Previous post
in march of 1977, a 13 year old girl was given champagne and a quaalude and then raped and sodomized by famous film director roman polanski. polanski pled guilty to the crime but fled to france before he could be sentenced. for the last 26 years, he has lived free and been celebrated all over europe.
but his crime of raping a child isn’t stopping hollywood and other elites from a campaign of indignation at the possibility of roman polanski being held accountable for his crime.
what does it take for hollywood to demonstrate decency, morals, and boundaries? roman polanski raped a 13 year old girl – he forcibly had anal sex with a 13 year old girl and ejaculated in her anus. she wasn’t wild about any of that. read it for yourself if you can stomach it.
if it had been one of my daughters, i would have chased him down and taken care of it myself. bring his sorry perverted arse back now.
Jared says: I think he probably paid off his victim. I have nothing to base that on other then the fact that she just wants the whole thing to “go away” and for years has never really fought hard for justice.
Jane says: Let justice take its course but this story sure gives all the right wing radio clowns a chance to talk at length about having sex with a 13 year old, in that digusting slobbering way of old men. The woman wants to drop it. Is ANYONE thinking about dragging her through all this after all these years?
Also: Kate must you be so graphic in your description?
PenniePan says: Roman Polanski was probably still grieving his wife Sharon Tate’s gruesome murder. He was unhinged and not acting rationally. I really don’t care though one way or the other except to say I wonder if it will take as long for the Bush administration officials responsible for torture (and deaths) to be held accountable. Anyone?
I am not going over to the link you provided to read this because I will not be able to stomach it. But didn’t I hear a little blurb on CNN, from her, that she wanted the charges dropped? Or am I incorrect? Really, I was at the gym and saw a little flash of something on the television set but didn’t get the full gist of it; about her wanting to drop charges???
Marsha says: C.A. Marks: yes it’s true!!! This is from a CBS report online:
“If Polanski is brought to an American court, Geimer, who is now an adult and living with her husband in Hawaii, cannot be forced to testify against him. What she really wants, she says, is for the case to be over. Geimer has already sued him and reached an undisclosed settlement. She filed court papers earlier this year asking the charges against Polanski be dismissed, according to CNN.
But clearly American authorities have different ideas.”
//http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/29/crimesider/entry5349005.shtml
Good G-d.
Marsha says: Pennie quit trying to start stuff. Give your “Blame Bush” sign a rest k?
Ginny's_Mom says: The Hollywood apologists still have the power to shock me. All because the guy is a famous director.
Paul says: Just for a point of clarification here, I believe Roman Polanski is being extradited for “fleeing the jurisdiction” — not for any sexual offenses. Those have been adjudicated.
just a girl says: There are many rape victims that refuse to cooperate in the prosecution of their rapists for varying reasons. You see this with wives who are beaten, children who don’t want to see their parents, teacher, whatever go to jail, those who just want to move on, etc, etc.
This man drugged and raped a 13 year old child, then fled the country after pleading guilty. He has a victim whether she wants to continue the case or not. Society also has a right to his prosecution. His ass needs to go to jail – Hollywood or no.
Any guy that’s even thinking about slipping a woman a roofie (much less to an underaged girl) needs to know that he will go to fricken jail even if it takes a really, really long time.
A_Reluctant_Pundit says: At the risk of being thrown out of here on my ear let me gently say this:
Polanski admitted to the crime. He apologized for the crime. There was a settlement as a sort of restitution. This would have contributed to his victim’s healing. He did not blame the girl and did not blame Samantha’s mother. Polanski apologized taking full responsibility on himself. As he should. The crime of a rape never really goes away. But having clear guilt, responsibility, and apology from Polanski, must help some.
When there is unspeakable trauma in a person’s life like Polanski experienced, a breakdown is not a stretch. His beautiful, 8-month pregnant wife and their friends were brutally murdered. The killers go on TV and their leader, the deeply insane Charles Manson, is a big story. The media coverage is extensive and ongoing. What must that have been like for the man who lost his wife and their unborn child to those freaks?
I think temporary insanity would have been a credible plea. Don’t you?
hey A
“Polanski admitted to the crime. He apologized for the crime.” “Polanski apologized taking full responsibility on himself.”
um, no, not really. he fled the country before he could be sentenced so that completely contradicts your assertion. “responsibility” isn’t just admission of guilt and saying sorry or slipping somebody some $$. there also has to be an acceptance of the consequences of his actions. he is a coward and an elitist who feels he was above the law.
adults do not have sex with children regardless of the heinous crimes in their past ie the manson murders. he is a rapist of children A. don’t give him a pass on this.
Ken says: Polanski should be dragged back to the U.S. to rot in prison until he dies.
I love the way our resident trolls still manage to slip in a Bush bashing on a topic totally unrelated. Obsess much??
Jack says: Oh brother! He raped this girl eight years after Sharon! If it were any other man with no fame and no money, they would have gone to prison and you would have been glad for it. What an idiot.
Jack says: Go read the file on this guy. Smoking Gun has it. Then come back here and whine about his freedom and his temporary insanity.
Syndra says: Roman Polanski lost his beautiful Sharon and his ready to be born child to a horrible murder that became an worldwide infamous crime. The details of that crime still haunts ALL OF US. How much more do they haunt him??? Sharon begged for the life of her child before being stabbed to death 16 times. It was just 8 years later Roman did this. Is it possible to understand this case as a deeply troubling human tragedy with perhaps more than one victim? Yes.
Scarlett says: Aren’t there bigger fish to fry? Like Osama bin Laden? George W. Bush and his merry band of torturers? This crime was committed 32 years ago, a lifetime ago. The victim won a civil suit already and she has asked that the criminal charges be dropped. The man is now 76 years old and has no criminal background since. Gimme a break.
“Is it possible to understand this case as a deeply troubling human tragedy with perhaps more than one victim?”
let’s get something really clear here: he’s not a victim in this case. his 26-year “freedom” sends a message to every stinkin pedophile and date-rapist that slipping a girl a drug and raping her isn’t really all that bad. in fact, you can maybe still have a meaningful even celebrated career and be part of civil society as long as you get away with it.
good grief people! what’s wrong with you?
cassiopeia says: Here are a few questions for the defenders of Roman Polanski:
When he was 44, why couldn’t he have sexual relations with women who were his peers? Women in their forties or their thirties?
Why are so many people apologizing for him drugging, raping and sodomizing a 13-year-old girl?
Somehow, this wealthy, connected, famous and sought-after director couldn’t find a competent adult to have normal, adult sexual relations with him?
Why did it have to be a little girl? Because you see, that is what she still was even though she was treated like something with far less value.
Roman Polanski was probably still grieving his wife Sharon Tate’s gruesome murder. He was unhinged and not acting rationally.
And there it is, the thing I just don’t understand. The left is supposed to be the champion of the underdog. And yet you would let a rapist go free because he suffered a tragedy in his life. Because he’s famous. Because he’s liberal.
He plead guilty to the statutory rape of a 13 year old, yet he fled before sentencing. The victim doesn’t get to call the shots in a felony – she is just a witness to the crime. She can beg and plead for the charges to be dropped, yell from the rooftops that she has forgiven him – and it won’t matter. The matter is between the State of CA and Polanski.
That Hollyweird is demanding his release just reveals the rot within the machine. Polanski has lived a princely life while a 13 year old girl had to navigate her way back to sanity. The fact that she has reached the point in her life where she can forgive such a monster is a testament to her and no one else.
Polanski should not benefit from her ability to move on. He has been a fugitive from justice for over 30 years – he needs to answer to that.
For you all here defending him and making excuses for him, ask yourself this:
What if it was your daughter? Or niece? Or best friend?
lisab says: the reason any money he gave her makes no difference is that such a transaction only settles the civil part of the case.
if you could buy your way out of criminal prosecution then rich people could go around raping women
Terry says: Leave him alone already. You women are just a bunch of magpies.
Kirk says: @Scarlett
After a crime was committed on a 13 year old, whether she wants to let it go or not the state picks it up. It was no longer up to her how things would proceed. She was 13, he was an adult. Game Over.
BikerDan says: Scarlett would you say the same thing about the occasionally found and prosecuted WWII concentration camp guard? Being old is hardly a reason to get away with raping a young girl.
Jane you don’t like Kate’s graphic description? Ya. Rape of a kid is ugly like that.
Pundit does “temporary insanity” last for 8 years?? Your comment wins the “BBlog Stupid Moonbat” award for the day.
Just another example of liberals trying to legitimize promiscuity with kids.
Lets give the offenders compassion, treatment, counseling and ask the victims to try understand their attackers character defects so we can all move on to more important things like allowing pregnant 13 year victims of incest to be able to discretely abort the child. Mommy wasnt putting so you have to understand
“The man is a pig. But he’s made some good flicks.”
Oh, okay dade. Then I guess that invalidates his temporary insanity.
I mean you guys (pundit, pennie) cant say on one hand that he was so sharp he made some really good movies but on the other hand was so devastated that he couldnt help but drug and bend over a 13 year old girl.
She said she was okay with it ?
So, my 13 year old daughter (21 now) comes home and tells me some guy got her wasted, screwed her up the butt and that I dont have to worry because shes okay with it ? What would any of you do who’ve had their own kids ?
monika says: why are liberals making excuses for the rape of a child?
Gena says: Polanski is not the victim here! He chose to run away and created his own problems besides raping a minor even if she had consented at the time, the act would have been rape as she was only 13.
There is NO excuse for a grown man having sex with a 13 year old, girl or boy. They are CHILDREN at 13, he was supposed to be an adult at 44.
Something is wrong with a person (no matter what films they have directed) who finds a child, no matter their physical characterisics, sexually attractive.
Imagine that girl is your child pumped up with booze and drugs and raped anally before you throw your sympathy Polanski’s way.
PenniePan says: You guys need to quit being ridiculous. What was her mother thinking leaving the child to go off with this man? Who would do that?
He pled guilty to a lesser charge and cut a deal (time already served) with the DA. Then he learned that the judge was going to renege on at sentencing. (I saw a documentary about this..the judge wasn’t acting properly either. Polansky’s attorney was tipped off. He told Polanski and he fled.
He obviously lost faith in our court system and is terrified to come here and be made a scape goat of. Which he most likely will be considering the likes of some of you.
Lucinda says: Micky don’t link this to “libs” you clown. Liberal women were the ones who got sexual assault laws changed in this country in the first place. You are a sick individual to bring Mommy into it too. Perv.
Jimmy says: Syndra
What happened to Sharon Tate might be a reason for Polanski’s behavior but it shouldn’t be an excuse. He needs to come back and face justice.
Seamus says: It’s awful what happened to his wife and his unborn child, but don’t use that to excuse his raping of a 13 year old girl. Too often we let people in his position get away with the most despicable acts, and too often cases involving domestic/sexual abuse leave the perpetrator walking off without a hitch.
RON_PAUL_FAN says: To paraphrase some of the statements made about the government torture cases: This happened in the past, a long time ago. He won’t ever again commit this kind of act. It’s over, forget about it. There is no point in dredging up past wrongs.
PenniePan says: Yes RPF there are definately similarities in the rhetoric which shows the hypocrisy of the right.
Ken says: “If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”- Roman Polanski
Oh yes, he was such a tortured soul when he committed these crimes.
Once again the complete ignorance of the left is stunning, but also quite amusing in that they, once again, keep drudging up Bush.
You people are pathetic.
Lucinda.
That hardly changes the fact or takes away from my point that liberals love to legitimize sex with kids and condone younger promiscuity among them every chance they get.
Just ask the leftist ACLU who did their best to defend NAMBLA before it became all too evident it was not in their best interest. Or all the leftist judges who let these monsters go free.
Your movement sure as hell hasnt done and isnt doing a damn thing for kids and their right to be free from freaks like Polanski so spare me this crap that you’ve done anything to change sexual assault laws when its the liberal states that are all last to adopt Jessicas law
“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”- Roman Polanski
What a powerful quote- To everyone who thinks, “it’s OK, and believes Roman is getting a bad rap here.” I say why don’t we move a child rapist into your neighborhood right next door to your house. After all it is “OK” right?
No, you/we demand that all sex offenders be labled as such and register where they live because we want to protect our children from such monsters. Sucess does not make him anything less!
bella says: Jane, what did kate say that was graphic? Polanski drugged and raped a little girl. So, if some asshole rapes a little girl you know and love, maybe your daughter you’re okay with that? Maybe use it to your advantage and score some cash out of the prick, gee hopefully he’s loaded … if he’s poor then prosecute. For those who use the ‘he was grieving the loss of his wife and child’ excuse, he later said that every man wants to f*ck young girls. The man is a monster, he needs to be held aaccountable, end of story.
idiot savant says: Let’s make sure we all have the “facts” straight – please?
1) He was NEVER convicted of rape, he made a plea agreement to sexual assault and was sentenced to a 90 day jailed psych eval.
2) The “treating” shrink released him after only 42 odd days saying that the full 90 were not required, he was sane, and that he was unlikely to re-offend.
3) The judge however wanted him to serve the remainder of the 90 day term AND wanted to “ask” him to agree to a “voluntary deportation.”
4) Polanski flew the coup the night before the “new” re-sentencing hearing.
5) Discussions about “restitution” did not occur until 1988 – over 10 YEARS after the original incident when the victim filed civil charges in court (in the US). The amount; until recently, was undisclosed however, it would appear that the agreed upon settlement amount was never paid either.
Sooo, he has already been “tried” and he opted for a plea bargain so the victim’s “wishes” in this situation I would wager are moot. The reason I say that is because I would think that the actual “victim” now is NOT the girl/woman who was raped, but “the state” from which Polanski fled and there is NO statute of limitations on flee warrants.
After all is said and done, I would guess that he would be looking at a “lot” more than his original 48 days left to serve since the system will automatically add flight charges and a “multiplyer” for the length of time he has been gone. Some of the time could be offset by “time served” while awaiting deportation or while awaiting trial once he hits the ground here; there could also be arguments made over “balancing” any sentencing between actual jail time and probation or forced deportation due to mitigating circumstances such as age, clean record the past 30 years, blah, blah, blah. Then again, the DA could attempt to paint him as the same ogre he was then by attempting to use the restitution settlement (and failure to pay) as proof that he hasn’t changed as much as he would have “us” believe .
Bottomline, I’d find it hard to believe that “the state” would impose ANY type of long prison term on a guy to whom they could just as easily say “don’t let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya” as they show him the proverbial door lol
to: PenniePan
The word is not “scapegoat” The correct word is EXAMPLE. Its a good word, and a good idea.
No Comments