the nation is fascinated with sex? well, what about this unhealthy obsession with celebrity?
“If he thinks there was prosecutorial misconduct, he can appeal. Evading the law by escaping to another country is not a viable option in our criminal justice system. In fact, it’s another criminal violation.”
I think it’s perfectly understandable for Polanski to not want to give the system that’s already attempted to screw him over another go.
He plead guilty. It wasn’t like he was convicted due to jury misconduct. He was a wealthy 44 year old man during the criminal process. I doubt cops coerced a criminal confession from him. Obviously, he plead guilty due to the evidence and/or statement by the witness. Let’s not exonerate him because he fled (emphasis added) the country. Or, because he is an old man. He was charged and convicted of a serious crime. In the name of justice, he ought to serve his punishment. Anything else would be a huge miscarriage of justice.
An all-time low for this blog, Ryan et. al, you should be ashamed of yourselves.
1. It is irrelevant that the victim has “forgiven” Polanski. She was given a LARGE settlement from him, one that was made larger by “forgiving” him.
2. To all of you “Americans are so prudish”, may I ask how many 13 year old girls you’ve personally drugged and had non-consensual sex with? Show of hands?
3. If this was a case of the janitor at school pulling this crap on a student, would you excuse it by saying “well, he really mopped the floors well”.
Moreover, by defending Polanski to this clip, it just gives ammo to that asshat Andrew Breitbart. Don’t think for a minute he and his subhuman followers aren’t combing these boards to find “liberals” rationalizing the rape of a 13 year old girl.
What evidence does Polanski have for his misconduct claim? If he was confident, he could have just appealed. He could have hired any lawyer he wanted to. If would have taken mass corruption to prevent the success of an appeal on the merits if Polanski had the evidence.
He was clearly unsure of himself. You’re quick to point out the flaws of our system. Yet, with his wealth, he was essentially able to evade punishment for a crime (he confessed to).
Every criminal thinks there was something wrong with their prosecution.
I have loved this site for a long time and have had great respect for you, Ryan. Unfortunately your strong stance has completely altered my opinion. You have the right to your own opinion, of course, but it is quite obvious you have never been close to anyone that has been affected by rape. You mistake the victim’s “forgiveness” for her probably just wanting the situation to go away. You talk of “facts” but have you ever spoken to the victim? Her family? The prosecutors in this case? Anyone affected by this tragedy? Perhaps you should investigate more before making such BOLD statements.
And this statement: “and now they’re fucking him over again.” Just like he fucked a 13 year old girl? Like that? I am flabbergasted by some of the opinions on this thread. Disgusting. You guys belong on PerezHilton.com.
“He plead guilty. It wasn’t like he was convicted due to jury misconduct. He was a wealthy 44 year old man during the criminal process. I doubt cops coerced a criminal confession from him. Obviously, he plead guilty due to the evidence and/or statement by the witness. Let’s not exonerate him because he fled (emphasis added) the country. Or, because he is an old man. He was charged and convicted of a serious crime. In the name of justice, he ought to serve his punishment. Anything else would be a huge miscarriage of justice.”
Yes. And the judge struck a deal for the sentencing, which Polanski cooperated with until the judge appeared to be adding more to the sentence because the media didn’t think it was enough. Then he fled.
“What evidence does Polanski have for his misconduct claim?”
Errrr. The testimony of one of the men prosecuting him way back when?
85. Great, but he still raped a 13-year old girl, no? Spin this all you want, he raped a 13-year old girl.
And Sasha:
“we are judging a scenario by today’s standards” (so are you saying that rape was ok in the 60s then?)
“Polanski has paid enough for his crime” (not according to your American Judicial system. So are you saying that specific people are above the law? Because he is a famous director? Or because his first trial was corrupt? Wouldn’t he want to go back then and clear his name?)
“the victim has forgiven him” (a big cash settlement and wanting the sitution to be out of the headlines probably helped)
“— and anyway, it was the mother’s fault”(WHAAAAAAAT? You CANNOT be serious???)
Sasha, I thought you would be the voice of reason in all of this. How incredibly disappointing.
I DIDN’T EXCUSE HIS ACTIONS, PETE!
The judge sentenced him via a deal made with Polanski and his defense team. Nobody is saying HE WASN’T GUILTY.
However, he can’t go back on the deal because an angry mob (like you and your team) demand it. That’s why there are judges and a legal system. We don’t hold public polls for every rape/murder case.
Bastoche,
If I understand your argument correctly, a convicted felon can justifiably leave the country and become a fugitive because he believes there might be some tampering with his sentence.
In our criminal justice system, the judge generally has full discretion (usually within federally advisable ranges) in sentencing. No deal is iron-clad. There is nothing procedurally incorrect with changing a convicted felon’s sentence.
I am appalled that some of you are defending a convicted felon so rigorously to the point where you make ludicrous claims against our justice system. Here I thought the claim was against the prosecution. But it’s an issue in sentencing. Are you kidding me?
Something tells me had he not made chinatown, I would not be hearing such ridiculous arguments.
He’s a CONVICTED felon who fled the country. The only miscarriage of justice is our system’s failure to capture him much longer ago.
there is a lot of projecting going on here… you are putting polanski in an impossible box to get out of.
I don’t know what you guys think you are fighting against, but whatever it is, Polanski is not it. it is not a black and white case at all. if you think it is this site’s low point, I think it is the site’s high point
I also applaud Polanski’s courage, instead of shrinking into some hole with hatred and bitterness at how he was treated, he continued to contribute to society, as he has facing horror after horror his whole life. Not only that but his movies are in a way therapy for it all. those on the fringe/victims of crime and isolation, don’t they realize polanski is one of the few artists who are on their side, and fight for you through his work?
None of you are directly influenced by polanski’s crime.. while I am directly touched by his art, and I think we have more say than you about the content of his spirit,.
If, If, If, Erik — but all your Ifs are the reality, and those aspects of the case can’t be ignored.
So no matter what any corrupt judge decrees, we have to abide by that corrupt sentence? is that what you’re arguing? Malicious Authoritarianism reigns supreme, right?
—
Ryan, you missed my point. It comes down to the downright simple fact of “two rights don’t make a wrong”. We don’t have to abide by a corrupt sentence, and I never argued that, what I was saying was that the fact that the sentence was in all likelyhood oozing corruption, that doesn’t negate or excuse the crime.
You are right in saying those aspects cannot be ignored, but if we are going to pass some sort of moral judgement only on the man and the act he committed, they are all meaningless.
Of course, I am extremely biased, as is anyone who passes judgement on either side of this argument based on little more than snippets of information the media provides us with, filtered through our own cultural bias. The case was likely infinitely more complex than we imagine it to be, and I do not imagine Polanski to be a monster who just vacationed in France for 3 decades without ever losing a minute of sleep over this, not do I think he is somehow a victim who can be absolved of all blame.
In the abstract, i do think he has to own his misdeed, and I do utterly reject any argument that the relevance of a case diminishes or dissolves if enough time has passed and people have moved on, even if only for the precedent it sets.
And just to clarify: the botched defense he got does, at the very least in part, explain and possibly justify his fleeing the country. The man deserves a fair trial, but he also deserves due punishment. The great irony is that he cannot get both, so he must either avoid punishment altogether, or face a kind of mock justice.
I don’t know, maybe I’d have felt less hostile toward the man if any of that had been reflected in his films of the last few decades, instead of the frequent emphasis on the sexuality of young women and girls (even if he does have a right as an artist to challenge the hypocritical sexual morals of western society).
I don’t know what to make of it exactly. It’s late here, and I’m sleepy. I’ll rewatch Death and the Maiden sometime soon and then think better and worse of him both at the same time as soon as the credits roll.
Anna, are you saying that the mother shouldn’t take any fault in all this?
You are obviously not a parent or else you wouldn’t be that stunned Sasha made such a statement about the victim’s mother.
Bastoche,
On one hand you think our justice system ought to handle the sensitivities of this heinous crime. Yet, on the other, you argue Polanski have every right to escape from the country because of a broken justice system.
Suffice it to say we cannot leave our justice system in the hands of normal people. Not because of mob mentality. Rather, the true scare is the affect of celebrity. He plead guilty to a fairly disturbing crime involving a 13 year old girl. Had he been anyone else: a 44 year old car salesmen. No one on this board would defend him, even if there was a broken deal in the sentencing.
91. Ponyo, bullshit. Polanski CHOSE to drug and anally rape a 13 year old girl. No matter how he feels he was treated by the judicial system, he still was the one who CHOSE to commit a serious sexual offense.
It is incredibly troubling to see people like you somehow make excuses for this because of the purported quality of his movies. Michael Jackson made amazing records, so his conduct with underage boys didn’t warrant scrutiny.
When we give famous people a free pass no matter what they do because of their fame or position in society, we’re the ones who ultimately lose. When you move the boundaries a little farther out because of fame, you get things like Bernie Madoff or George W. Bush.
Again, how many 13 year old girls have any of you anally raped? What? You haven’t? Why, it’s ok for Roman, why not for you?
I wonder how many of Polanski’s defenders were among the people utterly aghast that Mike Vick was let back in the NFL. Of course, he did actually SERVE his time, no?
soul brotha,
My issue is not so much with the defense of Polanski, but of the idea that you can’t be as willy-nilly as this judge was with something like this in the justice system.
The judge cannot add more punishment once Polanski has done what was asked to him. Polanski was sentenced by the judge to 90 days in Chino and a psychiatric evaluation. Chino’s parole board advised that he be given parole 42 days into his 90 day sentence after good behavior and nothing outstanding from his psychiatric evaluation. By this time, the media had been so on the judge’s ass about what they perceived as celebrity leniency that the judge not only said “screw his parole” but “I’m adding on extra time.”
That’s no justice.
AND IF ONE MORE PERSON SAYS I’M IN ANY WAY DEFENDING RAPE, I’M GOING TO START PRAYING FOR YOUR UNTIMELY DEMISE!!! OR MAYBE JUST AN ENCOUNTER WITH A RAPIST!!
First and foremost, no one else would have gotten the plea deal Polanski (a court order to undergo a 90 day psychiatric study). On the 42nd day, he decides to go back to France, which can refuse to extradite its citizens.
I am disappointed in both Ryan and Sasha. The victim wished to dropped the charges due to the publicity she was receiving. You know, the sordid details associated with the crime. She just wants to move on with her life. That doesn’t mean he deserves to have the charges dropped. He is guilty. You people are unbelievable.
Bastoche, but you have been defending what Polanski did by attempting to rationalize just how hard things were for him in the years leading up to his CHOICE to rape a 13 year old girl. The idea that a rapist is somehow the victim here is astonishing.
Justice would have been Polanski going away for many years. The initial 90 day deal was pure and simple a sweetheart deal offered by starstruck prosecutors. Joe Schmoe the school janitor wouldn’t have been offered that deal.
This reminds me of the Donte Stallworth case. He gets drunk and high, and runs over a man on the sidewalk. He gets a grand total of one month in jail. Famous people get different treatment.
I can assume that the majority of the posters here are politically liberal. Tell me, are you ultimately ok that Rush Limbaugh didn’t go to prison for felony drug possession because the prosecutors dropped the ball? Does the prosecutorial misconduct make Limbaugh’s drug addiction no longer a worthy topic for scorn or derision?
“Bastoche, but you have been defending what Polanski did by attempting to rationalize just how hard things were for him in the years leading up to his CHOICE to rape a 13 year old girl. The idea that a rapist is somehow the victim here is astonishing.”
I SAID NOTHING OF THE SORT, you non-reading (or non-comprehending) punk. I’m talking about the supposed due process surrounding the rape case nothing about BEFORE he raped the girl.
“Anna, are you saying that the mother shouldn’t take any fault in all this?
You are obviously not a parent or else you wouldn’t be that stunned Sasha made such a statement about the victim’s mother.”
I love how you twisted what I said when it’s right there on the page. I didn’t say the mother shouldn’t take “any” fault at all. Sasha said “It was the mother’s fault” Period. Which is beyond ridiculous. Did she force Polanski to drug her daughter? Rape her? Take nude photos of her? Listen to what you are saying!
And yes I am a mother and I could only imagine what it would be like if my 13 year old daughter was raped and people were defending the criminal because he was a rich and famous director. I would NEVER defend that person, even if he has served his time. In this case Polanski hasn’t even done THAT!
What is wrong with you JR? Do you have any feelings at all? I am almost crying thinking about that poor girl and what she has been through.
Pete, no one gives a shit about Rush Limbaugh.
“Does the prosecutorial misconduct make Limbaugh’s drug addiction no longer a worthy topic for scorn or derision?”
Scorn or deride him all you want, but you can’t do anything legally if Limbaugh’s prosecutors f-cked it up. I honestly don’t know anything about the Limbaugh case, but I’d be sticking up for his LEGAL rights (NOT making any judgements/defense of his actual actions) if he were a victim of justice-system corruption.
Bastoche, if you changed NOTHING about the case, except the rapist was Joe Smith, instead of Roman Polanski, would you be carrying Joe Smith’s water to the same clip?
Moreover, do you feel that a 90-day pyschiatric examination is an appropriate punishment for drugging and raping a 13 year old girl? Should Joe Smith be accorded the same deal?
I might be a punk, but you’re a starfucker who thinks he’s a civil libertarian.
Pete – I don’t see the majority of people here defending him. Seems like there is quite a mixture of opinions on here, some stronger than others. What does political affiliation have to do with anything?
It seems to me that most people recognize that this is not an easy black and white case. There’s a little bit of gray area in there.
JR, the point is that Limbaugh avoided prison for committing a pretty obvious felony. My guess is that more than a few people who had negative opinions of either Mr. Limbaugh’s politics or Mr. Limbaugh’s offense really wouldn’t be happy that he skated.
It seems that people’s opinions of Polanski’s actions seem more based on how much they like the films than the reality that he drugged and anally raped a 13 year old girl.
I guess if someone raped your kid, your level of outrage would be determined by the level of the rapist’s fame?
Jack Johnson, now THERE is someone who was wrongfully prosecuted.
105. The Limbaugh example simply shows that people’s belief in machinations of the justice system has less to do with what the courts actually did than their own personal biases either for or against the person being put on trial.
More than a few people have used the missteps in the Polanski prosecution as a means of either rationalizing what he did, or or minimizing the seriousness of what he did.
I sincerely hope those of you who think Polanski should die in prison can get a handle on your rage before his almost certain pardon, probation, or commutation of his sentence so you don’t have a collective nervous breakdown in a few weeks. We need you clear-headed for the height of Oscar season.
Can I suggest in advance that you redirect your fury toward the immunity from prosecution promised by the US State Department for the dozens of murders, mutilations and underage rapes perpetrated by Dick Cheney’s Blackwater buddies?
I appreciate that you want to take a stand against injustice, but there are more important targets out there. I’m serious. You could do some good. You can spend the evening passing your own personal judgment on Polanski, or write to your senators and congressmen and ask them what they’re doing about the little Iraqi girls that got paid $1 for giving blowjobs to US mercenaries. Which is more important to you?
I think that they should just forgive / release him, there are more important criminals to track down, punishing him at this point would just be to set an example or get revenge.
the time they give him in prison could be better spent for society if he made movies and donated some of the proceeds to a charity.
…at some point a bigger picture has to come through, he can provide great value to the world.. only five years ago he made the amazing movie The Pianist, which was probably healing for a lot of people … and says it all about the power of art to heal us through the worst that we face, I think that is so much more valuable than the average thug being thrown i jail who will commit one crime after another and never provide to society, and yet the thug would probably get off easier than polanski in the court of public opinion
I’ve personally seen only 1 Polanski movie, Pete, so his stardom means nil to me. The case interests me, and I would be advocating the legal rights of a Joe Schmo.
No, I don’t think the 90 days was appropriate, either, but that’s moot. That’s what the judge gave him. It seems to me like we should both be on the same team in that the judge was horrible.
EDIT: In fact, I would be a stronger advocate of Joe Schmo provided Joe Schmo was U.S. citizen, which I don’t even think Polanski was.
How about Elia Kazan, how many of you Polanski water-carrying starfuckers hissed at the screen when he received his honorary Oscar.
So, to summarize.
1. Naming names to Congress, unforgivable
2. Anally raping a 13 year old girl, mitigating circumstances.
110. Maybe the judge was right, maybe he was wrong. Maybe the judge thought the prosecutors were out of their gourds trying to offer that deal to begin with.
Take a gander at 109, there’s a guy who basically is saying that because the Piano is such a great film (it is), that somehow we all need to move past the whole anal rape of a drugged 13 year old girl.
By all accounts, Joseph Mengele was a pretty nice neighbor in Argentina.
Ryan, but by allowing the famous like Polanski to get away with damn near anything with the “can’t we just move on” argument, it makes it harder to prosecute the Cheneys and Blackwaters of the world.
Hell, over the half the country appears to be AOK with torture because, after all, we must have had a really good reason.
I agree that Polanski will have his sentence commuted, and he should be permanently denied an entry visa to this country for what he did. But you are ignorant beyond belief if you can’t see how many people are using Polanski’s fame as a way to minimize what he did to get in trouble to begin with. Or are you too dense to understand that?
Nevermind. Peace.
First of all, I know what you meant Pete. I just don’t follow on the daily doings of Mr. Limbaugh because I don’t give a shit. His political views are way over the top for my taste, but yes if the prosecutors fucked up his case then I guess he should go without punishment. That’s the way the law works as so many people here like to put it. Also, in no way, shape or form did I say Polanski should be pardoned simply because of his celebrity status. So please check your facts first and have you seen Roman Polanski Wanted and Desired??? Maybe the judge was wrong??? Please, he was a fucking clown.
Secondly, I apologize to you Anna but as a parent you should know never to leave your underage child in a strangers home alone. You just don’t do it. Samantha’s mother should have been there in every moment of the way. You can’t leave your child at the hands of a man just because he’s a celebrity. For that she should take fault for what happened.
“1. Naming names to Congress, unforgivable
2. Anally raping a 13 year old girl, mitigating circumstances.”
well there is also a difference because Kazan named many names and ruined their lives while Polanski only made this one mistake, it would be different if Polanski even raped one other person but he never did, it was just one mistake that he has already redeemed through making great art, art is one of the most healing gifts that can be given to society, much more healing than spending time in prison. I think he is above the law in this case, also because of the injustice they themselves committed against him.
“But you are ignorant beyond belief if you can’t see how many people are using Polanski’s fame as a way to minimize what he did to get in trouble to begin with.”
Just because I haven’t addressed that part of this issue doesn’t mean I don’t know it exists, Pete. I won’t ask you if you’re too dense to understand the difference, because I know you’re not.
I’ll have to spend more time considering your theory that we can’t touch Blackwater until we make an example of Polanski first. On the surface, that sounds messed up. On the other hand, maybe they’re having trouble prosecuting Polanski because Kissinger wasn’t executed for his war crimes in Cambodia and Laos. How many tens of thousands of children did Henry K. murder?
Every couple of years America needs a big celebrity show trial to distract from the atrocities the truly evil bastards in power commit every day. Makes us feel all warm and justicey.
People need to realize that nobody’s excusing Polanski’s crime. He did have sex with a 13 year old girl 31 years ago. No one’s disputing that. He pleaded guilty, was sentenced to a 90 day evaluation by the judge, who promised to follow up with the evaluation’s recommendation – which was to release Polanski on probation. Then the judge got fame-hungry and decided to retract the plea bargain and send Polanski to prison.
The judge staged trials (2 times) and consulted outside advice, even from a reporter. THAT, is illegal conduct, the very cause of Polanski fleeting the country. You’re asking for evidence? Talk to the prosecutor at the time. He went on record saying that the judge faked two mock trials for his own publicity and he also went on record saying that under these circumstances, no wonder Polanski left.
Again, what Polanski did was wrong. Very wrong. No one’s saying otherwise. But he DID serve the time that he was sentenced to, got screwed over, realized he’d never stand a fair trial in the States, and fled. Do I blame him? No.
Also, if anyone’s read the court testimony or record or whatchamacallit, the girl willingly took the drug. Polanski offered 1/3 of Quaalude to her, she declined, he said “oh”, but for some odd reason she still took it. Not using it as a defense for Polanski sleeping with her, but in a legal standpoint this needs to be clarified.
Thanks for that lucid and even-handed explanation, whatlobster. You should comment a lot more often.
Ryan, are you actually asking us to decide which we feel is “more important” to discuss — a 13 year old girl’s rape 30 years ago or more recent injustices done to Iraqi girls? Are you actually saying that this rape is now more or less irrelevant, the territory only of “personal attacks” on Polanski and surely not the proper site for a real stand against injustice, because other rapes have happened since, “dozens” of them, and they haven’t been properly persecuted? Dozens vs. one — why quantify rape? Why are you swinging the discussion towards which rape is more damaging? All rapes are equal, but some rapes are more equal than others?
Let me use another example that follows the logic you’ve laid out here: why continue to talk about Mathew Shepard and Harvey Milk when the queer community faces violence today, worldwide? Why so certain, Ryan, that to be invested in the latter means jettisoning the former, or that to care about what has happened in the past is to somehow make a false, halfhearted stance against injustice in the present? You insult yourself and your readers by implying that there is some invisible cap on outrage, that we can all only REALLY be angry at one injustice at a time, so we’d better go with the right one, lest we just be making silly personal attacks. Why talk about a historical film like Milk, if that’s true? Why talk about Wanted and Desired either?
I’m glad you seem to think you’ve found the correct outrage, the right victims to feel sorry for, the relevant ones we can still save. But it makes my skin crawl to think how much you sound like one of those indie kids who have found the better band that nobody else has heard of. I’d ask you a variation on the same question I’d ask the indie kid, except it has consequences now: why are you assuming we don’t care about Iraq because some of us think raping a 13 year old girl merits criminal punishment, even 30 years later (though we aren’t all saying this), and even if the case was bungled?
If this was a thread about the misconduct of the US administration, then surely you’d get discussions about that. But you set the topic, so why are you now so quick to scold us for biting?
How dare you ask us which rapes are more important to us, as if we chose the wrong girls to save with our keyboards simply by taking your post seriously enough to question it. I sincerely hope you’re the one who stays clear-headed through Oscar season, as one of our contenders features a teen girl getting raped. But what does one Precious girl who got raped years ago matter in terms of effecting change, where dozens of girls are raped elsewhere, right?
When you’re right you’re right, qwiggles. You’ve effectively put me in my place on several points.
So if you missed my main point entirely, maybe I’m doing a bad job making it clear.
What I was trying to do, and bungling badly, was trying to point out that one doesn’t have to be a celebrity in America to have the penalties for one’s crimes reduced — or to have those crimes overlooked altogether. It happens every day on a hideously wide scale, and nobody bats an eyelash. But the famous names like Polanski or Michael Jackson always get the public outrage surging, don’t they?
So yes, I’m saying the same thing I said in the very first of this post: “Slow crime day in Zurich?” No other international atrocities on the agenda? No billions stashed away in Swiss vaults earned through illegal arms deals or human trafficking? Systematic government-sanctioned rape and murder and misery, too complicated to pursue? Nice detective work, guys. Get a tip to go wait at the gate at the airport to handcuff a 76-old man who the United States tells you they want.
Fucking puppet show is what it is, qwiggles.
It’s a big news celebrity distraction involving drugs and anal sex, with a side-order of historic psycho serial killers.
Hunt down Tommy Chong like a dog for selling bongs. Meanwhile the CIA smuggles cocaine to fund Nicaraguan rebels, and Oliver North gets a talk show on Fox News. I’m saying the priorities of the US Justice system are rigged, top to bottom, so it feels ridiculous to me that this is the crime they decide to splash all over the news today.
I didn’t post this because I think it’s big news. I posted it because it’s more of the same shit news we get fed as “important” every day, and the media manipulators know the best way to make sure these distractions get traction is to target people in show business. Because that brings all the lurkers out of the woodwork. Gives us something to feel morally shocked about, so we’ll get to vent some pent up frustration without getting our noses too dirty in the other ugly things being perpetrated right now — today — and not 30 years ago.
In no way do I excuse or shrug off what Polanski did as less important than the the abuse of children by Blackwater in Iraq. I’m just pointing out which one is occupying the news cycle and which one nobody was even thinking about until I brought it up.
I’m not asking you to decide which rapes are more important. I’m just asking that you notice which rapes the media wants you to think are more important. Try to find head line frontpage news about the Blackwater rapes, qwiggles. There isn’t any. But there will be 12,000 Google news results about Polanski all week long.
Maybe you don’t think that’s fucked up. But I think it’s worth mentioning in the midst of this 30-year-old witch hunt. How many Blackwater rapists have been arrested? Where’s the international manhunt for them?
Ryan,
Sorry for coming late to the conversation. The difference between Blackwater and Polanski is that Polanski was convicted in a US court. You may not agree with the trial, but it was a valid verdict in the eyes of the court. Until it gets overturned, it still remains.
Where’s the international manhunt for the Blackwater rapists? I can’t answer that question. Why not ask the Justice Department? Instead of pursuing Blackwater, the Justice Department would rather argue in support of DOMA and DADT. (I can be just as meandering.)
“You may not agree with the trial”
But I do agree with the trial, Rob (or whatever they had worked out instead of a trial.)
I just wish the judge hadn’t been an insecure mediawhore showboater, and had stuck to the terms of the plea agreement.
Ryan, instead of taking all this time to defend a child rapist (who, given his wealth and position, probably doesn’t need your help and will be off the hook in a few weeks), why don’t YOU go and spend your time defending those little Iraqi girls or other victims. I agree that there are bigger crimes, but I think spending your time defending this guy (who is a disgusting human being, even if he did already serve his time) is not exactly giving you moral superiority.
DEAR F-CKING GOD. NOBODY’S DISPUTING POLANSKI’S CRIME. I wish people would understand where we’re coming from. We’re not saying he’s innocent, we’re saying his trial was nothing more than a circus act.
Maybe people should stop telling Ryan what to do. The man can’t even state an opinion anymore? Opinions are like assholes, we all got one. And there’s nothing wrong to express it.
Sure, let’s defend Iraqi girls, but you seem to forget that this is a cinema-concentrated website. At least Polanski has some relevance to the topic at hand.
A) I’m not defending Polanski
B) I’ve written emails to congressmen and my senator and two other senators whose names I won’t mention because I don’t want to spend all day tomorrow defending what they’re saying.
C) I’m not claiming moral superiority; I’m saying the US does.
Plea bargains are always subject to the approval of the court – this is something people seem to be unaware of or ignore.
The court can decide that a plea deal was unsatisfactory, which 45 days for what he did certainly was.
Just thought I would bring it up – the act of a judge not approving a plea bargain – this by itself doesn’t constitute misconduct.
What should have happened (in my opinion – not being a lawyer and all) – is either they make a new deal that fits the courts approval – or he changes his plea and gets a fair trial. Fleeing the country to live a good productive life in France doesn’t strike me as restitution for his crimes.
*How is this case any of Switzerland’s business?*
To answer that question Ryan its because the US signed an extradition treaty with the Switzerland in 1990 – Polanski is a fugitive from US justice, and he was on their soil. Once Polanski stepped on their territory he was under their jurisdiction and “their business”.
This case will take a while to sort out – I am sure there will be extradition hearings and Polanski can make his case there.
The 13 year old girl that Polanski violated had sexual intercourse twice before Roman Polanski had sex with her. It seems appropriate that the first two guys she had sex with (i.e., rapist 1 and rapist 2) be brought to justice as well as rapist 3. Whatever happened to the manhunt for those first two guys? Just because they’re not celebrities, doesn’t make them any less rapists. Just a thought….
Hopefully rapist 1 and rapist 2 have been brought to justice.
So RJGinCA – because there are unsolved and unprosecuted crimes – they shouldn’t prosecute any more criminals. I don’t follow your logic at all.
What Polanski did wasn’t your typical consensual “statutory rape” scenario – it was unconsentual rape. Someone who is drugged and intoxicated cannot consent legally, especially if that someone was drugged by the perpetrator.
Earlier sexual conduct really has no bearing on this case. Even if earlier sexual activity was relevent (which it isn’t) – we have no details of those situations – but we do know many of the circumstances of Polanski’s crimes.
From Dorothy Parker :
“This is a very complex issue, but to RJG:
(1) Neutrality has nothing to do with extradition treaties
(2) Statute of limitations has nothing to do with this since Polanski was charged with a crime in the 1970s but then escaped before sentencing for several reasons
(3) That’s how the criminal justice system works. It’s not Victim x vs. Polanski, but the People of California v. Polanski. It is not about how the victim feels, but rather about prosecution of a crime committed in a particular jurisdiction.
I doubt Polanski will serve hard time, and I expect some sort of plea agreement. I think that once that happens, at the very least, people will hopefully move on”.
I fully agree with this.
So leave the Swiss People alone, please.
There will be a deal between “The People of California” and “Roman Polansky”, and most certainly he will not die in jail.
Simply because at 76 years of age he physically cannot be a pedophile anymore. So there is not need to protect the young girls from him.
So let us move on.
“Plea bargains are always subject to the approval of the court – this is something people seem to be unaware of or ignore.”
Good point, Matt, and it’s buried somewhere above in someone else’s comment too.
The judicial misconduct described in Wanted and Desired is too complicated for me try to summarize — especially when everybody’s feeling worn out from the whole topic. And Polanski would probably not have been aware of the misconduct, except on the most gut-instinct level, so that would not have been his reason to flee anyway.
But the erratic behavor of the judge, Polanski’s own unfamiliarity with the way US plea bargains work, and his bound-to-be-awful experience living through the Manson trial most likely had him understandably fearing for his life, and as Sasha says above, even the LA prosecuters advised Polanski to skedaddle — because they could see the deal they made going sour.
So that’s why I keep bringing up the plea bargain. It was a deal that wasn’t a deal, but Polanski didn’t realize that soon enough, and when he did he did the same thing I’d have done if I had a refuge and safe haven from the insanity he was seeing.
A lot of talk about Michael Moore’s hypocrisy in another topic, but how many people attacking Polanski for skipping out on the sentencing would not have done the same thing if their alternatives were remaining in a Kafkaesque nightmare or clicking the heels of his ruby slippers and saying, “There’s no place like home, There’s no place like home.”
Doesn’t make it right, by any means, but if it doesn’t make it more understandable then the Polanski hate here is worse than I thought.
I am getting tired of the “Where was ______ when _______ was happening?” logic.
Every moment, every person, every situation is different. There is no way to make sure everyone is treated the same under the same situation, when there is not two situations that are the same.
I don’t have an ounce of sympathy for him. He has never paid for his crime.
He’s paid me, as far as I’m concerned. What do I get out of Polanski spending 18 months in prison before he gets shivved or gets his brains bashed out the showers? How does that “payment” benefit me or the world?
That’s why the comparisons with OJ are insulting. No, I wouldn’t have cared if OJ rotted in jail for his crimes because all he did with the freedom he stole was play golf for 20 years and rob some people of some sports trinkets.
So you know what? Fuck it. I’d rather Polanski have skipped out on 18 months in jail and go on to make Tess, Bitter Moon, Oliver Twist, and The Pianist, rather than get stabbed to death in prison in 1977. Anybody who’d rather see Roman Polanski, b. 1933 – d. 1977 should be hanging out at the Court TV message boards instead of here.
You don’t become a fugitive because you can’t do 2 years in jail. You run because your fear for your life. I hope you all feel “paid up” if Polanski has to do some time and dies in prison next year. Hope your hunger for retribution is satisfied when he’s finally hounded to death.
“THE PROSECUTOR, told Polanski to flee?” Is there a source I can read on this? How quickly was he disbarred?
If you want to talk about the standards of the times, it was Polanski’s scumbag lawyer who publicly threatened to put the little girl’s sex life on trial.
“Anyway, it was the mother’s fault…” I don’t think it was her fault that Polanski manhandled her daughter like she was an oven roaster, lifting her up by her drumsticks and brutally anally raping her. He treated her worse than an animal.
“Plea bargains are always subject to the approval of the court – this is something people seem to be unaware of or ignore.” It even happens on L&O with the wackier judges.
Thank you, Ryan!
This is a shame- FREE Polanski!
Where to begin Ryan – sheesh.
As far as paying you – that is irrelevant – its about “the people” not a person – a society that punishes behavior like drugging and raping a 13 year old. These are the laws – and its the states job to make sure they are followed and prosecuted.
So Ryan are you saying people should be forgiven of their crimes, or allowed to commit them as long as they make great art. Does this special status only work for good filmmakers – or does anyone who “might” make a worthwhile film get a special exemption.
You are also wrong about the reasons for running. You run because you have the option to – when the cost of running outweighs the cost of serving your time. Polanski didn’t need to serve his time – the French government would protect him and he could go about his life like nothing happened – not everyone is given that choice – if they were you would see a lot more criminals flee.
The comment about “feeling better” if he is killed is just out of line – justice is never about making yourself feel better – its always regrettable when crimes like this happen – and someone serving time shouldn’t make someone happy – but criminals serving their debt and the just application of the law are important for our society.
Just because some of us believe that it is a good thing that a criminal will be finally held accountable for his crimes – doesn’t mean we are happy about this. We see the value in the lessons that no matter your status or how much time has passed, you can be held accountable.
Just like you can separate Mr. Polanski’s life from his art – recognizing that great works are great works no matter the crimes of the artist – the same applies in reverse – no matter how great the art is – it doesn’t forgive the crimes.
“These are the laws – and its the states job to make sure they are followed and prosecuted.”
Ah yes, California, land of “you do the crime, you do the time.” Convictions and sentences are immutable and unyielding, no matter what the circumstance:
“…criminals serving their debt and the just application of the law are important for our society.”
You can say that with a straight face about American society?
Oliver Twist!? REALLY!? That’s no defense.
Ryan,
I guess my problem with letting OJ rot versus letting Polanski skip out is that where do you draw the line? How good does the director have to be to get a pass – 1 great movie? – 1 blockbuster? What if it had been Chris Columbus and we could have saved the world from Home Alone and Bicentennial Man?
Do you have a problem with an 85-year old former Nazi guard who drugged and raped a Jewish girl in a concentration camp, but has led an exemplary life since – the guy’s done tons of charity work and is a model citizen?
I don’t have the answers. I definitely have the same outrage for any rape or abuse of a child, Iraqis included, because children are usually more vulnerable than most people, so I feel they need to be protected more than others – even if their parents are incompetent. I just don’t like the example that’s set: someone may think they can drug and rape a child and then take off to France and everything will be okay – the only penalty being that he is unable to return to the US or Switzerland.
Regardless, Polanski’s not going to jail. If he does have to go, though, he won’t be in any danger. He’s white and wealthy.
Wow, comparing Polanskis crime with a Nazi guard in a concertration camp raping a jewish girl…
You know Planskis mother died in a concentration camp?
Dominik,
I know that – that’s why I made the comparison. Where do we draw the line?
Matt,
I never regarded Roman Polanski as a criminal. I know he had to suffer more than most people during his life, but I don´t want to use that as an excuse for what he did. But do we know what excactly happened in Nicholsons villa? Both used drugs, a strange situation, he probably didn´t know she was that young.
Most important to me is what Polanskis victim said, and she said repetitive that she accepts Polanskis excuse and wants this charge to end.
Polanski is not a bad person, he made mistakes, but this whole situations smells to me a lote like a Arthur Miller “Crucible”-situation.
Dominik – Polanski knew that she was 13. He kept pushing champagne, and eventually qualuudes (the date-rape drug of choice back then) on her. She repeatedly asked him to take her home to her mother. She tried to refusse the drugs, but eventually took part of a pill to appease him. When he raped her, she was crying, so he said, “What’s the matter? Afraid you’ll get pregnant? I can fix that.” Then he removed his penis from her vagina and stuck it in her anus.
On the way home in his car, she was still crying while he warned her not to tell anyone, because nobody would believe her, and if they did, she would get in trouble.
All this information is in the grand jury testimony.
She has never “accepted his excuse.” She forgave him because she wanted to move on with her life and stop reliving the rape over and over every time he tried to get himself legally cleared.
I know, Dominik.
This is a horrible situation. And you’re right, like most crimes, we’ll never know exactly what happened. I’ve just always had a problem with “the privileged” getting to live by a different set of rules than the rest of society. That may not have been the case in this situation, but it seems like it to me.
Let’s hope it doesn’t take 31 years before we catch Osama bin Laden. Polanski might have f*cked a teenage girl, but bin Landen f*cked an entire nation.
I mean, seriously. Polanski has been directing movies, visiting countries, and despite being “on the lam” has been pretty high profile for three decades without being caught. Doesn’t look too good that we’ll see bin Laden in jail in our lifetimes.
Perseverence, perseverence……
I really freaked out when I heard he got arrested. I wish they’d just leave him alone. I didn’t know the full story of the corrupt judge until I watched Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired last night. It’s streaming on Netflix if you haven’t seen it.
Even before that I’ve been on Polanski’s side. It happened a million years ago. The woman forgives him and wants it over with. Prison should be for people who are a danger to the general public and NEED to be locked away. I don’t know if he qualifies. If I thought that Roman Polanski was the big bad wolf taking advantage of innocent Little Red Riding Hoods from here to France and back again, then sure I’d say lock him up.
The crime he admitted to was not rape. It was that he had consensual sex with someone underage. The family was fine with that at the time. They wanted it to go away then. The “victim” has pleaded repeatedly for everyone to let it drop since then. But righteous people everywhere can’t wait to see someone rot in jail. It’s just a witch hunt at this point and has been for a long time.
But what I really don’t understand is how does the LAPD suddenly tells Switzerland, ‘Polanski is gonna be at this film festival go get him for us’ and they jump up and do it. Because apparently Polanski owns a home in Switzerland and spent half the summer there. Which explains why he wasn’t more careful.
He’s paid me, as far as I’m concerned. What do I get out of Polanski spending 18 months in prison before he gets shivved or gets his brains bashed out the showers? How does that “payment” benefit me or the world?
So you know what? Fuck it. I’d rather Polanski have skipped out on 18 months in jail and go on to make Tess, Bitter Moon, Oliver Twist, and The Pianist, rather than get stabbed to death in prison in 1977. Anybody who’d rather see Roman Polanski, b. 1933 – d. 1977 should be hanging out at the Court TV message boards instead of here.
============================
I have no words. Shame on you if you think art can forgive such sad and cruel actions. I have a little sister and if she was druged and raped I wouldnt care if the man could create art better than Michellangelo himself, he has to face justice and pay for his crimes, screw his talent, its not an excuse.
I hope people like you dont have daughters or sisters.All you are saying is that because he is famous and talented he should get a free pass.This is a disgrace.
Ryan, et al…
I see your point. I glossed over some material regarding the trial and the sentence. It appears as though RP was serving the punishment given to him. It also appeared as though the judge was wavering on his initial sentence, which, in my estimation, if effectuated is a violation of the double jeopardy clause, under the 5th amendment. If those are the fact, I’ve effectively changed sides. The same shit happened in the Rodney King case where, initially, all 4 of the cops were acquitted, later retried in federal court, and then found guilty (2 out of the 4) of a civil rights violation. The similarity stemming from the public outcry of the initial sentence inducing the later re-try and sentence (imo a violation of DJ).
My initial understanding was that the 90 day psychiatric evaluation was part of a larger sentence. Seeing as it wasn’t, I can understand why RP might be hesitant about CA’s justice system. He shouldn’t be retried for the rape charge; that was already settled. He should be tried for the fugitive charge.
This shouldn’t be an indictment of the entire criminal justice system. One judge acted at the mercy of the public. This should be viewed as an isolated event and not a rule applicable to all criminal justice cases.
If that were the case, every criminal would have a misconduct claim.
I am having a hard time fathoming how a person can say it is OK for a 40+ to rape a 13 year old.
A 13-year-old is a child. How can you call a 13-year-old not stable? Of course she is not, she is only a child. That is why we have laws to protect them. They do not have the maturity to make fully informed decisions. They cannot weigh the consequences of their actions.
Btw, if you have sex with minor, regardless of whether it is consensual or not, it is called statutory rape or child molestation (depending on the victim’s age). Both are public offenses, as far as I know. Correct me if I am wrong.
Here is what California law (today) says:
“Any person over the age of 21 years who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is under 16 years of age is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.”
California Penal Code 288 classifies sex with a person under 14 as something more serious: “Any person who willfully and lewdly commits any lewd or lascivious act, including any of the acts constituting other crimes provided for in Part 1, upon or with the body, or any part or member thereof, of a child who is under the age of 14 years, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of that person or the child, is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years.”
It does not matter what Polanski has been through.
It does not matter if she forgave him.
It does not matter that the child’s mother pimped her (would you have sex with a 13 year old, if her mother pimped her to you? And expect to get away with it?)
It does not matter what an artist Polanski is.
It does not matter how messed up his trial was. If there were problems in his trial, I am sure he could afford lawyers to solve those. Yet he chose to run away from his crime and its consequences. If he chose the former, I would at least think he repented what he had done.
The bottom line is:
He RAPED A MINOR (Sorry for the shouting). And by arguing for him, you are condoning his crime.
I cannot believe a moral person would do that. I am thoroughly disappointed with humankind at the moment. Not the first time of course, but it does not get any easier.
@ tunktunk Agreed. 100%
Actually, Matt, it’s the opposite in this case. Polanski was treated far worse because he was a celebrity. Are you kidding me? Kids mistreated or abused in the system never get justice. Give me a break. Punishing Polanski for this is putting a little tiny band-aid on a gigantic, grotesque problem.
But I also have to disagree with:
“I am having a hard time fathoming how a person can say it is OK for a 40+ to rape a 13 year old.”
Did anyone actually say that? That is a fairly hysterical response to what people are saying. There are two ways to approach the Polanski situation – one is to look at the crime itself – which every does through the standards we hold today vis-a-vis child abuse – this came out of the 80s and 90s when there was actual hysteria and many made-up cases about child abuse, Oprah, etc. The other way is to look at the case as a botched and corrupt court case. Yeah, so OJ Simpson gets off because his dream team of lawyers were able to buy doubt from a biased jury but Polanski gets a corrupt judge and no one holds our legal system accountable.
Two ways to look at it. You are mistakenly mixing the two. If you want to argue the severity of Polanski’s crime, go right ahead. But do not confuse that with the law; do not confuse that with our system of justice and the punishment he was supposed to have gotten for this.
As far as I see it – yes, Polanski committed a crime — so did the mother (who was not charged with child neglect; she is equally responsible). He should have been given a fair trial; he was not.
Cut to — now. Polanski is a fugitive from justice and has not come back to the US since he fled. He is now arrested. It is a good opportunity to fix what was broken to begin with — a corrupt case, a corrupt judge. Are they now going to put Polanski in jail to serve his term or are they going to give him at last a fair trial and a fair sentence?
Again, argue the two things separately. For me, as someone who grew up in the 1960s and was around when boundaries were blurred, when my friends were losing their virginity quite ordinarily at 13 and 14, no one said a thing. Doing it with an older man? Even better. We didn’t look at it like child abuse back then. Even as is it isn’t “child abuse” and to call it such is to insult those who are truly abused. She was basically drugged and date raped — it was statutory rape, not child abuse. Yes, legally it’s child abuse. But for those of us who remember what it was like back then? No.
However, on a personal note, someone close to me WAS molested by an ACTUAL child molester who did horrible things to her when she was just ten years old. He was, of course, never caught. He is still out there wandering the streets, completely free.
All of that said, Polanski should have done time for what he did. Absolutely – and the mother should have also faced very strong charges for essentially throwing the meat to the lion.
what fuckery is going on here? are we actually lambasting the law for DOING ITS JOB? why weren’t you guys defending O.J Simpson?
No special treatment. Equality for all. Sucks doesn’t it?
“…why weren’t you guys defending O.J Simpson? “
Maybe because we see a difference between what Polanski did and 40 stab wounds resulting in two dead bodies.
ryan adams
Murder and pedophilia are all punishable by law. O.J didn’t get a fair trial. Years later when an opportunity came to finally punish him for his crimes, the Justice system didn’t waste anytime. Did people complain? I mean, he was recovering his own belongings but look at his sentence? it is crystal clear that the jury had the murder of Nicole on their mind when they gave their verdict. Did people complain? where was the outrage?
We have a similar case here. Polanski escaped the first time. This was a perfect opportunity and the Swiss officials, in cooperation with their allies, seized it. And I say KUDOS TO THEM!!!!!!!!!
“Polanski was treated far worse because he was a celebrity.”
Probably the most salient sentence out of all the 150+ impassioned comments here.
“I mean, he was recovering his own belongings…”
“at gunpoint,” you forgot to add.
Nobody complained about O.J.’s second arrest and sentence because justice was being done. People are divided about Polanski because the issue is less clear. The public reaction is a perfect reflection of the actual differences between the two cases.
Justice is society’s response to crime, and society is responding — in microcosm — right here, with mixed feelings. Society just doesn’t happen to be as unanimous about Polanski as we are about O.J.
Sasha/Ryan,
Have to disagree. Polanski never would have gotten the plea deal he originally received were it not for his celebrity. That same celebrity might have screwed him later due to the publicity, but I find it hard to believe that a non-celebrity 44-year-old that pled guilty to what Polanski pled to is going to be ordered to a 90-day psych evaluation and would not be put in custody while awaiting final adjudication.
And I am in total shock and hope you (Sasha) mistyped the following: “She was basically drugged and date raped – it was statutory rape, not child abuse.” I hope you meant that if she consented (or was doing drugs and going with the flow), then it’s statutory rape, not child abuse. But drugged and date-raped – that’s abuse.
Jesus you people are gross. He DRUGGED and HAD SEX with a CHILD. Who the fuck cares if it was consensual? (Even though she repeatedly said “no” and therefore it wasn’t) she was a fucking 13 year old CHILD and he was never punished.
Just….WHAT THE FUCK?
It doesn’t matter if she’s “forgiven” him and wants it to go away. This isn’t a civil matter, it’s him vs. the state, not her. I’m really disgusted at the attitudes in this post.
LurBur,
I am in total agreement, and I should have written it better. In my post, I was trying to fathom what Sasha might have meant. I should have just asked for a clarification, rather than proposing what she might have meant. I think anyone over 21 who sleeps with a 13 year old is guilty of abuse, consensual or otherwise. I don’t care if girls that age during that time period were having sex with older men and proud of the fact. Young girls aren’t always mature enough to make those decisions, and that’s one of the reasons the law was put into place. Anyone over 21 should have been prepared to live with the consequences.
Some updated news:
An international tug-of-war over the 76-year-old director escalated Monday as France and Poland urged Switzerland to free him on bail and pressed U.S. officials all the way up to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the case.
Authorities in Los Angeles consider Polanski a “convicted felon and fugitive.”
Polanski has told Swiss officials that he will contest a U.S. request that he be transferred to the United States, attorney Herve Temime said in an e-mail. Temime said Polanski’s legal team would try to prove that the U.S. request was illegal and that the Oscar-winning director should be released from Swiss custody.
“Taking into account the extraordinary conditions of his arrest, his Swiss lawyer will seek his freedom without delay,” Temime said. The lawyer said he was able to speak with Polanski from his Zurich cell and that the director was allowed to meet with his wife, French actress Emmanuelle Seigner.
Now a complicated legal process awaits all sides. While France expressed hope that Polanski would be freed shortly, Swiss officials said there would be no rash decision.
Polanski bailed before sentencing. He was ordered to undergo a 90 Psych evaluation to basically determine whether he’s prone to recidivism. He bailed before being sentence for the unlawful sex charge with a minor.
Seems like you guys are drinking the RP juice. The guy evaded the law and was never sentenced for his crime.
Red Was shot in Switzerland with Swiss actors. Great Movie… I’m just saying
But I guess it’s no more a Swiss movie than Blue is a French movie but it certainly is Swiss enough
This is what he gets for raping a little girl. You don’t run away from that you scumbug. Burn in hell.
Free Polanski! NOW! Damn swiss and their chocolate – Making children obese since 1960
He didn’t “rape a little girl.” Raping a little girl is grabbing a four year-old off the playground, taking her into the woods and raping her while she screams for her life. There is a huge difference. You make light of rape by making the two sound equal. They are not equal. She was not a “little girl,” she was a pre-teen – and she got in way over her head. He shouldn’t have done it, yes. Agreed. But you couldn’t have known what things were like back then unless you were there or lived through it – clearly you didn’t; clearly you are judging what happened back then by standards we hold today.
“Seems like you guys are drinking the RP juice. The guy evaded the law and was never sentenced for his crime.”
He was mistreated by the judge in the case – there should have been a mistrial. The whole thing is bullshit.
Jesus Sasha, don’t you have children (I may be remembering wrong)? I don’t understand what you’re trying to prove by calling a 13 year old a pre-teen instead of a child. No matter the technical term, IT’S ILLEGAL. The end.
What things were like? The hell? That this asshole was out of his mind on drugs? Oh yeah, that’s makes it all ok.
Good god.
“He was mistreated by the judge in the case – there should have been a mistrial. The whole thing is bullshit.”
Judges are free to reject plea bargains whenever they want. You can’t have a mistrial when there’s a plea bargain. DOH.
Matt, you want to hold to those hard and fast rules – no problem. I disagree, though, that it’s “child abuse.” It was inappropriate, it was wrong, but it wasn’t the kind of child abuse the people I know who were victimized went through. For one thing, you all see the victim here as completely innocent – I do not. I knew young girls who were in a hurry to grow up, who drank and did drugs and slept around at that age — it was a 60s and 70s thing in that part of Los Angeles. She wanted to be a star – thought this was how it was done. It was dumb – my 11 year old daughter knows better. It was different than, say,him saying he was going to help her with a homework project, luring her inside, drugging her and raping her. This was a young girl acting a lot older than she was, trying to play along in order to become famous.
Again, you all seem to ignore that I said he should be punished for what he did. I will not, however, play these games of trying to make his crime into something it wasn’t.
“He DRUGGED and HAD SEX with a CHILD. ”
You totally misread the case if that’s what’s you think. You are seeing it for something it wasn’t. You have to look at the whole picture not just one part of it. Clearly your heart is in the right place but you are putting blame where it doesn’t belong.
Finally, here is the transcript – it shows how Polanski took advantage of her – and how he knew he was committing a crime, really. But it also shows how this scenario could have been stopped, long long before it got out of hand. Her mistake was trusting him. But she was in 9th grade, people. Do you all remember 9th grade?? Would you have gone to someone’s house and taken off your top for nude photos and drank champagne and gotten in a hot tub??? So, does she “deserve what she got”? No. Of course not. Still, let’s at least be fair about what really happened that day.
GEIMER: No, we didn’t have dinner but during the course of this I was posing with some champagne glasses and did drink champagne.
KING: At age 13?
GEIMER: Yes, thinking that was a very cool thing to do. So and maybe that’s why I was feeling a little more comfortable. So it got late towards the evening and then he went to take some pictures in the hot tub, you know, real pretty looking hot tub outside. So we…
KING: Was any one there but you and him?
GEIMER: Just he and I, and no one else.
KING: No assistant photographer? No lighting person?
GEIMER: There was some kind of housekeeper or somebody who left. So then we were alone.
KING: So there’s no lighting person?
GEIMER: No.
KING: Because usually with professional photography…
GEIMER: It was much more casual than that. I didn’t know what to expect. It all seemed like it was going fine.
KING: Did you do the hot tub scene?
GEIMER: So we did the hot tub.
KING: You were in a bathing suit?
GEIMER: No, I wasn’t. I was in there up to here, but topless but covered up. I was just assuming this was for a European magazine, I know standards there are a little bit different.
KING: You’re pretty hip? (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
GEIMER: I thought I was, I guess I wasn’t.
KING: You were a virgin?
GEIMER: I just figured I wasn’t — no, I wasn’t.
KING: You were not a virgin?
GEIMER: No, I had a boyfriend for quite some months before that.
KING: So you had had sex before?
GEIMER: And embarrassing as it is, I’ll tell you, yes, we did it once. So that was about as close as you can get to being a virgin but just one step away.
KING: So what happened?
GEIMER: So that was even still fine and I just — I didn’t think anything — I assumed if something was showing, it would be cropped out and be appropriate because this was going to be for a magazine and, you know it must be the way things are done. But then he got in the hot tub and that’s…
KING: What was he wearing?
GEIMER: We were pretty much done photographing. I guess shorts or something. I don’t remember.
KING: What’d you say?
GEIMER: I said — well that’s when I realized that something was wrong. This doesn’t feel right anymore. So I told him that I needed to get out of the hot tub and that he needed to take me home because the steam was giving me an asthma attack. I just made it up.
KING: You made it up?
GEIMER: Yes.
KING: But to get out you would have — he would have had to seen you topless?
GEIMER: Oh, right, he photographed me topless. He’d seen me topless. I just was thinking, well this is very European, it must be all right.
KING: OK, so you — what happened?
GEIMER: So I’m feigning my asthma attack, you know, I got out, put a towel on and everything. We walked in the house. And I was going, you know, I really don’t feel good, I’m having trouble breathing. I don’t remember exactly what I said.
KING: But you said drive me home?
GEIMER: And I was like, yes, I need to go home because I’m not feeling well. And then that progressed to, you know, eventually why don’t you come in here an lay down into a very dark room and that’s when I really realized, you know, what his intentions were.
KING: Did he forcibly rape you?
GEIMER: You know, I said no. I didn’t fight him off. I said like, no, no, I don’t want to go in there, no. I don’t want to do this, no. And then I didn’t know what else to do. We were alone. And I didn’t want to — I didn’t know what would happen if I made a scene.
I was just scared and after giving some resistance figured, well, I guess I’ll get to go home after this.
KING: So you completed the sexual act.
GEIMER: Right.
KING: It was just straight sex, nothing else?
GEIMER: It was all kinds of…
KING: Did you ask you to do other things?
GEIMER: He did things and I didn’t do anything.
KING: So he did but you didn’t.
GEIMER: Right.
KING: But then did you get dressed, he did drive you home?
GEIMER: I got dressed, he drove me home.
KING: What was said in the car?
GEIMER: He asked me — I was crying when he came back to the car. I went to the car. He went in to speak to — I think Anjelica Huston came home and was quite perturbed…
KING: She was with Jack at the time?
GEIMER: … to find him there, especially with me.
KING: She saw you?
GEIMER: Real quick because I just straight to the front door, hi, out…
KING: Waited in the car?
GEIMER: And then so I was kind of crying a little bit because I was upset, I was becoming more — I was intoxicated.
So he asked that, you know, you shouldn’t tell your mom. We should keep this secret and we really didn’t chat on the way home. We just drove back to my house with not a lot being said.
“Judges are free to reject plea bargains whenever they want. You can’t have a mistrial when there’s a plea bargain. DOH.”
LurBur — The judge himself was the architect of the plea bargain. It was he who devised the original terms. It was only after the 42 days of psych evaluation and the subsequent rumblings in the press that the judge started to worry about his own ass hanging out in the media spotlight and reneged on the terms of the plea bargain that he himself helped negotiate.
I wish you guys would stop making blind assumptions and familiarize yourself with the facts, read up on the case or watch Wanted and Desired.
Sasha,
It may not be the kind of child abuse that you are used to seeing, but it is child abuse. Child abuse is the physical, psychological and/or emotional mistreatment of children.
I don’t see this child as innocent, but that has no relevance whatsoever, unless this is a case where she made up the entire story and nothing actually happened – that we’ll never know. Maybe he was totally innocent of doing anything with this girl and pled guilty to a lesser charge, thinking he’d lose at trial. Then, this would be a travesty.
It amazes me that you make statements like girls slept around to get ahead and that’s just how it was. Those are some of the reasons laws like this are on the books. Times aren’t any different now. Certain kids have always and will always throw themselves at celebrities/sports figures/etc. They find themselves in situations way beyond their years and end up not knowing how to deal with it – perfectly described in the above transcript. This particular event involved drinking and drugs, which further impaired her limited faculties. It’s up to the adult to make sure nothing happens. After all, he’s the ADULT. “But your honor, she was 13 and wanted to be in my movie. How could I not sleep with her?” If the transcript above is true, he’s a scumbag.
I’m glad to see that you want him punished, at least.
Sasha,
Could you please explain:
““He DRUGGED and HAD SEX with a CHILD. ”
You totally misread the case if that’s what’s you think. You are seeing it for something it wasn’t. You have to look at the whole picture not just one part of it. Clearly your heart is in the right place but you are putting blame where it doesn’t belong.”
You say we are misreading the case, if we say he drugged and had sex with a child.
I have read the full text of the girl’s testimony. He raped her. She said “no”, he did not stop. This is called “rape” regardless of the victim’s age.
A 13-year-old is considered a minor and they are protected by law for a reason.
So he did indeed have sex with a child. You are saying because of this and that, she was not a child. The law disagrees with you, again for a reason.
The kind of arguement you make, where you are saying she is not a child, is the kind of position held by fundementalists in Afghanistan, S. Arabia, etc. You know, to force children to marry older men. Does that sound ok?
As far as I know, it is not disputed that Polanski served her alcohol and drugs. Whether she asked for them is not relevant. Would you give a 13 year old (who is left in your care) alcohol and/or drugs if he/she asked for it. Of course not, because it is wrong, and I believe illegal.
So which part of that statement is wrong?
Cinephiles are so quick to make excuses for Polanski.
I am not screaming eye for an eye, but he committed a crime, and for me one of the biggest crimes a man can commit. And he fled. I am glad he had not offended again. I know his trial had problems, etc, etc. But how can you have these things change the fact that he committed a serious felony and left unpunished? He shall have a fair trial, have everything taken into consideration. He shall get over it. The victim shall get over it. We shall get over it.
I personally am scared to have any adult thinking that they can get away with having sex with a 13 year old.
Btw, I have been a curious 13 year old girl once. I am glad I was protected and guided well by my parents, who made sure that no 40 year old took advantage of me. And looking back, yes, I was a child.
I can’t believe it actually came down to ’she was asking for it’ but, ta-dah, here we are. Not only did she want it, but, apparently, unless you were alive in the 1960s you can’t comment, because that’s just how things were back then. And, you know, that makes it OK! And, hey, regardless, that’s just how 13 year old girls are, universally, hot to trot and dying to get into old men’s pants. You know, ’cause they’re asking for it. Your ignornat conception of what ‘rape’ is sounds like something out of State Senator Bill Napoli’s playbook. Way to contribute to the endless rape culture that pervades our daily world. Polanski would be stabbed to death in prison? Are you crazy? Do you think he would be in the general population? Your strawman logic here is ridiculous. Also, maybe I’d rather see Roman Polanski serve 18 months in jail and then be able to revisit shooting in Los Angeles instead of Oliver Twist. How about that, huh? Because here’s a shocker for you: I am able to appreciate Polanski as an artist AND think he should go to jail for being a rapist. WHICH HE IS.
This is disgusting. Wanted and Desired is Polanski propaganda, filled with victim blaming and half-truths.
Sasha and Ryan you should be *ashamed* of yourselves and, moreover, you should be embarrassed that you cannot seem to reconcile that a person can make good art and not be a good person.
Look everyone has their opinion. The point right now is that he was accused of SEVERAL crimes. He plead guilty to ONE as part of a plea deal. He may have not been guilty of any of them or could have been guilty of all of it. We’ll never know because not only did he NOT go to trial but trials don’t necessarily come up with the truth either. So everything is a matter of opinion and what people chose to believe. The only people who KNOW what happened are Roman Polanski and the woman.
What we do KNOW is that Polanski made a deal to serve a certain amount of time and then he was supposed to be done with it. Somewhere in the middle of fulfilling his end of the deal, the judge changed his mind. Polanski, thinking the judge was going to throw the book at him after he already plead guilty, fled to France. He did everything his lawyers told him to. He only left when even the prosecutor didn’t trust the judge.
IF he had just gone to trial, then at least we would have a verdict from a jury. His word was never tested. Her word was never tested. So all any of us have is our opinions. And we should all remember that.
If this 13-year old had sex with 15-year old boy everything would be OK. Why? There’s no difference at all.In the past the 12-year-old girls were getting married.
It’s important to see differance between rape and sex with not so innocent girl. Even if she was 13 years old. Especially when she “asked for the charges to be dropped”.
And really – how is it possible in the country so big as the United States, in the XXI century that you don’t have “non-claim” in your law system. In Europe even murders aren’t penalized after more than 30 years!