If Polanski was a poor/unknown person, would there be anyone defending him?

[The Straight Story]

"He makes good films" ie, he does something we like, so he deserves special treatment.

If some poor man gave a teen in your neighborhood alcohol and then had sex with her would you see it the same way?

Why or why not?

I am 43, if I had sex with your kid when they were 13, would you be ok with it? Would you if I had money and made movies you liked?

Some might see this as a complex situation and bring in the judge and such, but really - when you break it down to the basics what do you have?

An older man, a young girl, drugs, and sex.

Defend that all day if you want. I just don't see how you can.

[UndertheOcean]

1. No.

[MrModerate]

2. Alternatively, if he was nobody, would they bother to still be chasing him . . .

After 30 years? Someone (several someones) wanted to make their reputations on this bust.

[UndertheOcean]

4. Good point .

[LostInAnomie]

6. If he was a nobody, France would have extradited him upon request.

[MrModerate]

17. I dunno. They've resisted extraditing less well known fugitives . . . n/t

[Liberal_in_LA]

98. if he was nobody the authorities would not have let him out to escape the country

[paulsby]

101. france is weird with sex criminals

recall that mary kay letourneau was somewhat of a folk hero in france (they had a big movie about it and all) while the case was going on and etc.

i personally don't find much to respect about a middle aged schoolteacher (male or female) who rapes a 13 yr old student repeatedly. but that's me.

[quiller4]

171. We have no extradition treaty with France. Polanski is far

from the only character who has spent a life in France avoiding the arm of US law.

[TorchTheWitch]

189. the US has had an extradition treaty with France since 1909

http://www.expatintelligence.com/extradition-treaty-france.shtml

[tammywammy]

244. France wouldn't extradite him because he's a French citizen n/t

[TorchTheWitch]

245. then France should have tried him in their own courts

I'm not seeing anything in the treaty that justifies not extraditing him because he was a citizen of France and also not handling it in their own court.

[seabeyond]

7. if an unknown that went to court and ran away came up on their radar, then ya....

he would get it. speeding ticket or any number of things. they would take him in

[The Straight Story]

9. Who is 'they'? (nt)

[MrModerate]

20. The officials who hope to make their reputations by catching him . . .

Outside of France, which was clearly not interested in cooperating.

[anonymous171]

202. What's wrong with that? He needs to be caught and thrown in jail like the scum he is

[MrModerate]

261. How many other 30-year-old cold cases do they have on their books . . .

That they'll be putting their resources toward solving? Even if they were, would they have the funds, given what this one is going to cost?

I have no interest in defending Polanski -- what he did was criminal, evil, and destructive of another person's life.

Doesn't mean I have to approve of prosecutorial showboating, though.

[imdjh]

13. A man was recently arrested, tried, and convicted in Maryland for a very old case.

I can't find the article.

[Zix]

168. What of that?

At least they didn't want to make their reputations on the persecution of innocents.

[MrModerate]

262. And they apparently didn't want to make their reputations tracking down space aliens, either . . .

Which has as much to to with Polanski as your example does.

[roguevalley]

177. yes they would. open warrants are open warrants.

[MrModerate]

263. And how many of those are they actually pursuing? n/t

[mzmolly]

180. One would hope.

:hi:

[Blue_In_AK]

240. That was my first thought.

Nobody would give a care, and they certainly wouldn't be looking for such a person in Switzerland.

[1gobluedem]

3. People are defending him?

Madness.

[seabeyond]

8. all over the place. all kinds of reason. my favorite, thinking with little head

did soemthing foolish

[Maru Kitteh]

94. Oh no. My fave is the "she prolly lied, and plus the lttle tramp might not have been a virgin"

so therefore it wasn't rape line of defense. Hard to beat that one for the upchuck factor.

[wroberts189]

5. Umm... who here is defending him?

I have been watching posts all day and I see all these types of posts but I have not seen any "defend him" posts.


You have a link? I would like to see it. thx.

[The Straight Story]

12. Threads relating to this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6643182

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6643221'

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6639021

and more

Sympathy or excuses for a person that has raped (by any standard definition) a young girl just does not set well with me.

Blame the judge, the system, et al, in the end what he did was just plain wrong.

[Orrex]

16. I see more posts screaming about posts defending him

Than posts defending him.


But please don't get me wrong--he's a creep who should have been in jail a long time ago. I'm glad that they finally decided to catch him, and I hope that the extradition is processed quickly.

[The Straight Story]

21. There may well be - but why on DU so we have ANYONE defending him?

He molested a child, if it were a priest or school teacher who here would defend it?

[Orrex]

26. Yes, this is different from a case involving an accused rapist

I've seen many threads calling for the immediate torture and/or execution of accused rapists and child-molesters, and such summary justice is equally out of place in this nominally Democratic forum.


However, since Polanski's trial has already occurred, and since the creep fled the country, I'd say that it's no longer a question of a presumption of innocence; he's long past due for a bunch of years in a small cell.

[Odin2005]

49. DU has a sick underbelly of rape apologists.

I discovered that several months ago when many posters said having sex with a passed-out drunk woman was OK.

[Orrex]

53. How many posters was that, exactly?

I missed that thread.

[Odin2005]

59. Can't remember the exact number it was a bunch of them

Including several women posters, one of whom was herself a rape victim. It pertained to a movie scene in a movie called "Observe and Report. Many said that it was not rape because she half-ways came to for a couple seconds while being raped and "consented", as if that change the fact that the whole period before that is still legally and morally rape.

[Orrex]

62. Hmm...

Were they defending the act as part of a piece of fiction or as a real-world act?

The two are very different, of course.

[Odin2005]

64. They were defending it as a real-world act.

[Orrex]

66. Well, then, that's pretty fucked up.

Years ago I knew a guy who passed out at a party he was having in his own apartment, and his tv, stereo, and computer were stolen. Would those same posters argue that my friend had "consented" to the thefts?

:wtf:

[Odin2005]

80. It's misogynistic entitlement.

Some guys apparently think it's OK to put their dick where they want to. Given that that thread started only about a week after my friend had been raped it shocked me.

[eShirl]

114. that's exactly what it is

You'd think it was still the 1950s around here some days.
:(

[seabeyond]

119. last couple years

i am jsut not seeing a whole hell of a lot to recommend the male gender. and this one....

maybe it is my age. maybe my independence. but fuck you know. i dont know

i swear women have a bigger mid life than men now a days.

[eShirl]

141. some of the people displaying that attitude are women

and most of the men are are not, thank goodness
the OP is a man, if I am not mistaken :)

[seabeyond]

144. true that. thanks. nt

[renate]

172. I really, really, really like this comparison

I can't believe I've never heard it before, even though I've heard variations on the "she got drunk, it's her fault" theme since I was in college. And I can't imagine that anybody who would say "yes, it was his fault he was robbed" would say that the thief shouldn't be prosecuted if he/she were caught.

What an excellent way to frame the "consent" issue in a way that even people who blame rape victims can understand.

:applause:

[Orrex]

194. Glad you like it!

Since it's a true story, I can't claim ownership of the idea, so you're welcome to use it wherever you see fit!

[Odin2005]

199. Yep, it's an excellent comparison.

[seabeyond]

63. actually she slurred, "why you stoppin" and then passed out, limp, not conscious. nt

[Nye Bevan]

151. A few...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642682

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6644052

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6644729

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642471

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079620

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642751

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079365

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642602

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642603

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643216

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079476

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642379

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643332

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079341

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643548

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6643019

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4080279

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643246

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643504

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079363

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643625

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079362

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6644554

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643763

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4080167

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643834

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643845

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079154

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643664

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643815

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079372

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643850

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6645409

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642377

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4080142

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079225

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079160

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079418

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079156

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079420

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079579

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4080267

[Orrex]

195. Thanks, but...

I was asking about the older thread to which Odin2005 was referring, rather than current "Free Polanski" threads.

:hi:

[druidity33]

198. i'd have to see that thread

to believe what you're saying.

:shrug:

[hedgehog]

127. Excellent point!

[wroberts189]

18. Thanks... I am new to this story. I saw the poll... nt

[Orsino]

255. Well, I'd hate to think we are beyond sympathy.

I'm guessing that even you would want Polanski given the legal protections that should be afforded any prisoner/convict.

[Nye Bevan]

143. These people

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642682

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6644052

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6644729

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642471

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079620

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642751

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079365

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642602

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642603

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643216

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079476

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642379

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643332

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079341

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643548

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6643019

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4080279

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643246

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643504

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079363

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643625

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079362

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6644554

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643763

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4080167

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643834

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643845

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079154

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643664

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643815

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079372

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6643850

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6643182&mesg_id=6645409

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6642376&mesg_id=6642377

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4080142

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079225

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079160

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079418

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079156

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079420

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4079579

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4079077&mesg_id=4080267

[eShirl]

10. a welcome voice of sanity

[Cirque du So-What]

11. It's indefensible

and aside from whether the victim has forgiven him, what he did was reprehensible. Not only would it be a travesty of justice to allow him to circumvent justice, it would be another example of a contemptible two-tier justice system that the rich and powerful manipulate to their advantage. Equality can never be achieved as long as such a system exists.

[The Straight Story]

19. I have forgiven someone who molested me, still does not make it right

I understood them and their issues in life, even worked to understand them as an adult - but that does not make what they did right.

They and others wanted a way to excuse it, to make it rational, but in the end it is still what it is. Molestation and wrong - the act of a selfish person who forced themselves upon someone younger for their own gratification.

Wrong is wrong, period. Sad thing is the well known and rich get a pass all too often.

Poor? you have no excuse. Have money and/or a name, well then people will argue about it.

[hedgehog]

129. It's not clear to me that she has forgiven him so much as that she

feels that the continued notoriety is interfering with her life and her family today.

[proteus_lives]

14. Hell no.

His defenders won't admit it but it's all about him being a famous artist. His fame has turned them into rape apologists. :puke:

It's like what Chris Rock said, "If OJ drove a bus, he wouldn't even be OJ. He'd be Orenthal the bus-driving murderer."

[Electric Monk]

15. I should hope so. He'd still be entitled to a public defender even if he couldn't afford better.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gideon_v._Wainwright

[BlooInBloo]

22. "I am 43, if I had sex with your kid when they were 13, would you be ok with it?"...

Depends - are you a hot milfy teacher type? :P

But I kid.

I don't see why there's an issue with this. If he is convicted of the crime, send him to jail.

[tammywammy]

24. He already pled guilty, so that part is taken care of

He left before he was sentenced. And well, now he'll have charges for fleeing the country as well.

[BlooInBloo]

25. Yep. So send him to jail. I don't understand what the brouhaha is about.

[tammywammy]

27. You'd think so

But apparently to some posters he's "done his time" and deserves to just go on with his merry life.

[BlooInBloo]

29. Odd - I wasn't aware that he had done any time.

[seabeyond]

32. but his wife was murdered. he is a good producer. you are a puritan. he was thinking with

little head. it was so long ago, what good would it do our society. not until bush/cheney are prosecuted. she made him do it. she wasnt a virgin

probably some more in there. didnt read them all.

[BlooInBloo]

34. Oh. Well. There you go then. So what's your problem? Are you a man-hater or something?

:rofl:

For fucks sake people - just put the fucker in jail. There are complicated things in this world. This isn't one of them.

[seabeyond]

40. lmao.... man, you are a trip. a whole rollercoaster with you

but worth it.

[BlooInBloo]

51. Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself, (I am large, I contain multitudes.)

I've been finding cause to say that a lot, recently, it seems. Not sure why.

Maybe my collective psychoconsciousness is trying to tell me something. Or something.

[seabeyond]

57. meh... cant say i find you contradict yourself. i was thinking more a

dr jeckle my hyde. one minute you make me lauuuuugh, and then next, well, piss me off.

but that wouldnt be you, just the ride. and you being true to you, from what i gather. which i always respect.

[BlooInBloo]

69. Hm... Then maybe this is a better way to go...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_GxXRbSFDg

[seabeyond]

70. ya, but geez, how cheesy. nt

[BlooInBloo]

73. You shaddup. I grew up on that show, and a bunch of others just as cheesy.

I WANT CHARLES IN CHARGE OF ME!

:rofl:

[seabeyond]

75. i know, i know. i got a bet sentimental and

even listened to the whole song. so bad.

[BlooInBloo]

83. :)

[Hekate]

89. Heh. You channel Walt Whitman tonight. LOL nt

[BlooInBloo]

95. Oh - somebody else once said that? Amazing.

:P

[tammywammy]

36. Excellent summation

My jaw actually dropped on the "well, she wasn't a virgin anyways."

[seabeyond]

41. .

[BlooInBloo]

43. I take it that's a variation on "the slut deserved it"?

[tammywammy]

50. That's how I read it. Quite Disgusting. n/t

[BlooInBloo]

74. Hell yah it is.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tammywammy]

122. Oh well thank goodness I have you here to tell me I read it wrong

I don't know how I've managed to go through life without you telling me what to think.

Maybe I wouldn't have read it "wrong" if the poster that said it hadn't been trying to defend a 40+ year old man having sex with a 13 year old. But then hell, it was the 70s and such a wild time that it was okay when she said no to anally rape her. :shrug:

[Hannah Bell]

128. your "thoughts" about what people mean don't equal what they mean.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6639021&mesg_id=6639191

and here's some context for the post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6639021&mesg_id=6644685

[Maru Kitteh]

131. And you lack the fortitude and honesty to explain yourself clearly.

It's easy to see through your flimsy pretense.

[Hannah Bell]

133. i don't talk to people who send sick emails.

[tammywammy]

132. Her grand jury testimony says she said no

If someone continues to have sex with me after I say no, that makes it rape. Regardless, it's rape when you have sex with a 13 year old. It doesn't matter that her mother sent her there. It doesn't matter that she took drugs. It doesn't matter that she wasn't a virgin. She was 13 years old, she could not consent to sex.

[Hannah Bell]

135. yes, it's rape when you have sex with a 13-yr-old. that wasn't what i was disputing.

if you have her testimony, please link it.

[tammywammy]

136. Link

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskia1.html

[Hannah Bell]

142. significantly different story.

[tammywammy]

145. Yes her testimony is quite difference than what you've been saying. n/t

[Hannah Bell]

149. no, different from what *she* said, in this interview & others:

http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20124052,00.html


My sister was dating a guy who knew Roman and introduced him to my mom, who had actually met him once before at a club. When Polanski said he'd take some pictures of me and put them in a European magazine, it was exciting. We thought it would be a good thing for my career.

On Feb. 20, 1977, Polanski took me on our first photo shoot in a hillside area just a few blocks from my house. We shot a roll of film; then he asked me to take off my shirt and took topless photos while I changed. I let him do it, but I felt self-conscious. I was thinking, "I shouldn't be doing this," but I was a kid, so I thought if it wasn't okay, he wouldn't tell me to do it. If I'd told my mom, she would never have let me go with him the second time. When he made another appointment a few weeks later, she had no reason to suspect anything. I didn't want to go, but I still thought it would be a good opportunity.

He picked me up again on March 10 at around 4 p.m. In the car he asked me if I'd ever had sex. I had, once (it was embarrassing to be a virgin among my friends), so I said yes. What I should have said is, "It's none of your business." We stopped off at Jacqueline Bisset's house, but I didn't recognize her at the time. Someone offered me a glass of wine, but I said no and went out by the pool because I didn't have anything to say to the adults. He took some shots of me wearing jeans and a white shirt tied up at the waist, but we were only there for about 15 minutes.

Then we go to Jack Nicholson's house. I had seen Chinatown and I was thinking "Wow! Jack Nicholson." The maid lets us in and disappears, so as far as I am concerned we are alone, and I'm very far from home. Polanski asks me to pose, drinking champagne. I wouldn't take the wine earlier but when he says champagne, that sounds interesting to me. He keeps refilling my glass. Then he asks me to pose topless again and says he wants to take pictures in the Jacuzzi. I don't have my bathing suit so I get in in my underwear. He takes pictures, then he gets in naked and now I'm thinking, "Oh, this is not right." I'm scared and woozy, so I tell him I have asthma and to take me home. I get out, grab a towel, but he doesn't want to take me home yet. That's when he takes out the Quaaludes and asks me if I've ever had one. I lie and say yes. I take one-third. He takes what's left and tells me to lie down for a minute. I know he wants to have sex and he is not taking no for an answer. I'm intoxicated and afraid and don't know what to do, so I just let it happen.

Then Anjelica Huston knocked on the door. I assume she asked him, "What are you doing in my room?" I started to get dressed, but Polanski came back and said, "Lay back down," and he took off my underwear. He had been interrupted, so he finished—briefly—then went back to talk to her. I got dressed and went out to the car and started to cry. He took me home and said, "Don't tell your mom what happened." But my sister heard me telling my boyfriend on the phone what happened. My mom asked me if it was true, then called the police. That's when all hell broke loose."


esp. funny, in the original testimony she says p. asked *her* if the drug was qualuude. & she tells the questioner she'd taken qualuude before.

[Odin2005]

60. Yep.

[eShirl]

120. yep, the attitude that "damaged goods" is fair game for anybody

talk about dehumanization

[Odin2005]

200. I see red whenever I see that kind of BS sexist reasoning.

[Odin2005]

52. My jaw dropped to the floor after reading that post, too.

Pure unadulterated misogyny. disgusting. This is a LIBERAL board, that poster should be banned.

[Zix]

169. I 'd never HEARD the "she wasn't a virgin anyway" variationever before, until today - on this site.

I must ask myself whether or not it has in fact been MINTED RIGHT HERE.

[Hannah Bell]

193. you didn't hear it on this site, either.

[tammywammy]

37. dupe

[WildEyedLiberal]

102. "It was the 70s and those were CARAAAZYYY TIMES - you had to be there!"

Just saw that one in another thread.

[paulsby]

103. lol on the puritan comment

that was probably the most ridiculous post i have read here in... well hours anyway... :)

let's get the facts

a 40 something yr old director plies a 13 yr old girl with promises to "make her a star", and while at jack nicholson's house (can you get any MORE hollywood) plies her with quaaludes and alcohol (and a hot tub if i recall correctly) and anally rapes her.

and is convicted and flees the country to france, where he is treated warmly, is a celebrity (they loved him at cannes) and people are ok with that.

and those of us who think he's a POS who (up till now) got away with an evil act are "puritans"

lol

[seabeyond]

106. can i get off this spinning, messed up world.

i tell ya.

i can easily go off to my little space and be really really happy. wink. it is looking more and more appealing. and i think i could get it done.

i am seeing such a parallel on who posts the "so what" on rape and threads that debase female. nah, no connection there.

puritan is the pat answer to all things in disagreement. doesn't even make sense anymore, just yell PURITAN. dont want to get naked in public to entertain males, PURITAN. dont want to be gang bang, PURITAN. punish rapist for raping 13 yr old, PURITAN

[paulsby]

183. to me the operative difference

is the issue of choice (like with so many things)

do i think people have the right to engage in: homosexual sex, multi-partner sex (gang bang), public nudity (i think women should be allowed to be topless in public, just like men. in many jurisdictions, they are - e.g. new york. i also believe in nude beaches (designated areas for same on public beaches), premarital sex, etc.

all of the above are a choice. but NONE are consistent with puritanism.

i believe premarital sex, for instance, should be legal. the puritans didn't. but it's a choice. i would support a person who DOESN'T believe in premarital sex, to make that CHOICE as well.

what i don't support is a 43 yr old man drugging, coercing, and raping a 13 yr old girl.

period.

she had no choice. she couldn't even GIVE consent (she was 13)

[BlooInBloo]

238. Buck up - it could be worse. If a noted columnist-cum-sexual-harrasser called her rape a "seduction"

for example.

Oh - wait....

http://www.eschatonblog.com/2009/09/every-time-i-try-to-get-out.html


EDIT: In case you're not familiar with his harassing history: http://www.eschatonblog.com/2006/05/from-richard-cohens-greatest-hits-file_7776.html

[seabeyond]

241. at least he ends it calling it sexual assault. he needs a transcript of the gals testimony

and no. stop.

maybe that will make a little more clear to this man.

[TorchTheWitch]

212. he raped her orally, vaginally and anally

according to her grand jury testimony.

[Hannah Bell]

250. and do you recall the results of the physical examination?

[tammywammy]

35. Some are confused

He was to undergo a psych eval and that was 42 days. Apparently that's enough time for them for rape, but from what I've read his sentence would have been around 16 months to 3 years. Now he'll face more time since he fled the country.

[hedgehog]

130. So, it's OK to kid about teacher on student sex when the teacher is female

and the student is male?

Isn't that attitude just an expression of the old double standard - guys can help themselves to sex at every opportunity but girls must remain pure?

[BlooInBloo]

178. Heh. I had wondered if anybody was going to get around to picking on that part...

And yes, that is more-or-less what I was highlighting.

[PSPS]

23. WHat's with the Polanski obsession on DU? Is it all over the cable nooze or something?

I don't watch the TEE VEE, so I don't get half the crap that everyone talks about on here anyway. But I can imagine all the MSM is going gaga with this, as sex with kids is a real ratings booster (see: McKenzie Phillips.) And it will help keep more important things like health care out of the news.

[seabeyond]

30. i dont watch news. wasnt into this. until people started making excuses and saying rape should NOT

be prosecuted ect....

pisses people off when a kid is raped and people make excuses for it.

tempers fly

[mitchtv]

28. well the mother didn't face charges

I feel that she was criminally libel for her part in the ehole affair. It was kinda like she got what she wanted, a fat lawsuit. What's fair is fair . ahe pimped her child

[seabeyond]

33. so he shouldnt be punished? this is a new one to add to the list. nt

[mitchtv]

46. not at all; round them all up

I don't think I said that, nor did I mean to,

[seabeyond]

48. good, then i will back it off my list of reasons, lol. thanks for clarification. nt

[Atticus]

31. This person is white, famous, wealthy, connected to the Manson killings and has pleaded guilty to a

sex crime. If you are a news director for a 24/7 cable news show, you salivate just thinking about stories like this.

Thank God no other children have ever been raped.
Thank God there are no recent outrages to titillate the "viewing public".
Thank God there are no injustices crying out for exposure and redress.

And, how long do you think it will take for someone to blame this crime on "liberals"?

[anonymous171]

38. Of course not. nt

[ovidsen]

39. I am not, and will not defend him. On the other hand...

...I see no point in sending him to prison.

A waste of taxpayer money and time.

[seabeyond]

42. the point, is he raped a girl. nt

[The Straight Story]

44. So justice is about tax payer money? Health care is about money it seems too.

Jesus was right, money is the root of all evil.

[blondeatlast]

61. Justice served is my tax money well-spent. I work in law and there is no excuse for

what he did. He confessed to the crime.

And she was THIRTEEN.

[ovidsen]

67. Vengeance is a waste of time and money

What Polanski did (and I'm convinced he's guilty, and that she wasn't his only victim) is absolutely nauseating. But at this point, I don't see justice being served by locking him up. All I see is a desire for vengeance being satiated.

And a lust for vengeance is not something I respect in people.

I'm concerned about far more important things.

[seabeyond]

71. nah. at first the lock up is cause not allowed to rape. then the lock up, all this time later is,

not allowed to run from punishment. it is not about vengeance

[blondeatlast]

76. I'm trying to understand this argument, I've seen it elsewhere concerning Polanski.

He plead guilty, then left the country to avoid justice. so, all is excused? What do you propose we do with those who commit hideous crimes? I'm not trying to single you out, I';m trying to understand the philosophy. I don't work in criminal law, fwiw.

I'm really trying to understand this philosophy and I just can't wrap my own head around it--and to bring up taxpayer money doesn't help me understand at all.

I really am trying to understand this argument, a little help, please?

[ovidsen]

86. Justice delayed is justice denied.

And to paraphrase Shakespeare, what's done is done, and can't be undone.

If prosecutors (and I know hindsight is 20/20) had been on the ball a few decades back, they would at least have seized his passport after he was told he would be going to prison. So he took off like the coward he is. Officials all but held up signs saying "have a nice flight".

There were several very good reasons for having him behind bars in 1979. He was a predator, and there was no guarantee he wouldn't try a similar crime if he weren't jailed. So lock him up. There's a chance that, while behind bars, he might have been able to understand just exactly what was so disgusting about his actions. Lock him up. Let him be an example to other people who may be considering sexual assaults. Lock him up.

But those are moot points now, IMO. He's too old to be a threat; if he hasn't figured out yet why what he did makes sane people want to hurl, there's no hope. And remaining free for 30 years after being told he was going to jail isn't exactly setting an example. It boils down to being a waste of time.

For very similar reasons, I would have granted parole to former Charles Manson follower Susan Atkins, who died of cancer in a California prison a few days ago. From what I've read, she was a model prisoner during her 30 or so years as a "guest of the state". She confessed to being a homicidal butcher and showed what I feel to be genuine remorse for what she did. She was also active in helping to counsel new arrivals trying to adjust to prison life.

She wanted to be outside the walls when she died. I don't blame her for feeling like that. California said no. I can understand why.

All things considered, I would like to temper justice with mercy, and not taint it with vengeance.

I realized that view would not be embraced here, but decided to post anyway. I had hoped it would show that opposing Polanski's extradition to the US did not automatically put someone in the "blame the victim" mob. Polanski's guilty as hell. The little girl (and that's what she was) he assaulted is a genuine victim in every sense of the word.

But at this point, locking him up will only satisfy the public's desire for vengeance. And to me, vengeance is not an admirable quality. However, it's out of my hands, and I have far more important things to worry about.

Thanks for keeping an open mind.

[renate]

175. but the thing is, he's the one who caused the delay

I appreciate and admire your courage in expressing (eloquently and compassionately) a probably unpopular view. :thumbsup:

"Justice delayed is justice denied" doesn't seem to apply in this case, though, since he's the one who wussed out and fled the country instead of facing up to the crime that he himself admitted to.

If he'd never stood trial, and his victim were now saying "never mind," there might be an argument for letting him go. But I just don't get why there's even any question of whether someone who was convicted of a crime but who had the money and connections to avoid punishment for 30 years should serve his sentence. Someone with no money wouldn't have been able to escape justice for so long--letting him go would be a brazen admission that there is one justice system for the poor and another for the wealthy.

[bettyellen]

196. that quote refers to victims' justice being denied. my take on it- better late than never

[Odin2005]

45. There would still be a few jerks calling the victim a liar, slut, whore, etc.

[AuntPatsy]

47. no n/t

[SpartanDem]

54. Can imagine if this was some Republican?

you can bet these sick assholes wouldn't be saying it happened so many years ago, this all about revenge. They'd probably be calling for the death penalty.

[Gwereeya]

55. BINGO!

I don't give a shit if he found the cure for cancer, lock up, toss key.

[madmusic]

56. Yes, here is what I defend.

Anyone, ANYONE who makes a plea deal has the right to expect the judge will stick to it. By making a plea, the defendant gives up our most sacred rights in our country of laws, not men (or women). That is what the state gets out of a plea deal: our willingness to surrender our rights. That is no small surrender. If the judge had wanted to stick with the plea as negotiated, Polanski would not have fled.

That doesn't justify his fleeing, but his flight is another charge. So, yes, I would defend anyone who gave up his/her rights in a criminal proceeding and then got burnt by the judge who accepted the plea and then said, "You shouldn't have trusted me!"

Anyone, rich, poor, famous or not, black, white brown whatever, they should all be able to trust the court to either stick with the plea contract or reject it and give the defendant his/her rights back.

[Liquorice]

58. He raped a 13 year old girl. nt

[madmusic]

65. Doh, terrorists killed over 3,000 people, including children

DUers still don't think we should abolish the Bill of Rights to get 'em.

[Liquorice]

68. Polanski's rights aren't being violated. It's a simple matter of a rapist who ran

away from his sentence, like the coward he is.

[madmusic]

72. Flight is a different charge.

If he waived his constitutional rights and expected a negotiated plea and the judge was going to violate that plea, then is rights were violated. Another judge recently found misconduct by the sentencing judge for this reason.

Either everyone has rights or no one does because the law applies equally to everyone, except here on DU.

[Liquorice]

77. That's Polanski's phony story. I don't believe it for a second. Why would I believe a rapist? nt

[madmusic]

78. Hello?

You don't believe what?

[Liquorice]

79. That the judge was going to violate the plea. nt

[kwassa]

81. it is well-documented in great detail everywhere

and was the subject of a recent documentary.

The judge was a ambitious publicity-hound.

Google the case yourself, the info is out there.

http://www.thewrap.com/article/hollywood-reacts-shock-polanski-arrest-7844

"In a documentary last year titled "Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired,” the filmmakers raised substantive questions about the behavior of the judge, Laurence Rittenband, who was criticized in the film by both prosecution and defense lawyers for being swayed by public opinion and for violating the terms of a plea bargain struck by Polanski before he fled the country.

n January of this year lawyers for Polanski tried to have the case dismissed on the grounds of judicial and prosecutorial misconduct, and to have the case moved out of Los Angeles.

But the request was tentatively denied by a judge who demanded that he return to court. That decision is now under appeal.

[charlie]

82. Bad behavior all around

Polanski may have had a hand in souring the judge. Initially, the judge was accomodating, postponing sentencing for 3 months so Polanski could direct a movie. He allowed him to leave the country. But, instead of going directly to the set, he went to a Munich Oktoberfest and was photographed partying with beer and babes. The judge was infuriated, of course, a sex offender ostensibly in his custody was on the newswires living large. It was a really dumb, arrogant move on Polanski's part.

[quiller4]

173. Actually it is more than that. There is also the issue of prosecutor and judge

taking back a plea bargained agreement and not permitting a defendent to change his plea. This is a significant justice issue and it happens all to often for nobodies. Maybe now that prosecutorial and judicial misconduct will get some attention.

[TorchTheWitch]

242. I've yet to see anything claiming that was the case

Media reports at the time claim only a plea deal agreeing to the one lesser charge... nothing about there being any sentencing deal. In fact, reports at the time say the judge ruled that he undergo a 90 psych evaluation and intended to use the result of that evaluation to help determine what the sentence would be. This tells me that there was no sentencing deal the judge had agreed to and he had only agreed to the plea deal (the dropping of the other charges). For whatever reason, Polanski was convinced that the judge was going to sentence him to some amount of prison time (which he absolutely should have gotten) and fled the country hours before he was to be sentenced. If the judge threw out the entire agreement after he fled, that's exactly what he should have done... a plea deal is null and void the moment the accused reneges on the deal (and Polanski reneged by jumping bail and fleeing before sentencing).

The agreement to plea to the one lesser charge was extraordinarily lenient... to also agree to a sentence consisting of only the 42 day psych eval on top of that is so lenient as to be absurd. Considering the charges any judge that would agree to both the plea bargain to the one lesser charge and a sentencing deal that allowed the criminal to walk away has no business being a judge even back then.

[seabeyond]

243. after getting past the defender saying renig plea agreement, this is exactly where i got with info

we have been given.

i have hunted and hunted for this supposed misbehavior of judge. the only place i am seeing where the info comes from is documentary that is all about siding with director and clearing his name....

[madmusic]

252. It was VERY easy to find, and what defender are you referring to?

The director pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse in 1977, but fled to France on the day of his sentencing in 1978, aware the judge planned renege on the agreement and sentence him to more prison time.

Earlier this year, Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza in Los Angeles agreed that there was "substantial misconduct" by the now-deceased judge who had arranged a plea bargain and then reneged on it. But Espinoza dismissed Polanski's bid to throw out the case because the director failed to appear in court; Polanski has asked a U.S. appeals court in California to overturn that decision.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090928/ap_en_mo/eu_switzerland_polanski

Hint: Google Polanski and "plea bargain"

[seabeyond]

254. no info. the writer writes reneg... as you do. present judge says misconduct

but we hear none of it. they says never went after him, as i shows they did.

i googled Polanski and "plea bargain" and it all shows he says judge reneged, but no info.

you want people to go with reneg without facts. because he and his lawyers say

[madmusic]

259. Reliance on the media is fine if it supports your view and an unconstitutional raid

Or it was for you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3235955

But we should be skeptical if you don't like what the media reports. Is that it?

[liberalmuse]

84. He should of stayed and taken his punishment 35 years ago.

Hell, we know that he would not have spent much time in jail - a year at most, and then he would have been let out for good behavior. People don't do much time for rape or child molestation here in the US, but if you're caught with a joint 3 times, you'll spend your life in prison.

Although I think it's odd that all of a sudden someone in Switzerland decided to make political points by arresting him when he's been pretty much all over the world (except for the US) living the good life and hob-knobbing with the beautiful people for decades after he committed his crime, I find it pretty much impossible to muster up any sort of sympathy for child rapists. To his sympathizers: At worst he'll probably be picking up trash along side Chris Brown. :(

[tammywammy]

91. France wouldn't extradite him

From what I've read, the LA DAs office read that Polanski would be going to Switzerland (a country that will extradite), made up an arrest warrant, forwarded that on to the State Dept, who sent it to Swiss officials. This deal he was going to was all over the internet. The articles said this wasn't the first time the DAs office has tried to get him, but Polanski would find out about it and cancel his trip.

[bridgit]

85. He'd already be on the inside eating cold, powdered scrambled eggs & bologna sammichs

:(

[Pushed To The Left]

87. Nope! But Americans love their celebrities. If a poor/unknown person did this, people would be

calling for his execution and/or castration.

[Prism]

88. As someone molested

What he did? I don't defend, and I'm ok with him paying the price for his crimes.

However, his case highlighted a kind of celebrity crazy in the judicial system, and we'd be severely remiss not to recognize it. The problem is that the entire process was so tainted by a celebrity-crazed judicial system.

I do not, for one moment, excuse what Polanski did. I do believe he deserves hard jail time for his crimes.

But I don't think it's entirely horrible to note that the so-called impartial judicial system in his case was anything but, and the very corruption based in celebrity that is so rampant in the U.S., then and now, really hoses our ability as a society to punish crimes in a clean and impartial manner.

Polanski deserves punishment while the judicial system needs a serious slap down for how his case and other were allowed to proceed. I don't think these are mutually exclusive thoughts.

But there is a gray area between what we tacitly go along with in culture and what we punish by law. What we punish is a no tolerance system. What we tacitly tolerate as a culture and society is a far different thing. We're hypocrites to a degree. We'll never really sort any of this out. We just flip it all around based on prevailing consensus at the time.

[rebel with a cause]

90. My take on it is......

If I have to read/hear the girl say one more time how she was part of it and he is innocent, I will puke. Thirteen year old girls who have sex with an adult who has authority over them is not an equal partner in the incident.

Can we give him a sentence that fits his crime. Make him serve it and be done with it. This has gone on for too long. I'm sick of it.

[depakid]

92. Personally, I have more respect for what she has to say after all this time

After all- she, not self righteous assholes on message boards- is the person who's had to deal with the matter as it has come up over the years.

[rebel with a cause]

97. read post # 96.

and look in the mirror before you call others self righteous assholes.

[depakid]

99. Sounds to me like from that post

that we agree- this is worse for her and hers than to have simply let the matter be. The guy's been exiled from Hollywood. For a director- that's pretty stiff consequences to pay. A US prison term for life makes matters no better for anyone involved. It's a lose/lose.

And btw: that comment wasn't directed so much at you as with the hang 'em high crowd on the board- who remind me in this instance to be nothing so much as a bunch of inspector Javerts, in it for their own emotional purposes.

[rebel with a cause]

100. Okay, Understood.

I was trying to make my first post as short as possible because my daughter wants me off the board. Does not think it is good for me.

Since it is now 3 a.m. I will agree with her and hit the hay. ;)

[LisaL]

93. Her description of it is that it was not consensual.

She claims she had told him no. I heard her interview on Larry King Live, that was in 2003, and she said she had told him no. So where did you get the idea she is claiming he is innocent?

[rebel with a cause]

96. In her interviews that she has done this year where she has said as much.

It seems her story must have changed since 2003. :shrug:

I am not putting her down actually. I am saying a thirteen's idea of being an equal might be due to misguided thinking. I have dealt with sexually abused children. They often say in the beginning that they have been abused and then later think it is either their fault or that they at least share in the blame. They often feel to blame for their abusers problems because they see it as all because of them. It is all pretty usual. I just want her to be taken off the hot-spot and given peace on the matter. Until this is over she will not have that.

[LisaL]

113. What exactly did she say during the interviews this year?

Do provide links.
She might be saying she wants this to be over, and that she forgave him, or that he is this great artist, etc, which doesn't mean she is recanting her story or changing it. The fact that she wants to move on does not equal that she is now claiming he was innocent.

[rebel with a cause]

164. Self Deleted

Forget it. I'm done. For information use your Google.

[paulsby]

104. it cannot be consensual

with a 13 yr old. fwiw, i used to live in a state where the age of consent was 14 , but i digress.

she could claim it wasn't FORCIBLE, but it - by definition - was not consensual

and that's leaving aside the issue that he drugged her with quaaludes and alcohol

[LisaL]

116. You are missing my point.

I am saying that what she described wouldn't be considered consensual even if she were over the age of consent.
She claims she had told him no.
If she were an adult, what she claims happened would not be considered consensual.

[brettdale]

105. double standard for famous people

The public doesnt care what a famous person does. If Roman had of been a plumber or a teacher there would be no support for him.

[Echo In Light]

109. Cult of Celebrity = pure worship, true religion - artists, athletes, "stars," etc

I do find it a bit odd since Polanski is, er, would seemingly be, pretty far off the mainstream radar for the average American.

[Hannah Bell]

107. if he were an ordinary person, it wouldn't have happened. she went with him to get into pictures.

but yeah, if events occurred as described with, say, the local construction millionaire or something, & 30 years later the state came after him, i'd feel the same.

[LisaL]

108. It took 30 years because Polansk has fled to France, and

France would not extradite him.
What is it you are trying to argue here?
That if somebody leaves US for a country that would not extradite him/her, US should just give up after so many years?

[seabeyond]

115. no. the little tramp of 13 used the grown big ole powerful man to get in pictures

is this fuckin for real

[Hannah Bell]

146. your spin, again. the fact is, she went to take the pictures because he

was a famous director & she wanted to be in the movies. this is what *she* said, i'm not speculating or inventing.

her mother was an actress. her mother was also her "agent," & had been trying to get her acting & modeling work.

if he'd been 44-yr-old joe schmoe, she most likely wouldn't have let him take her picture.

the spin: "tramp", "used", etc. is entirely yours.

[suzie]

170. The local neighborhood child molesters take photos, videos, promise kids stuff all the time and they

fall for it, because they're KIDS.

Polanski's career would have been severely harmed if he had actually been sentenced. It was the early days of the Women's Movement. There would have been all kinds of protests and demonstrations when his films were shown.

But he fled to Europe, the case never got the media coverage, he could continue having sex with teenagers and no one in the U.S. was going to make a big deal out of protesting his films because he wasn't visible here. He continued to live the good life and get awards while doing what he wanted.

And most likely that included continuing to have sex with underage kids.

But, now he's an old guy, so you're fine with that?

[Hannah Bell]

191. you seem to be laboring under some delusion. your discussion is irrelevant

to my post.

[suzie]

246. Unfortunately, it's difficult to discuss this with someone like yourself who has only their

fictionalized idea of what would happen with Joe Schmoe, child rapist.

In the real world, child molesters/child rapists offer the kid something all the time. And in the real world, pedophiles take photos of kids all the time.

It's one of the first questions that cops and interviewers ask child victims--because it's so common.

I believe that you're the one laboring under the delusion that you know something about the Joe Schmoes and their victims.

[Hannah Bell]

249. No, I think you're talking to yourself. For example, "pedophiles take photos of kids all the time."

did i make some claim that pedophiles never took pictures of children? where was that? wtf are you talking about?

[seabeyond]

111. little slut..... golddigger? whore?? wtf are you saying. her fault cause she was promised

cause she wanted something from him

poooooooo, pooooooo, little man.

picked on he is.

[Hannah Bell]

118. no, that's your spin. cause you can't hear past yourself.

[seabeyond]

121. no, really, it is what you are saying. nt

[Hannah Bell]

123. no, really, it's not at all. you don't hear what i'm saying because you prefer your version.

[tammywammy]

126. It took 30 years because he FLED THE COUNTRY

He pled guilty and then left the fucking country. If he hadn't left the damn country, this would have been over and done with a long time ago. What's hard to comprehend about that. I guess we should let that old man out that bombed the Alabama churches, I mean we caught him soooo long after he did it. Right?

[Hannah Bell]

147. four children were killed in the bombing, correct?

you think it's a good analogy?

[tammywammy]

148. What does it matter?

It was a long time ago. That's what most posters are saying. That it happened so long ago we should let it slide.

[Hannah Bell]

150. disingenuous.

[WonderGrunion]

112. If Roman Polanski were poor and not famous

He would have finished his sentence decades ago because he wouldn't have had the money to flee and be walking the streets a free man today. Much as he currently is. Or was until a few days ago. You know what I mean.

[salguine]

117. Hell, OJ Simpson butchered two people, and there were plenty of folks who thought

the authorities should let it slide. 'Cause he's The Juice, you know.

[Hannah Bell]

124. not because he's "the juice", & you know it.

[salguine]

152. What the hell does that mean?

[Hannah Bell]

153. i think you know the reason the case was so charged between supporters &

detractors wasn't about his fame.

[salguine]

159. That's the second time you've told me I "know" something. No, I don't. What do I "know"?

[Echo In Light]

125. I forget which popular comic noted that OJ never had trouble finding women wanting to date him

[hedgehog]

134. If Polanski had been a poor/unknown person, her mother would never have left

the daughter alone with him in the first place. This entire incident is an indictment of celebrity culture.

[Echo In Light]

137. Many would be aghast to know how often 'casting couch' scenarios occur, even w/parental approval

Hell, look at the horrific ends many parents will go to when they've involved their child in extra curricular events in school - I seriously doubt the vipers who endorse blackmailing, injuring or outright murdering their kid's competition would think twice about having their daughter cozy up to higher ups who can provide extra 'incentives' for a "price."

And really, isn't that just the way of corporate culture, and its wonderful "values?"

[suzie]

140. Actually that's not true.

It happens all the time with mothers who leave their children with pedaphiles, for whatever reason.

Doesn't change the fact that a child molester is a child molester.

[Hannah Bell]

155. no one said it did. typically, however, if the mother prostitutes her kid for gain,

the mother gets prosecuted too.

[suzie]

158. And your point would be?

I noted that this is not about "celebrity culture".

Does the fact that the mother is stupid, does a stupid thing, does a criminal thing change the fact that someone molested her child?

Mothers get prosecuted for prostituting their children, but less often for simply doing stupid things.

Blaming mother doesn't work as an apology for criminal behavior. Which seems to be the point of most of the "but the mother" statements.

[hedgehog]

161. I'm not sure. At first I thought you were right and the mother shouldn't

be blamed for his actions. On the other hand, going back to that time and place, would other mothers have left their 13 year old alone with a 43 year old relative stranger for a photo session?

[Hannah Bell]

188. you don't do nuance well, do you? to note that the mother had a history

is not an "apology for criminal behavior".

the mother, otoh, wasn't "stupid". she was an actress, and her daughter's manager. & polanski was already notorious for his sexual proclivities.

[suzie]

247. Are you seriously saying that the mother of the victim should have

known that Polanski was inclined to anal rape of children?

That was common knowledge?

[Hannah Bell]

248. are you seriously saying you'd let your 13 year old go alone with a hollywood

director known to use drugs, have wild parties & a fondness for young women - to "shoot photos"?

really?

[suzie]

251. What does that matter to this case?

Roman Polanski plead guilty to sex with a 13 year old child. He stated in his plea that he knew she was 13 when he had sex with her.

The inappropriateness of the victim's mother in no way changes that central fact of what happened, no matter how many posts you offer apologizing for Polanski.

[Hannah Bell]

253. you've given up on the "stupid" trope? so many straw men, so little time.

1. none of my posts constitute apologies for polanski. sex with a minor = rape, that's cut & dried.
2. "inappropriate" is not the appropriate word for the mother's role.
3. link to your claim p. "stated in his plea that he knew she was 13 when he had sex with her."

[suzie]

260. It doesn't matter what the mother's role was. Act the apologist for Polanski all you want; talk

about "strawmen", "nuance", the mother, and attempt to divert from the central fact of the case all you want.

Roman Polanski anally raped a child whom he knew to be 13 years old when he performed the act.

See page 14 of his guilty plea, where he admits that he knew her age.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0928091polanskiplea10.html

[Hannah Bell]

154. yep. but if you mention this very important fact, you're supposedly condoning

child rape. the storyline has to be she was entirely pure & without normal human motives. because she was 13, & everyone knows 13-year-olds never get themselves into trouble by acting on their self-interest, & they don't drink, use drugs or have sex, either.

[suzie]

166. So, child rape is justified because some 13 year olds do drugs, some

have consensual sex with their PEERS, some drink at too early an age.

That doesn't matter. It's illegal for an adult to have sex with an underage child.

Sorry, the "progressive forum" that is supposed to be DU is now an outlet for NAMBLA views?

[Hannah Bell]

185. wtf? exhibit a, & i rest my case. dissociate much?

[ScreamingMeemie]

138. Even if Polanski had been innocent and poor, there's a good chance

the book of judgement would have been thrown at him, he would have been incarcerated on heresay (before evidence was even taken) and his life would have been destroyed...

[geek tragedy]

139. If he was a poor black construction worker, he'd be rotting in jail.

No doubt about it at all. And no one would be feeling sorry for him.

[Hannah Bell]

156. i would, if the circumstances were the same.

however, they couldn't be, since a poor black construction worker couldn't have put her in a movie. thus neither she or her mother would have consented to the photoshoot.

[geek tragedy]

157. That you sympathize with the rapist instead of the victim

speaks volumes.

Goes along with your defense of the stoning of a girl in another thread. Your views on women make Pat Buchanan look enlightened.

[seabeyond]

160. twilight fuckin world..... stoning thumbs up. WTF

i am so fucking confused.

then you male, hannah female....

my world has gone topsy turvey this this 13 yr old rape. what is it. with female defending this pig. another calls it an affair. old fart rape young girl and is a mere affair.

i didnt hear about no stoning. and cant figure how that gets a thumbs up

[Hannah Bell]

187. it doesn't. but don't let that stop you from your appointed rant.

[seabeyond]

190. i later read your posts on that thread and though i now see your argument not once

was there empathy for the stonee..... just the manipulative play to obama.

other posters were able to incorporate the two

[Hannah Bell]

192. link to the "manipulative play to obama," please? because i have no idea wtf

you're talking about.

[Hannah Bell]

186. lol. and they say comedy is dead.

[suzie]

167. Her mother might have consented to allow her daughter to have sex with

an adult male for drugs. Happens all the time. Or mother may have looked the other way because the construction worker paid part of the rent.

But that doesn't mean that the case should not be prosecuted. But keep on coming up with the apologist arguments on why poor Polanski is not at fault, it's that bad, bad mother and her degenerate 13 year old daughter.

[jakefrep]

162. If he were a nobody, would his arrest/extradition be a media event?

nt.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

163. no. also he woudlnt have gotten away with it.

[Rex]

165. No.

[ThisThreadIsSatire]

174. The worst part about this...

is not that nobody would be defending him or that nobody would be pursuing the matter.

The worst part is is that somebody, (I haven't seen them yet but we all will soon) most likely the person who will be the 'public face' for the prosecution, will be running for office next year.

DAs and DA wannabes use high profile cases to get their face in the news as a means of kicking off their campaigns. Justice is secondary.

[seabeyond]

181. nah. the wrost is the top dudes in france totally ignoring the rape and saying what a good artist

he is. how mean that u.s. still intends to prosecute.

dsimissing rape of female world wide

[alp227]

176. No. With fame and fortune comes the power of high-powered defense attorneys.

Think about it. Michael Jackson, OJ Simpson, and Robert Blake were all acquitted of their crimes because of that factor. In contrast, Houston-based rapper South Park Mexican was convicted of child sexual abuse in 2002; he (real name Carlos Coy) didn't have as much wealth as needed to get the attorneys who convinced the jury to vote Jackson not guilty. SPM is to be released in 2047 and is eligible for parole beginning 2024 yet still recorded some music behind bars.

Polanski's trial will be pretty interesting. Let's see if this is gonna be a repeat of the Michael Jackson trial.

[MellowDem]

179. Nope...

and don't let anyone on here make you think otherwise.

[RedCloud]

182. if I had sex with your kid when they were 13?? kid vs. they?

[Piwi2009]

184. No defending from me. He is a pig and should get some prison time

But I can't help but contrast the rightwads laying into him, yet every Jan 22 at the big anti choice rally in D.C., they forgive, embrace and are compassionate to women whom they say did something much worse--"kill a child." I guess if you're repentent enough, anything is "overlook-able." But something tells me they wouldn't let Polanski speak at the rally no matter how sorry he was.

[pitohui]

197. if he were a poor/unknown man he'd never spent a moment in jail

it was the 1970s, getting a teen girl high and having sex w. her was not rape, it was "seduction" -- i was a girl in that era and if all the creeps who put the moves on 13 year olds went to prison well i think some of you would have damn well been surprised at how few males would be out in the free world...

he was singled out and of course he is bitter for being singled out because the times changed out from under him and i doubt he ever intended to be a rapist or to spend his life in public shame because of the label of pedophile

the victim wants to move on, why can't we?

i had sex as a teen, i was a girl, i may have even gasp taken a drug or two, i wouldn't do that now but now is not the 70s and expectations were different

we are all creatures of our time, and damn few of us are better people than we were raised to be -- even tom jefferson as we all know famously had slaves and slept w. a slave

why are we obsessing about this old man who can't harm anyone NOW? what are we being distracted from?

[seabeyond]

201. she said no. she was afraid. she wanted to go home. rape. that is why this little old man

still has to pay the price. but just be another amongst a long line of people, including the french govt that ignores the rape to talk about a pathetic old man.

how mean the u.s. is. mean. not that it was "mean" to rape a girl. but to prosecute a rapist

[Thickasabrick]

203. Agree.....and I think we were the same age. Attitudes sure have

changed.....which is a good thing....but I do think people are over obsessing about this.

[LisaL]

205. WTF do attitudes have to do with it? 13 was below the age of consent

back then.

[Thickasabrick]

207. And he pled guilty to sex with a minor nt

[LisaL]

209. Then WTF is wrong with him being extradited to US to finally

pay the piper?
He plead guilty-why shouldn't he be sentenced for it?

[seabeyond]

214. beacuse he is old now? no, he is a good artist? she wasnt a virgin? he had a tough life?

rape was accepted in those days? his wife was murdered? thinking with little head? not until bush/cheney get it? hid in plain site for 3 decades? YOU ARE A PURITAN.

[LisaL]

216. He makes movies. Obviously that's a good enough reason.

To many, that is.
But not to me.

[LisaL]

204. Nonsense. Ignoring everything else, 13 was below the age of

consent in CA.

[anonymous171]

206. Read her testimony. It was rape. Polansky is a rich fucker who needs to be taken down a notch

I can only hope he dies in jail.

[Thickasabrick]

208. Well that's nice but read his testimony....oh wait....you can't because

there wasn't a trial.

[LisaL]

210. Yea well if he is oh sooo innocent why didn't he

ask for one? Certainly he wasn't obligated to plead guilty, was he?
:eyes:

[Thickasabrick]

215. He pled guilty as part of plea bargain deal which would have only

required him to be in prison 90 days. The judge reneged on the deal - he found out about it and ran.

[seabeyond]

220. bullshit. that 90 days was for psych eval. he was released in 42 days. was suppose

to go for sentencing on that ONE charge. ran

[LisaL]

221. As far as I can tell the judge isn't obligated to follow the deal.

And whoever pleads guilty should know that it is a possibility.
How exactly does it excuse running?

[anonymous171]

211. Yeah, because he fled the country.

Even fucking Michael Jackson stayed for his trial.

[Thickasabrick]

218. There is no trial. He pled as part of a plea bargain and the judge

reneged. That is why he ran.

[anonymous171]

222. Still doesn't excuse anything. He is a rapist and a fugitive. nt

[Thickasabrick]

224. He pled guilty to sex with a minor. That is all. nt

[seabeyond]

228. that is rape. nt

[Thickasabrick]

231. Whatever you want to call it - he pled guilty to sex with a minor. nt

[seabeyond]

233. it. is. rape. nt

[LisaL]

229. Yea and why shouldn't he be sentenced for it?

[seabeyond]

226. he plead down the 5 charges adn 1 remained. keep telling false info. that is what the plea

bargain was. dropping 5 of 6 charges.

when sentencing came to the one left, he ran

[seabeyond]

217. he got 5 of those charges dropped to not have trial. he should have counted lucky stars instead

of running.

[Thickasabrick]

219. You are assuming that all charges were true. Would you just like

to get rid of trials altogether?

[LisaL]

223. He could have always plead not guilty and go on trial.

Why didn't he?

[anonymous171]

225. Because his wife was murdered and he was afraid of jail and

the girl was a liar and the judge was just trying to make a name for himself, etc. etc.

[Thickasabrick]

227. Because the mother did not want her daughter to have to testify...or

so I've heard.

[LisaL]

230. Hah? How does that explain why he plead guilty?

Sure as hell he wasn't obligated to plead guilty because the mother did not want her daughter to testify.

[Thickasabrick]

234. Let's see......90 days in jail.....or 1 to 2 years in a trial......I think I would

go with pleading guilty to sex with a minor and do 90 days.

[seabeyond]

236. NOT 90 days in jail. 90 days for an eval that took 42 days. mandatory for his charge was1-3

years.

or soemthing like that. thoguht he would get it lite, or no time/time already served. pissed off judge and didnt think he would get it so ran

[seabeyond]

235. cause he was faced with 6 very serious charges and this was a

the lotto ticket of getting out of trouble. he took it cause it would assure the least amount of time cause he raped, drugged, sodomized ect....

[seabeyond]

232. he got rid of the trial. dont put on my shoulders. he raped, drugged, sodomized a girl. humialiated

her.

she didnt want trial. so they dropped 5 of the 6 charges. he had ONE charge so she didnt have to go to trial. he was afraid he would get the most time for the ONE charge cause he was an arrogant fuckin asshole and pissed off the judge. so he ran

like a pathetic losing coward he is

and a country protected the raping SOB

[Thickasabrick]

237. What exactly am I putting on you? I really think this has gotten to

you and I'm sorry. I'm going to exit this whole discussion so you will have to find someone else to vent your faux outrage on.

Have a good day.

[seabeyond]

239. raping a 13 yr old, ya.... i am bothered. people making excuses for it, justifying it

blaming the victim. bothersome

but dont fool yourself that you have anything over me. you have been at it way longer than i, spreading the same nontruth repeatedly, justifying the mans rape of a girl endlessly.

i am sure you arent done

[Canuckistanian]

213. The DOJ wouldn't be interested in him

Except that a recent documentary on Polanski got under the skin of a certain CA prosecutor, in which was highlighted certain judicial shenanigans.

Ergo, said prosecutor decided to make a federal case of it, as it were.

So a trap was laid.....

[varelse]

256. He'd have done his time years ago

and most likely it would have been very hard time indeed.

[Piwi2009]

257. Obama gets his man! First Polanski, then Bin Laden!

[Echo In Light]

258. POLANSKI?