Polanski’s Defenders
September 29th, 2009 at 3:53 pm by David FarrarSome pretty revolting blind eyes being turned in the movie world, as reported in the Herald:
Petitions from leading film directors and other cinema figures, including one signed by the celebrated Polish director, Andrzej Wajda, focused most of their anger on the Swiss authorities. The fact that the Polish-born Mr Polanski was arrested as he arrived to receive a lifetime achievement award at the Zurich film festival was, they said, “a provocation”.
No a provocation is the fact he allegedly raped a 13 year old girl, and fled the country.
A leading French director, Bertrand Tavernier, said: “The Swiss are extraordinary. Here is a law which is supposed to combat drug-trafficking and tax evasion and the first victim they pick on is an artist.”
Oh how dare they pick on an artist. The shame, the shame. Artists are all good noble people.
He did not get arrested because he is an artist. He got arrested because he is an (alleged) child rapist.
The Swiss Economy Minister, Doris Leuthard, rejected suggestions that the arrest was intended to ease strained relations between Switzerland and the US. An extradition treaty between Washington and Berne obliged Switzerland to act, without question, on any arrest warrant issued by the US authorities, she said. The international outcry on Mr Polanski’s behalf implied that there should be a law for ordinary people and another for celebrated film directors, she suggested.
That is precisely what they are saying it seems.
In a radio interview, the French Foreign Minister, Mr Kouchner, said that the Californian and Swiss authorities had acted unreasonably. “It’s a little sinister, this business, to be quite frank,” Mr Kouchner said. “A man of such talent, recognised throughout the world … All this is not nice.”
Being arrested for rape is not nice I agree. Being raped as a 13 year old is even worse I would say. The only sinister aspect is that France has sheltered him for so long.
The jury of the Zurich film festival … accused the Swiss government of “philistine collusion” with the US.
Oh yes those cultural philistines. How dare they arrest a movie director for child rape. Don’t those philistines know it is okay if you are an artist.
The jury’s president, the American actress Debra Winger, said: “[The arrest] is based on a three-decade-old case that is all but dead but for minor technicalities.”
So if you flee overseas, then the case should be dropped if you do it for long enough.
When news of his arrest first came through I was thinking hey maybe they should not send him to jail. But the more the cultural elite complain about what has happened, the harsher I think the sentence should be.
Tags: rape, Roman Polanski
September 29th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
A good blog about it here: Rape Apologists: Polanski’s Rape of a Child Not That Bad.
An excerpt:
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
I don’t think you need the “alleged” in there.
From Slate.com
Polanski pleaded guilty to “unlawful sexual intercourse” with a minor. What’s the difference between that and statutory rape?
Vote:They’re synonymous. Only a few states—Georgia, Missouri, and North Carolina—actually use the term “statutory rape” in their penal codes. Other legal euphemisms for having sex with someone who’s underage include “Rape in the Third Degree” (New York), “Felonious Sexual Assault” (New Hampshire), and “Carnal Knowledge of a Child” (Virginia).
September 29th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
From the same source Ryan:
“Some news sources have reported that at the time of Polanski’s crime, the age of consent was either 14 or 16. This is incorrect. California’s first penal code in 1850 proscribed sex with girls under the age of 10. The age of consent was raised to 14 in 1889, to 16 in 1897, and finally to 18 in 1913, where it has remained since that time.”
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
I understand that the allegation of rape is no longer extant, and indeed, hasn’t been for some 30 years. There was an allegation of rape, it was dropped and a guilty plea for (consensual) underage sex accepted.
Polanski was arrested 30 years ago for rape. He’s been arrested now by Swiss authorities because of an arrest warrant relating to a failure to appear for sentence on an underage sex charge.
It doesn’t change the underlying act, but the suggestion there’s still a rape charge out there is misleading.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Here’s a the clip of Whoopie Goldberg discussing Polanski and turning herself inside out not wanting to define it as rape.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Surely skipping bail is sufficient reason to be arrested. What took so long?
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Fact: He drugged a 13 year old girl with a Sedative and Alcohol and then proceeded to have oral and penetrative sex with her, sodomise her, and photograph her nude despite her protestations. Roman Polanski has pleaded guilty to this.
Fact: He was convicted of doing the above.
Fact: He skipped bail 30 years ago and has been on the run ever since.
The man should be returned to the US, Hung, drawn and quartered.
His apologists ought to be shot.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
From wiki.
Geimer testified that Polanski performed various sexual acts on her[33][34][35] after giving her a combination of champagne and quaaludes.[36] Specifically, Geimer’s testimony was that Polanski kissed her, performed cunnilingus on her, penetrated her vaginally, and then penetrated her anally, each time after being told ‘no’ and being asked to stop. [37]
[edit] Charges and guilty plea
Polanski was initially charged[38] with rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance (methaqualone) to a minor. These charges were dismissed under the terms of his plea bargain, and he pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.[39]
Following the plea agreement, according to the documentary Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, the court ordered Polanski to report to a state prison for a 90-day psychiatric evaluation, but granted a stay of ninety days to allow him to complete his current project. Under the terms set by the court, he was permitted to travel abroad. Polanski returned to California and reported to Chino State Prison for the evaluation period, and was released after 42 days. On February 1, 1978, Polanski fled to London, where he maintained residency. A day later he traveled on to France, where he held citizenship, avoiding the risk of extradition to the U.S. by Britain. Consistent with its extradition treaty with the United States, France can refuse to extradite its own citizens. An extradition request later filed by U.S. officials was denied.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
I she was my 13 year old daughter I would want his head on a pike.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Those with the stomach, can read the girl’s witness evidence here:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0610081polanski1.html
Nuff said
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
It is fascinating to watch the flip-flop “morality” of these air-head actors/actresses as they contort themselves to defend the paedophile Polanski…because he is an “artist”!!!
It is a good lesson to remember when these same idiots preach on whatever other cause-de-jour they feel they must lecture us mere plebs with. They are all intellectual lightweights, totally absorbed in their own egos – they spend so much time in their make-believe TV/movie worlds that they cannot recognize reality when it is staring them in the face.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
On the one hand, he stupified and raped a 13 year old girl, and fled the country.
On the other hand, he’s a great director and artist?????
WTF.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Incredible he has supporters and defenders, just because you have shot a couple of movies that get the “arties” all excited you should get away scot free is disgusting. He drugged and raped a 13 year old girl, the fact he gave her big cheque a few years ago and has a few “influential” supporters he thought he could walk away scot free.
Vote:Be great to see him locked up, filthy pervert.
September 29th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
I have often wondered at the disconnect these “artistc” types have with the rest of us. Like Mr Nobody I would not care how talented he is, what he has done for the world etc he raped my daughter. To suggest otherwise is semantics.
From where I sit it seems to me that if he had not fled this would have gone away by now. Ya does da crime then ya does da time…
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
If you ever had a reason to hate the left liberal elite then this is as good a reason as ever.
The same people who championed B Hussein Messiah Obama are the same vermin who think that Polanski should be forgiven for raping a 13 year old girl.
Polanski should serve his entire prison term and not one day less .
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
“The fact that the Polish-born Mr Polanski was arrested as he arrived to receive a lifetime achievement award at the Zurich film festival was, they said, “a provocation”.”
Oh really? And did these big brains ask themselves why Polanski didn’t attend the Oscars in 2003, when he was nominated for (and won) for Best Director? Nobody was in any doubt that he’d be arrested the instant he got off the plane, so he didn’t go.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
What a hash the US legal system made of this case! Allowing Polanski to bargain away the serious charges was obviously terrible. What most people seem to be missing in this debate was that the charge of rape was dismissed (I’m not saying I agree with this in any way) and Polanski served a very small amount of time for a lesser charge. It seems that Polanski fled when it started to look like a judge was going to try to ignore the deal that had been struck. Of course Polanski should have been tried and punished if found guilty but I would guess this will never happen due to the mess made by the lawyers and judges 30 years ago.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Interesting timing on this too. Apparently he has a house in Switzerland and visits often. They’ve had a lot of chances to arrest him in the country before now.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Hey, didn’t you get the memo? Survivors of the Holocaust can do no wrong.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
[blockquote] If you ever had a reason to hate the left liberal elite then this is as good a reason as ever.
The same people who championed B Hussein Messiah Obama are the same vermin who think that Polanski should be forgiven for raping a 13 year old girl.
[/blockquote]
Nice to see you can spout misinformation without much factual correctness at all and noone questions it. The main people who supported Obama are not supporting Polanski. But what are facts in the way of another ramble against the ‘elite liberals’. Your comment is like saying “hey I hate all businessmen because there was that famous NZ businessman (deliberately leaving out names) from Christchurch that raped and sodomised a 13yo girl in a fairly similar fact scernario, and some business people stayed beside him and called the girl a slut”. In conclusion your point is as flawed as most of yours surprise surprise.
As for ‘alleged’ its not alleged, its a fact. He admitted it, in his ‘plea bargain’. So no need to use the word alleged DPF in fear of a libel claim.
In respect of the mother knowing, she did, but thought it was a normal photo shoot, and also that she would not be alone with the guy, who she also trusted, and she was apparently shocked to find out there was nudity involved (both in the ‘trial shoot’ and the later shoot where the rape / sodomy happened).
It is good to see no mater how long time elapses justice still catches up. I imagine that someone thought it was not right he was about to be remembered hence sought the extradition and therefore rightly achieved their aim of bringing to light what he had done. In respect of punishment I think it is important to remember the victim does not seek a prision term for him, thinking public humilation is a just punishment.
Transcript of interview with victim when she was older in 2003 I believe
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0302/24/lkl.00.html
Transript of original complaint is on the internet as well.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
I doubt the extradition request will be successful as the Swiss Courts can be a bit ‘funny’ about that sort of thing (it is bad for business if they start handing over fugitives).
Although guilty of an awful crime the chances of Polanski ending up in San Quentin are fairly remote.
http://www.nightcitytrader.blogspot.com
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Well I hope the extradition is successful.
Not only is he guilty of this awful crime, his movies are bollocks too.
6th form english was made even more intolerable while having to watch the abortion of Macbeth that is his!!
Also had to sit through Bitter Moon to impress some long forgotten girl……..have a pathological hatred of Hugh Grant ever since.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
He’d already used the big “famous” lever and plea-bargained down from rape (which is what is was, without a shadow of a doubt) and IIRC was looking a a whopping wet-bus ticket of 42 days inside.
He should be double-bunking with Bubba for at least ten years, but I’m a generous man, I’ll stump up for a bottle of Champagne and half a Qaalude (do I need a time machine for that?) to ease his pain…
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Jeff83
“The main people who supported Obama are not supporting Polanski”
Lets see, I can name Whoopie Goldberg and Harrison Ford without doing any further research, I am sure that ten mins spent doing so could and would reveal many more Obamabi sycophants who think that Polanski should go free.
Goldberg and Ford are card carrying cheerleaders for Polanski and Obamabi.
So there you go Jeff, this is one time where the facts really have stuffed up your attempt to re write history.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
Reason # 958 to loathe and detest what the socialist elite say and do. One rule for them, another for us plebs.
cheers
David Prosser
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
I think you’ll find he is not an “alleged” child rapist, he is an admitted child rapist. He admitted some of the charges. Then when he realised that even in California, money and fame doesnt get you off stupefying, raping and sodomising a 13 year old girl who repeatedly said stop, he did a runner.
The exact definition is something like criminal fugitive child rapist.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Its statutory rape. Still rape.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Now for some really intelligent comment. Screw the frogy bastards, they are total suckholes. I see their moral outrage for MR Polanski on par as their moral outrage for those that came to NZ to sink the rainbow warrior. The French are one eyed arseholes and should be given the respect they deserve, sweet fuck all.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
My heart goes out to the victim and her family, what an awful way to relive something truly evil from 30 years ago. And I feel for the many other victims who have also been forced against their will and who are currently reading/watching what is happening.
It will raise with them their own pain, emotions and horrific memories.
Unlike many other crimes, paedophilia is so fucking sick on so many levels. But it is the one crime which is never discussed in open forums. It is the one crime where victims are ashamed to speak out in many cases. Where parents feel like they have let down the one thing they would truly die for. It is the one crime where there is no Charity to give kids free trips to Disneyland or to meet their sporting heros. It is the one crime where closure never happens, as you never know if your kid is going to commit suicide in their late 30′s. It is the one crime where the fucking kiddyfucker gets about $800k spent on them to be rehabilitated, while the victim and the victim’s families fall apart. Imagine as a parent being entrusted to discuss growing up with your child, to find that that innocence has been forcibly ripped away.
So my heart goes out to the victim and all victims. As for Polanski. The greatest thing is that him and the others like him should be named and shamed and then treated as the low life they are. And as for any sympathy, I kind of liken my hatred for these people on the same lines as Clayton Weatherston et al. And as a taxpayer, I feel more fucking agrieved that I’m paying money for the up keep, of vermin, while victims have been getting nothing.
So if you have been a victim and are reading this – I’ll never know your pain, but I am humbled by your strength to overcome. You aren’t victims, you are an asset to Society.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
I don’t think the “alleged” is required as he admitted guilt by way of a plea bargain, but skipped the country before the plea bargain could be presented to a judge and ratified … or the judge could have not accepted the plea bargain and given him a harsher penalty … fear of this is apparently why he fled
so he is guilty of the crime he admitted to, and for skipping bail before sentencing
and, I’ve read the girl’s testimony taken when she was still 13 … if it is believable (I’ve seen nothing to suggest it isn’t) she asked him to stop at every step of the crime … so it would have been rape whether or not she was under age
I hope the Swiss do carry through the extradition and he then finally gets the sentence he is due given the crimes he committed (not the reduce plea bargain sentence)
on a side note, I have seen commentary that he has been regularly holidaying in Switzerland during his 30 years ‘on the run’ so it would be interesting to know why they arrested him this time
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Christopher Simpson 8:25 pm,
One of the things I appreciate about Kiwiblog is that we DO discuss such things as paedophilia and other sexual perversions.
Vote:Many here, as I’m sure you’ve already noticed, share your vehemance of paedophiles, et al.
In my personal opinion these crimes are worthy of nothing short of the public execution of the perpetrators.
(Along with those who beat up and kill old men using the excuse of ‘road rage’).
September 29th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Thank God for the French. Now I can carve out a career of raping teenage girls safe in the knowledge that if I get caught I can flee there and become an artiste and be safe from prosecution for decades.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Interesting. I must confess I’d never looked at the detail here – I vaguely knew he’d fled the country accused of sex with a minor – I’d assumed it was consensual sex with a girl under the age. I know, still statutory rape, but in the swinging 70s in California I guess that sort of thing went on.
Looking at the detail, I see now that he gave her alcohol and drugs (although it seems she had had both before, but not at the same time), and had sex with her when she clearly didn’t want to, and when she was actively trying to get him to take her home. Based on her evidence, pretty clear cut rape (obviously her evidence might be wrong etc etc).
I’m amazed the police allowed him to plea bargain that down, and I agree that there should be no statute of limitations on this kind of crime. Rape is rape is rape – on her evidence it clearly wasn’t consensual, and that is always wrong.
Leaving aside that, which was a surprise to me, what they’re actually after him for is for fleeing the country. That is a much bigger crime. A government really cannot stop pursuing someone who has done a runner – you can’t have people thinking that they can just go overseas and after 20 years the slate will be wiped clean.
On why now for the Swiss – sounds like they’ve only just signed the treaty with the US that makes it necessary – so they have to do it now under law, they previously didn’t.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
hey Hurf, there ya go, it looks like we agree on something
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
kris K – your link don’t work!!
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:17 pm
Gavin, it was under a new law.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
PaulL said: “I’d assumed it was consensual sex with a girl under the age.”
Someone who is under the age of consent cannot legally give consent. What you assumed was that he had consensual sex with someone who cannot consent. Spot the problem here?
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
It never ceases to amaze me how certain people feel that rules should not apply to them. Debra Winger has made an utter fool of herself in her calls for him to be released.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Yeah, understand Chris. But I draw a difference between forceful and not forceful. Like it or not, underage girls (and boys) are also sexual beings, and there is a difference between willing participant and unwilling. I had assumed willing. It is still illegal, and still wrong. But there are degrees of wrong, and I had incorrectly assumed this was at the “wrong” end, not the “hang him up by the toenails and hit him with a 4×2 with a nail through it” end.
There’s an interesting blog post here: http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2009/09/there-is-fury-and-and-sadness-inside.html (hat tip to offsetting behaviour, who in turn got it from balko, whomever that may be) by someone I assume has a son or relative who has been prosecuted for sex with an underage girl (although it doesn’t say that). There is some screwed up stuff that goes on in the US around sex.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
As an aside you may be interested by this, ages of consent for all countries.
Spain and Japan surprised me: 13.
Some are as low as 12.
http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm
The ones with the question marks are interesting. They have no laws for underage consential sex?
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
PaulL – I’m sorry but that link is total nonsense. Firstly, the boy in the top photograph is 18 years old, and yet the author characterises the actions of these people as innocent “you show me yours and I’ll show you mine” children. I couldn’t even finish the artcile as it became so totally absurd and separated from reality: “Two kids “moon” a passerby and are incarcerated in jail as sex offenders” – in what fucking universe? What a load of horse manure.
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
May help if I post the link, sorry:
http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
Chris, the boy in the top photo is currently 18. At time of offence, according to the offence date listed and presumably from the sex offenders register, he was 15. Presumably that photo is of him at 15. You need to read more closely.
I’m not advocating for perverts here, a 43 year old man having sex with a 13 year old girl is very clearly wrong. But a 15 year old boy having sex with his 15 year old girlfriend is not a crime that requires him to go to jail, or that requires him to have his name listed on a sex offender register for life. Something weird is going on there.
I was interested enough to click on the link from offsettingbehaviour, I wasn’t interested enough to go do more research, so as I said, I read the post and it was interesting, and the conclusion I came away with is that there is some screwed up stuff that the US get up to with criminalising sex. And it looked to me like the person making the posting probably is impacted in some way – with a son or relative who is in that situation (isn’t the kind of thing you just make a blog post on out of the blue).
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
The age of consent in the Vatican State is 12?
As a former alter boy, why does that not surprise me?
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Yes but look at all the Muslim countries:
Must be marriedl/illegal/illegal.
Just wait to those homosexual and lesbian virgins blow up a few terrorists and themselves!
Now that will be the gay mardi gras to end all gay mardi gras!
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
Big Bruv, Goldberg actually supported Hillary, with her very short lived support for Obama being based on a misunderstanding of policies, switched after she lost but hardly what you would call a die hard supporter.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/07/whoopi-switches-from-obam_n_85578.html
Vote:September 29th, 2009 at 11:22 pm
Despite the outrage, there is likely no case to answer for on his unlikely return to the US via extradition. The rape charge, for whatever reason, has been dropped. The victim is unwilling to testify and has said, as an adult, she does not want him prosecuted. Even skipping bail is subject to tolling.
Vote:September 30th, 2009 at 12:25 am
I’ll leave California up to those with knowledge of Californian law 30 years ago, but in New Zealand, that’s not the case.
A 12 year-old can consent to sex. If they do, then it’s not rape. Still illegal? Yes. Go to prison for a fairly long time? Yes. But not rape. “The age of consent” is somewhat of a misnomer. Not unlike “the drinking age”.
Vote:September 30th, 2009 at 12:28 am
I’d have said this was wrong. There doesn’t need to be a charge, there’s been a guilty plea to a charge already, and a conviction will have been entered; and no-one needs to testify – the facts are not (materially) in dispute. All that’s left is the sentencing on the charge of underage sex.
Vote:September 30th, 2009 at 6:35 am
[quote]Despite the outrage, there is likely no case to answer for on his unlikely return to the US via extradition. The rape charge, for whatever reason, has been dropped. The victim is unwilling to testify and has said, as an adult, she does not want him prosecuted. Even skipping bail is subject to tolling.[/quote]
Vote:Wow, go back and read the case idiot. The case hasn’t been dropped – it’s a criminal proceeding, meaning it’s taken against him by the state, not the victim. And the victim has already testified, and Polanski has already been convicted, awaiting sentencing.
September 30th, 2009 at 9:14 am
Graeme, if as reported she was plied with alcohol and drugs it could be rape in New Zealand even if she was over age. I do not the law in California. Do you.
Vote:September 30th, 2009 at 11:20 am
Quite right. Look at the apologists on the pinko-feminazi Broadsheet blog at lefty Obamaite Salon.com tripping over themselves to excuse Polanski:
Reminder: Roman Polanski raped a child
Oh wait…
Vote:September 30th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Firstly, on the matter of Polanski – throw him to the lions. And the people that were happy with a deal to serve only a handful of days behind bars.
Luc said : The age of consent in the Vatican State is 12? As a former alter boy, why does that not surprise me?
Are you saying you were abused as an “alter” boy?
The age of consent in the Vatican State is 12 because it inherited all its laws from Italy in 1930. The age of consent is 15 in the Vatican City where one of the parties is an adult – intended to prevent those in a power relationship (teacher-student, doctor-patient). Also, it is Catholic teaching not to promote sex outside of marriage.
All this is moot because the Vatican has a unique process for providing citizenship, with a citizen population of around 800 people, and I’m not sure any of them are children, not has that particular law been tested in the Vatican City.
December 31 last year the Vatican announced that it would no longer accept Italian law as the basis for Vatican Law, as many of the laws are against Catholic teaching. A review is underway to correct this.
As other commenters have stated – do you really expect a law where two 14 year olds caught having sex are tried as criminals (law breakers) or is this a matter for their parents and the individuals concerned that the state should just keep out of?
Vote:October 1st, 2009 at 12:08 pm
FWIW, a bit more research suggests the age of consent in the Vatican City is 14, not 12 (and 16 in a relationship of dependence: The Vatican City and Age of Consent
Vote: