Roman Polanski

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Whoopi Goldberg, national treasure.

[lungs]

Can somebody explain why he is being defended so intensely by some? I'm not very cultured and don't really know who he is.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

He escaped the ghetto in Poland while his mother died at Auschwitz.
He directed Rosemary's Baby.
His pregnant wife was murdered in his house by the Manson family.
He directed Chinatown.
Then, he raped a 13 year old.

[larrymcg421]

The amusing thing about this thread is I see people were using the default Leonard Little argument 6 years ago.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by molson

I think you could argue its a waste of resources if he hadn't been concvited yet - it might be a tough case to try at this point with all those years and an unwilling victim. But he's already been convicted. He just needs to come back and do his time.

It's an interesting question though, whether he should be sentenced by 1970s standards (when this kind of stuff had MUCH lighter penalties) or by today's more harsh standards. I'm not talking about actual statutory guidelines - obviously, he has to receive a sentence that would have been legal at the time of his crime. But should a judge, or even can a judge, otherwise take into account the changing of our cultural landscape and public sentencing expectations for crimes like this.

Also, we need better international extradition treaties. Especially with Mexico. It's way too easy to commit a crime here and then flee there to avoid prosecution.

He should be sentenced by 1970's standards. But he should also have to deal with any additional time for running away.

I'd comment more on this but last time I said it was wrong for a grown man to fuck girls this age, I got yelled at for it.

[albionmoonlight]

If drugging and sodomizing 13 year old girls is wrong, then I don't want to . . .

ah, fuck it. I can't even joke about that. The bastard is lucky he's managed to stay out of jail this long. He pleaded guilty under oath, so he admits to having done the crime. He's just managed to escape the punishment by fleeing the country.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

He escaped the ghetto in Poland while his mother died at Auschwitz.
He directed Rosemary's Baby.
His pregnant wife was murdered in his house by the Manson family.
He directed Chinatown.
Then, he raped a 13 year old.

So it all goes back to Hitler.

[Karlifornia]

Not much sympathy for him. He's had some personal turmoil that I wouldn't wish on anybody, but that doesn't make you any more impervious to the law than anyone else.

[JediKooter]

From what I read, he was going to get slapped with probabtion and credit for time already served. He's French, why is anyone surprised he ran away when things got tough?

[bhlloy]

Time heals a lot of things. Not sure raping a 13 year old is one of them though.

And while it really sucks for the victim that this keeps getting dragged up through the press, that's really on Polansky as well for skipping out in the first place. Fuck him. Or are we now rewarding people for managing to avoid being brought to justice for so long? That's a great message to send.

No comment on whether he deserves to win an Oscar. Don't find it hard to believe that there are other Oscar winners/Hollywood notables who have done equally fucked up stuff and not been caught...

[CamEdwards]

Wow... Whoopi Golderg's attempted defense is painful to listen to.

[JPhillips]

What the hell is wrong with these people? Yes, I'm sure he's an erudite dinner guest, but he drugged and raped a thirteen year old girl. She said no and he stripped her naked. She said no and he performed oral sex on her. She said no and he raped her. It's not a close call.

It's especially infuriating knowing that we're executing some percentage of innocent prisoners to be tough on crime. And his MacBeth sucks.

[Groundhog]

Anyone that defends this guy is an idiot. Worse even. Someone close to me had something very similar happen to them when they were slightly younger than Polanski's victim, and has so many issues because of it that it breaks my heart. In this person's case the attacker also was never punished.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Anyone that defends this guy is an idiot. Worse even. Someone close to me had something very similar happen to them when they were slightly younger than Polanski's victim, and has so many issues because of it that it breaks my heart. In this person's case the attacker also was never punished.

Well, he only pled guilty because he was promised no jail time (there was no case without the victim, who did not want to testify). The judge sent him to prison for 42 days, and was going to send him for 48 more.

WIth the victim wanting it over, he should be sentenced to time served for the original charge.

And he should be in prison for the rest of his life for fleeing prosecution.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Well, he only pled guilty because he was promised no jail time (there was no case without the victim, who did not want to testify). The judge sent him to prison for 42 days, and was going to send him for 48 more.

I don't know how his plea agreement went, but most of the time you accept a plea, it is made clear to you that the judge, not the prosecutor, sentences you. Accordingly, the prosecutor can only promise to recommend a sentence. When you swear under oath that you committed the crime, you are doing so with the knowlege of what the maximum penalty is and that the judge can impose it if she or he wants.

In a lot of plea cases, the real action is in trying to plea to a crime with a low maximum sentence, especially if the judge is known as a hang 'em high type.

And I had no idea that the times involved in this case were so low. 3 months for raping a 13 year old? He should have kissed the judge and prosecutor for letting him get away with rape if that's the case.

[Neon_Chaos]

I suppose a lot of things get fucked up in your head when your wife and unborn child are murdered.

[Kodos]

I hope that's not an attempt to excuse what he did.

[I. J. Reilly]

Originally Posted by Neon_Chaos

I suppose a lot of things get fucked up in your head when your wife and unborn child are murdered.

Originally Posted by Kodos

I hope that's not an attempt to excuse what he did.

Can I +1 both of these?

[Neon_Chaos]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I hope that's not an attempt to excuse what he did.

Nope, not an excuse.

[Kodos]

Cool. Obviously, something that traumatic would mess with your head. But it would never justify anything he did later.

[Neon_Chaos]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Cool. Obviously, something that traumatic would mess with your head. But it would never justify anything he did later.

Agreed. He should be held liable for the shit that he did.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Anyone that defends this guy is an idiot. Worse even. Someone close to me had something very similar happen to them when they were slightly younger than Polanski's victim, and has so many issues because of it that it breaks my heart. In this person's case the attacker also was never punished.

Not that I'm defending Polanski at all, but the problem with making blanket statements like this is that you're calling the victim in this case an idiot.

[SportsDino]

Lock him up for as long as he avoided jail, to the day... if he survives that long. Sounds fitting to me.

[SteveMax58]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Not that I'm defending Polanski at all, but the problem with making blanket statements like this is that you're calling the victim in this case an idiot.

Misguided, then? Likely for the same reasons her parents would send her off with a grown man to photograph her without being there with her?

[claphamsa]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I hope that's not an attempt to excuse what he did.

no but it is reasoning to stick him in a loony bin instead of Oz!

[CamEdwards]

Love this quote from Harvey Weinstein.

"Hollywood has the best moral compass, because it has compassion," Weinstein said. "We were the people who did the fundraising telethon for the victims of 9/11. We were there for the victims of Katrina and any world catastrophe."

In Roman Polanski case, is it Hollywood vs. Middle America? -- latimes.com

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I don't know how his plea agreement went, but most of the time you accept a plea, it is made clear to you that the judge, not the prosecutor, sentences you. Accordingly, the prosecutor can only promise to recommend a sentence. When you swear under oath that you committed the crime, you are doing so with the knowlege of what the maximum penalty is and that the judge can impose it if she or he wants.

In a lot of plea cases, the real action is in trying to plea to a crime with a low maximum sentence, especially if the judge is known as a hang 'em high type.

And I had no idea that the times involved in this case were so low. 3 months for raping a 13 year old? He should have kissed the judge and prosecutor for letting him get away with rape if that's the case.

I understand that the prosecutor is only agreeing to recommend a sentence. But, aren't these followed most of the time? Like 99.9%?

3 months would have been the judge's sentence (and there is a lot to suggest that this judge was not looking for justice for the girl, but publicity for himself). The plea agreement would have been no time. The prosecutor only gave the no-jail-time agreement at the request of the family, who preferred not to continue on with the case. Polanski's motivation was to get it over with and out of the newspapers. Woops, that did not work too well.

[cthomer5000]

FREE R KELLY!

[Autumn]

Yeah, I don't understand the defense of him at all. He should have been brought back any one of those 32 years. I'm sure he was surprised, but he can't really cry foul. He's been deliberately avoiding "capture" for 32 years, it's not like he's some naive innocent here.

It's odd that they suddenly made this move to bring him in, but what does he have to complain about? Thirty two years of freedom? Not ever having been raped? It's nice that she forgives him, but there's a reason we don't let victims decide the punishment in the criminal justice system.

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Love this quote from Harvey Weinstein.

In Roman Polanski case, is it Hollywood vs. Middle America? -- latimes.com

What a jackhole. I wonder who was actually donating the money in those telethons. Amazingly, I've found it rather easy to donate to the Red Cross without being told what to think by some star.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Samdari

I understand that the prosecutor is only agreeing to recommend a sentence. But, aren't these followed most of the time? Like 99.9%?

In federal court, no. In state court, much more so. I have no idea what the practice was in California in the 70s. But, even if it was a "99% of the time" thing and he was going to get screwed b/c of the judge . . . well, that happens.

If he took a plea agreement that exposed him to active time in order to "just make it go away," then he still made that cost/benefit choice.

Maybe it's b/c I'm a defense attorney, but when there is an offer on the table, I think that you need to explain to the client the best case, worst case, and likely case if they take the deal. Same as if they go to trial. And, while we work for the best case and expect the likely case, we make darn sure that our clients understand the worst case.

It sounds like Mr. P didn't plan for the worst case.

[Young Drachma]

I wonder how long it'll take them to get him here while they negotiate all of this. But Hollywood's reaction is despicable.

[BrianD]

I'm just going to be very short and sweet with it but I just feel that he made his mistake and he just needs more support. Nobody’s a perfect person in the world. Everyone kills people, murders people, steals from you, steals from me, and I just feel that people need to give him a chance. I always looked up to Roman Polanski and I always will just because I think he’s one of the best directors. I love Roman Polanski and I look up to him a lot.

[Kodos]

Is this a Noop parody?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Is this a Noop parody?

No, it's an idiot college QB parody.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

What the hell is wrong with these people? Yes, I'm sure he's an erudite dinner guest, but he drugged and raped a thirteen year old girl. She said no and he stripped her naked. She said no and he performed oral sex on her. She said no and he raped her. It's not a close call.

It's especially infuriating knowing that we're executing some percentage of innocent prisoners to be tough on crime. And his MacBeth sucks.

Hey, it's all part of being a victim. It's 30 years later, she still says no and we're fucking her now.

I couldn't give a flying fuck about Polanski. He deserves everything bad that can happen to him but there's no way to do it without reharming the victim and we'll gleefully do that. What the fuck? Im asking as one of these victims too. It stops being about us the minute the abuse ends. Then, we become society's victim.

If my molester wasn't dead and someone tried to put what happened to me on an international stage, I'd go ahead and eat my gun and I'm not even famous. Can you imagine her having to describe to the ecstactic masses of the entire world how he shoved his cock up her ass? . It wouldn't be worth it opening a wound that is already closed and can't get better reliving it to punish a septagenarian who likely can't even get it up any more

. I'm sure others would feel otherwise but she asked for this to be over before it even started. Basically, when they started shooting the HBO documentary she wanted it stopped because again, she was brought back to the assault that society has no intentions of letting her heal from.

Be glad fuckers that you don't have the capacity to see what abusers you are.

Now, simply on the fleeing charge, sure, why not. Making this woman relive a rape for society to get its nut off once again at her expense... I wish someone would go ahead and nuke this fucking species into extinction. We don't deserve this planet.

Well, of course we could just put a cap in Samantha's head so she won 't have to suffer any more and everyone can enjoy fucking with Roman because lord knows and in all honestly he deserves it and of course, even though she absolutely doesn't count as a human being we can at least pretend to be moral.


Then blow the fucking place up and give a decent species a chance.

[Axxon]

And I'm out of this convo. I'm way too emotionally tied into the emotions that she's going through. I can't try to defend this in a logical argument. Not that anyone would care in any case.

[Axxon]

Roman Polanski's victim Samantha Geimer, now 45, 'got over it long ago'

Roman Polanski's victim Samantha Geimer, now 45, 'got over it long ago'

BY Helen Kennedy
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Monday, September 28th 2009, 4:00 AM
Samantha Geimer at the after party held at the Plaza Hotel Grand Ballroom for the 'Roman Polanski:Wanted And Desired' HBO documentary premiere in 2008.
Corkery/News
Samantha Geimer at the after party held at the Plaza Hotel Grand Ballroom for the 'Roman Polanski:Wanted And Desired' HBO documentary premiere in 2008.
Take our Poll
Polanski arrested

Do you think the U.S. should pursue the criminal case against director Roman Polanski on three-decades old charges he slept with a 13-year-old girl?
Yes, sex with a minor is a crime. Period.
No, the victim doesn't want it pursued and it happened 30 years ago
I'm not sure
Related News

* Articles
* Polanski arrested in Switzerland on 1978 warrant for sex with minor

Roman Polanski's most compelling defender is the woman he raped at Jack Nicholson's house when she was just 13.

Now 45, Samantha Geimer is a mother of three who lives quietly in Hawaii and works as a bookkeeper.

In January, Geimer, who publicly forgave Polanski in 1997, filed a formal request that Los Angeles prosecutors drop the charges against him.

"I have survived, indeed prevailed, against whatever harm Mr. Polanski may have caused me as a child," she said at the time. "I got over it a long time ago."

Geimer said Polanski had paid, and she wanted to move on and stop reliving the details of the assault every time he made headlines.

"True as they may be, the continued publication of those details causes harm to me, my beloved husband, my three children and my mother," she said.

In 2003, she wrote a generous Op-Ed in the Los Angeles Times, saying Polanski should not be barred from receiving a Best Director Oscar for "The Pianist."

"I don't really have any hard feelings toward him, or any sympathy, either. He is a stranger to me," she wrote.

The last time Geimer saw Polanski she was a 13-year-old aspiring model lured to a house in the Hollywood Hills for a photo shoot. Polanski plied her with champagne and a Quaalude and took nude pictures of her in a hot tub, despite her requests to go home.

She told the grand jury Polanski then had sex with her and that she was afraid to resist "much."

The director later pleaded guilty to having sex with a minor.

"What happened that night, it's hard to believe, but it paled in comparison to what happened to me in the next year of my life," she said last year, when she appeared in a documentary about problems with the case.

In the end, she was relieved when Polanski fled because reporters stopped calling.

"He did something really gross to me, but it was the media that ruined my life," she told People in 1997.

Geimer did not comment Sunday, when the events of 31 years ago resurfaced once more and reporters started knocking on her door again.

[flere-imsaho]

It's amazing how we have national outrage over this and not over the fact that a) Texas just put a clearly innocent man to death and b) the governor of Texas just did his best to stop an investigation that would once and for all confirm the innocence of the deceased.

Texas Governor Defends Shakeup of Commission - NYTimes.com

[molson]

Originally Posted by Axxon

Roman Polanski's victim Samantha Geimer, now 45, 'got over it long ago'

Totally irrelevant to anything.

We don't want weird old guys drugging and raping 13-year old girls, even if the 13-year old girls eventually find their own peace with the situation.

There's a reason its "state v. defendant" and not "victim v. defendant". Victims are very, very often unwilling, particularly in crimes like this. That gives defendants a lot of power to carry out their crimes again and again, against different victims.

I'm sure Polanski hasn't stopped raping children. He'd be a rare cases if it hasn't happened again and again since then, says the recidivism rates for this particular crime.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by molson

Totally irrelevant to anything.

We don't want weird old guys drugging and raping 13-year old girls, even if the 13-year old girls eventually find their own peace with the situation.

That is what I just said numbnuts. The victim doesn't fucking matter. She's disposable garbage. She should have already been given a mercy killing because we damned sure can't deny some good old voyeuristic recreational outrage. Thank you for reinforcing my point. No go pat yourself on the back for being a heartless, soulless knob because if assisting victims is meaninless then it makes no fucking sense to worry about victims that don't exist when you're just going to make THEIR lives worse while you keep chasing shit that hasn't happened yet.

Fucker.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

It's amazing how we have national outrage over this and not over the fact that a) Texas just put a clearly innocent man to death and b) the governor of Texas just did his best to stop an investigation that would once and for all confirm the innocence of the deceased.

Texas Governor Defends Shakeup of Commission - NYTimes.com

Because silly, it's not about innocence or guilt. It's about potential victims and so there's got to be casualties on both sides. We're fighting a righteous war against the hasn't happened. Things like this are bound to happen. You never know.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Axxon

That is what I just said numbnuts. The victim doesn't fucking matter. She's disposable garbage. She should have already been given a mercy killing because we damned sure can't deny some good old voyeuristic recreational outrage. Thank you for reinforcing my point. No go pat yourself on the back for being a heartless, soulless knob because if assisting victims is meaninless then it makes no fucking sense to worry about victims that don't exist when you're just going to make THEIR lives worse while you keep chasing shit that hasn't happened yet.

Fucker.

So by your logic, sex with children is totally cool if the child consents?

I won't address the bizarre personal attacks against me except to put you on ignore. You're not worth my time.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by molson

I'm sure Polanski hasn't stopped raping children. He'd be a rare cases if it hasn't happened again and again since then, says the recidivism rates for this particular crime.

You seem quite versed in the mind of a child rapist. Want to share something?

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by molson

So by your logic, sex with children is totally cool if the child consents?

I won't address the bizarre personal attacks against me except to put you on ignore. You're not worth my time.

Put me on ignore asshole. That's where you're going. I was fucking molested you piece of shit. I hate Polanski and what he did but I absolutely hate hurting Samantha worse. God can get his vengeance on Polanski. We're getting ours on Samantha.

You are a sick bastard reading what I wrote and accusing me of being for child molestation. You have deep deep issues.n

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by Axxon

Put me on ignore asshole. That's where you're going. I was fucking molested you piece of shit. I hate Polanski and what he did but I absolutely hate hurting Samantha worse. God can get his vengeance on Polanski. We're getting ours on Samantha.

You are a sick bastard reading what I wrote and accusing me of being for child molestation. You have deep deep issues.n

I think you were right when you said you couldn't discuss this logically. I'm sorry for what you went through, but it's entirely possible to be the victim of a molestation and hold a completely different viewpoint than your own.

[judicial clerk]

Axxon is also missing an important point. It is the not the attempt to extradite Polanski that is causing her grief. It is the reporters who bother her about it for a story every time that are causing her grief. Whoopie Goldberg talking about it on the View is the real problem. Pursuing a fugitive arrest warrants does not inherently involve rehashing things with the crime victim.

And while we should always be cognizant of a victims wishes, in criminal court it is not a case of her against him for doing stuff to her, it is the state of california against him for breaking the states laws.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

I think you were right when you said you couldn't discuss this logically. I'm sorry for what you went through, but it's entirely possible to be the victim of a molestation and hold a completely different viewpoint than your own.

Yes

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by Autumn

Yeah, I don't understand the defense of him at all. He should have been brought back any one of those 32 years. I'm sure he was surprised, but he can't really cry foul. He's been deliberately avoiding "capture" for 32 years, it's not like he's some naive innocent here.

It's odd that they suddenly made this move to bring him in, but what does he have to complain about? Thirty two years of freedom? Not ever having been raped? It's nice that she forgives him, but there's a reason we don't let victims decide the punishment in the criminal justice system.

It sounds like Polanski filed a request to have the case dismissed earlier this year or late last year, based on some potential prosecutorial misconduct. Apparently something came out in a recent documentary style movie. The judge indicated he would not review the request unless Polanski appeared. I'm guessing the arrogance and contempt for the law in this move by Polanski inspired those in position to renew efforts to bring him in.

I guess there is no statute of limitations because he already pled guilty and fleeing is also a crime in and of itself. I have no idea what someone would normally get for fleeing as he did.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

It sounds like Polanski filed a request to have the case dismissed earlier this year or late last year, based on some potential prosecutorial misconduct. Apparently something came out in a recent documentary style movie. The judge indicated he would not review the request unless Polanski appeared. I'm guessing the arrogance and contempt for the law in this move by Polanski inspired those in position to renew efforts to bring him in.

I guess there is no statute of limitations because he already pled guilty and fleeing is also a crime in and of itself. I have no idea what someone would normally get for fleeing as he did.

He's also been really careful about it, avoiding countries that would arrest him.

I'm not sure that there was any new sudden push to bring him in. Surely, if he had set foot in the U.S. or U.K. at any point during the last few decades, he would have been taken in. Also, if the U.S. had advance notice of his travel plans, as they did here, they may very well have been able to negotiate his arrest on a previous trip.

Switzerland is more of a grey area, and he might have gotten a little too comfortable and complacent in going there with advance notice.