Is Roman Polanski Above the Law?

LJWorld.com weblogs Science Becoming Religion

Posted by Reasonmclucus September 30, 2009 at 6:28 p.m.

Supporters of convicted criminal, movie director Roman Polanski believes he should be allowed to get away with skipping out on sentencing 32 years ago. He had originally been charged with giving a 13-year-old aspiring model champagne and part of a Quaalude and then raping and sodomizing her among other charges in spite of her pleas that he stop. According to the girl's grand jury testimony he photographed her topless, ostensibly for a magazine, and then had her completely disrobe before attacking her.

He managed to plea bargain the charges down to a simple unlawful sex with a minor charge. However, he fled the country when it appeared the judge might sentence him to a longer jail term than what he had agreed to in the plea bargain.

As many people know, male Hollywood producers, directors, etc. have long had a reputation for requiring woman who wanted to succeed to grant them sexual favors via the casting couch. Polanski possibly thought this tradition meant he could get away with attacking a young girl who wanted to become a model.

40-year-old men who rape 13-year-olds usually are sexual predators who have preyed on more than one girl. I wonder if there are other girls who were raped by Polanski but didn't report it because they were ashamed, considered rape part of the cost of getting in show business, felt it wouldn't do any good to charge someone so well known or were paid to forget the incident.

Polanski has avoided arrest for 32 years because France allows it criminals to return home without fear of being extradited for their crimes. French leaders apparently believe it is perfectly acceptable for French citizens to rape American girls.

French Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand was quoted in French media as saying, "In the same way that there is a generous America that we like, there is also a scary America that has just shown its face." French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner told France-Inter radio that he and Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski asked Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that Polanski be released on bail, calling his arrest a "bit sinister."

French opposition shouldn't be too surprising considering the country's past support for accused artists.

Polanski has been flaunting the law for 32 years. It's time for him to be returned and serve out his sentence.

Ordinary citizens who have done the same have been required to return to jail. Why shouldn't big shot film makers?

Are entertainers in particular or the rich in general above the law? Are they only required to pay compensation to their victims and check into rehab when they get caught breaking the law? Do the entertainers who support Polanski believe rape of children by film directors is acceptable behavior?

It's not like Polanski questioned the charges by attempting to establish his innocence in a trial like Michael Jackson did. Jackson challenged the charges against him and the jury found him not guilty. Polanski readily admitted his guilt by agreeing to a plea bargain that implied only a minor violation of the law.

Copy and paste the link:

LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

denak (anonymous) says…

I wholeheartedly agree with this blog.

Roman Polanski should serve time for the rape of his victim.

What I find appalling is how some entertainers, such as Whoppi Goldberg, who think he should be released because what he did wasn't "real rape." I kind of think a middle age man who give a 13 year old girl drugs and then proceeds even when she says stop is guilty of rape.

So, personally, I hope he is extradicted and given a longer sentenced not only for the original rape but also because he fled.

Dena
September 30, 2009 at 7:03 p.m.
Pywacket (anonymous) says…

What a sniveling coward. Not only should he be jailed, but they should prosecute him for fleeing. And how innocent was Jack Nicholson, at whose home this took place? Is it even remotely possible that he was unaware that this scumbag had taken the child outside to the hot tub and was forcing himself on her?

I have to assume that Nicholson knew exactly what was going on. He should've been prosecuted for not reporting it and/or for complicity in allowing it to happen at his house. It's totally disgusting, even after so many years. This girl had to grow up with this horrible burden and live with the effects of it all her life. From what I've been reading, she's still battling demons. No surprise there.

I have to wonder how many other children Polanski's raped in the intervening years. Pedophiles do not typically just stop molesting on their own. Since slinking out of the US, Polanski has spent his time in countries that were more likely to look away and let him do as he pleased.

As if we needed it, this story should remind us of the possible dichotomy between someone's professional success (which may reflect great talent and skill) and their sordid inner workings. We seem too willing to fawn over people who are greatly successful--especially entertainers and sports figures--instead of regarding them with the same wariness with which we would view "ordinary" people.

Would that girl's mother have allowed her to spend a day with a couple of factory workers they had just met? or a neighbor guy down the street that they had just met? Why did she feel safe allowing her 13-year-old daughter to go with this man, unchaperoned? I have read that they had only met him once before.

There are creeps and pedophiles in every walk of life, so no one should expect that just because someone is respected and successful in a high-profile profession, that he is necessarily a good and decent person.
October 1, 2009 at 12:46 a.m.
honeychild (Mel Briscoe) says…

polanski should face prosecution just like us plain folk. he has enjoyed freedom, galavanting around the four corners of the world-- playing olly olly oxen free w/ america-- for a good amount of time. ship the dirtbag back over here and try him just like they would anyone else. this has gone on for long enough.

and it doesn't matter if the victim forgives him now. it might help her reconcile her own feelings but it should have zero bearing legally. she was a child at the time. period.
October 1, 2009 at 9:22 a.m.
honeychild (Mel Briscoe) says…

i noticed that, santini! i'm thinking "okay... who the hell is woody allen to endorse ANYONE when it comes to that kind of stuff?" all we need now is r. kelly to weigh in on the topic and we'll have all the knuckleheads present and accounted for.
October 1, 2009 at 9:40 a.m.
The_Original_Bob (anonymous) says…

But it wasn't rape rape.

--

He drugged, raped and sodomized a little girl.

My favorite part of all this is how his supporters say he has been living in exile for 30 years. He's been living in his home country. Sicko.
October 1, 2009 at 9:49 a.m.
honeychild (Mel Briscoe) says…

i know, right? this fool has been living high on the hog everywhere BUT america. how is that punishment?
October 1, 2009 at 9:59 a.m.
honeychild (Mel Briscoe) says…

good question.... but then again, looking at the r. kelly debaucle, no one played the black card there. atleast not to my knowledge.
October 1, 2009 at 10:35 a.m.
TheSychophant (anonymous) says…

santini's statement: "I wonder if his supporter/enablers will play the “anti-semitism card?" leads me to believe that you, sir, are an unmitigated, unreconstituted anti-semite.
October 1, 2009 at 12:37 p.m.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…

To answer the question, nope. Let his lawyers file an appeal once he is safely behind bars.
October 1, 2009 at 2:48 p.m.
grammaddy (anonymous) says…

This girls' mother was present when Mr. Polanski gave the girl the drugs to help her relax for the photo shoot. What kind of mother would leave her 13 year old daughter with a known womanizer while she was under the influence of drugs. Who the hell leaves their 13 year old daughter in that situation. Whoopi was right, it was not rape rape only statutory, and by the way, the girl was not a virgin at the time. Not saying I condone what he did, but the victim wants to let it go so who are we to deny her any more embarrasment.
October 1, 2009 at 6:12 p.m.
gphawk89 (anonymous) says…

No one is above the law... except those who make or enforce the law.
October 1, 2009 at 6:24 p.m.
denak (anonymous) says…

"....it was not rape rape only statutory..."

Statutory rape *is* rape. Secondly, during the trial, the victim testified that she repeatedly asked Mr. Polanski to stop. He didn't. She then stopped asking. The prosecution asked her why she stopped telling him to stop and she replied, "I was afraid of him."

Seems to me that is "rape..rape." The victim said no or stop repeatedly. The only reason she stopped saying no or stop was because she was afraid. She didn't consent when she stopped saying no. She simply made a strategic decision to stay alive.

Dena
October 1, 2009 at 8:10 p.m.
denak (anonymous) says…

Marion asks the supporters of Muslim: “This is diferrent just how?”...

Well for starters, this is the 21st century and not the 7th century. Secondly, child brides and betrothals were not uncommon in most societies throughout history regardless of religion. So sorry, as much as you would like to take this opportunity to religion bash, your example really doesn't apply.

Dena
October 1, 2009 at 8:21 p.m.
BigDog (anonymous) says…

Of course many in Hollywood show their slimy side
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-she...
October 1, 2009 at 9:33 p.m.
riverdrifter (anonymous) says…

His mother was murdered by Nazis, his dad survived a concentration camp and Roman basically was a WWII street urchin. Later, his pregnant wife was murdered by Charlie Manson's slime. And he made great motion pictures: Rosemary's Baby, Chinatown (one of the greats) and The Pianist, also one of the greats.
"May you live in interesting times."
10,000-1, I would rather sit down to supper and wine with Polanski than any other blogger here.
October 2, 2009 at 12:33 a.m.
igby (anonymous) says…

Riverdrifter can share a jail house meal, cell and three hots and a cot as well! Lol.

He will get sentenced under the old law sentence guidelines and do more time that if he'd did the deed today. ......and register as a sex offender. But he will die in prison for sure.

Who you are and what you've done only counts if your Bil Clinton, and the president.

I bet Obama, will give him a pardon, just wait and see!
October 2, 2009 at 2:53 a.m.
BigPrune (anonymous) says…

The ‘Free Roman Polanski’ Petition signed by the following slime plus there's more....I think people need to remember that people in Hollywood are like circus carnys. Think about it. The only difference is they have money and good teeth.

Woody Allen, I guess a few people think he's funny but I never cared for his humor
Wes Anderson, Directed, "The Royal Tenenbaums"
Darren Aronofsky, Directed, "The Wrestler"
Jonatham Demme, Academy Award, Director, "The Silence of the Lambs"
Stephen Frears, Directed "The Grifters" and also "The Queen"
Terry Gilliam, "Monty Python" fame (mostly just animator), Directed a bunch of big budget flops
Taylor Hackford, Director/producer, "Ray," Director "An Officer and a Gentleman"
Neil Jordan, Academy Award Best Screenplay "The Crying Game"
John Landis, Director, writer, actor, producer for a whole bunch of good movies
David Lynch, Director, nominated 3 times for Academy Awards
Mike Nichols, Director/writer/producer, Won an Oscar, Grammy, Emmy and Tony Award.
Salman Rushdie, writer fame "The Satanic Verses," and went into hiding for a decade
Martin Scorsese, director, Academy Award "The Departed" did a mess of movies some good/bad
Steven Soderbergh, director, movies some good some bad
Diane von Furstenberg, fashion designer

For all the other "elite," click here:
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/big...
October 2, 2009 at 5:33 a.m.
Blessed4x (Rich Colson) says…

"grammaddy (Anonymous) says…

Whoopi was right, it was not rape rape only statutory, and by the way, the girl was not a virgin at the time. Not saying I condone what he did, but the victim wants to let it go so who are we to deny her any more embarrasment."

You, sir or madam, make me want to vomit. I certainly hope you are not a real grandparent. At this point I'm not certain you are human.
October 2, 2009 at 6:22 a.m.
rbwaa (anonymous) says…

Marion (Marion Lynn) says…

Bukhari (007.062.64) Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64:

Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Marion asks the supporters of Muslim:

“This is diferrent just how?”
===============================

Leave it to you to attempt to derail this blog to spout your bigoted attitudes. There are a multitude of christian sects/cults in the United States that do the same thing yet you do not vilify them.
October 2, 2009 at 8:46 a.m.
brujablanco (anonymous) says…

Gee, Marion, never thought I would see the day you 'd condone child molester. Tsk tsk.
October 2, 2009 at 1:19 p.m.
pantheon (anonymous) says…

From the excerpts I read from the testimony, it sounded like rape rape in addition to statutory rape. In fact, it sounded specifically like anal rape of a 13 year old.
On the other hand, the pitchforks and torches mentality I've been seeing in conjunction with the case suggest that people have what I would consider wrong concepts of justice.

Here's the breakdown as I understand it: He raped a 13 year old, was sentenced for statutory rape, served half that, then fled. I don't know much about "the law" but I would think the thing would be for him to finish his sentence for statutory and have a trial for whatever skipping bail is. If you guys are going to get all emotional about the justice system, just go put on a cape and DIY.
October 2, 2009 at 5:47 p.m.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…

Save

the

column

inch

.

Polansky

should

be

behind

bars

.
October 2, 2009 at 7 p.m.
justbegintowrite (Ronda Miller) says…

Seems to be you are blaming the victim here. Surely grown men have the ability to have self control and just say no....unless they have an illness.
October 2, 2009 at 8:09 p.m.
ferrislives (anonymous) says…

Marion Lynn = Roman Polanski's best friend and advocate; how sweet. Will you two go in a hot tub together?

Back to the subject and excluding the copying and pasting of previous drivel, Polanski is a rapist, pure and simple. If anyone questions the seriousness of what he did back then, here's a complete transcript from the trial: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/...

Marion, please try not to copy and paste only what you like, and it's awkward that you could still find a way to pull Obama into this topic. Obsess much?
October 2, 2009 at 9:54 p.m.
Fangorn (anonymous) says…

riverdrifter: "His mother was murdered by Nazis, his dad survived a concentration camp and Roman basically was a WWII street urchin. Later, his pregnant wife was murdered by Charlie Manson's slime. And he made great motion pictures: Rosemary's Baby, Chinatown (one of the greats) and The Pianist, also one of the greats."

The vast majority of people who suffer even great tragedy in their lives do not commit horrible criminal acts like this. And great talent or skill in some enterprise should not excuse such behavior. Mike Vick is an exceptional football player, but there has been more outrage over his cruel treatment of animals than riverdrifter shows over the fact that Roman Polansky **anally raped** a 13-year-old girl. I realize asterisks are an internet equivalent of shouting, but some here - and in Hollywood - seem to have a determined moral deafness that prevents them from understanding this.

Polansky lived in luxurious "exile" at posh estates in Europe for the last three decades because one of our alleged allies refused to extradite him back to the US to face sentencing for a crime to which he plead guilty. Giving him a cot, three meals a day and basic medical care until he dies in prison hardly seems like enough punishment for his deeds.
October 2, 2009 at 11:21 p.m.
ferrislives (anonymous) says…

yada yada yada - he RAPED a 13 year old girl. I'm not sure if you have a daughter Marion, but if you do (or a close female relative), how would you feel if it happened to her? Would you be happy with someone who copies and pastes parts of the story, instead of sticking with the facts that have remained the same over the years?

What he did was not only illegal, it was morally wrong in so many ways. And he's not above the law, no matter what others say, or how others try to act as a distraction.
October 2, 2009 at 11:50 p.m.
riverdrifter (anonymous) says…

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/200...

Roman,
Get to work and make another great movie.
What we're getting now is crap.
October 3, 2009 at 12:19 a.m.
igby (anonymous) says…

Ferrislives: That's some transcript. He's done!
October 3, 2009 at 4:10 a.m.
igby (anonymous) says…

The state of California or the Fed has a shock for him when he gets back here in the states. Since he ran and did not do his time. The state or fed can and add new charges of possession of child porn. The film he took is in evidence. The child porn laws can cover child porn that he possessed even when the law was not on the books.

Riverdrifter: you should read the fine print of the registration requirements for a sex offender. Public forms are within the laws ability to comprise promotion of illegal sex acts as a violation of the sex offender registration act. Lol.
October 3, 2009 at 4:28 a.m.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…

You just never know which side mario's gonna take in his crusade de jure.....

How

would

David

Irving

have

felt

about

this

?
October 3, 2009 at 6:24 a.m.
Fangorn (anonymous) says…

In this nation, we have a justice system, not a "victims' system". A victim cannot simply say, I want this to go away. Even if she sincerely means this and our justice system fails to prosecute Polansky's crime, this issue would still remain: a child rapist was allowed to go free with no real consequence or punishment. What message would that send to other rich and powerful people? Exactly this: Do whatever you want, flee if you're caught, then wait it out while the everyone forgets about justice. Is that the message you want sent? I sincerely hope not.
October 3, 2009 at 8:17 a.m.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…

Try

to

stay

on

track

,

gramps

.

This

thread

is

about

Polanski

.

You can read the transcript of the testimony at:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/...
October 3, 2009 at 9:02 a.m.
rbwaa (anonymous) says…

@ marion
you are again attempting to derail the issues that:
1) Polanski RAPED a child
2) Rape is a violent crime
3) Polanski fled the country to avoid his punishment
4) the prosecutor lying does not mitigate the guilt of Polanski raping a child
5) 32 years of avoidance does not mitigate the crime of rape
6) Justice requires that Polanski face his punishment in order to send the message to all rapists that punishment cannot be avoided by running away
October 3, 2009 at 9:10 a.m.
notjustastudent (anonymous) says…

Some of you feel you have valid points for his defense...all of which should be brought up at his sentencing hearing, which you seem to think is unecessary. It's not surprising hearing what people have to say in his defense, and unfortunately, if something like this happened to a lot of their relatives (of those defending him) it probably wouldn't change their minds. What probably would happen is that their relative, the victim, wouldn't say anything to them about it- this comes from personal experience. They would hide it, or not report it at all. And that is the saddest thing.

@rbwaa
You forgot to mention one thing that a lot of people are confused about/forgetting- he was not Sentenced to stauatory rape, but Pled Guilty. He admitted guilt! (regardless of why or if he actually did it, I don't care, he is guilty under the law now). Then ran away, like a coward. A coward that makes fantastic movies and had a really, really hard life, sure, but a guilty coward nonetheless.

Oh, and marion, I'll tell you how it's different-
Those things didn't happen on US soil, and are not punishable by US law. So shut it down, and bring it back on topic. Maybe if I say please? I won't hold my breath...
October 3, 2009 at 9:47 a.m.
notjustastudent (anonymous) says…

Marion- the US has tried multiple times to arrest Polansky. They couldn't get him extradited from France, so they had to file papers to corespond with trips he took outside of France. Getting all the paperwork completed and having it correspond with him actually show up when they thought he would took 32 years (the paperwork had to be filed each time they attempted, it couldn't just sit on file for decades). It had nothing to do with the Swiss, and everthing to do with the US trying to follow the law, unlike Polansky, who broke the law.
October 3, 2009 at 9:52 a.m.
notjustastudent (anonymous) says…

One more thing- if his case was so screwed up, that gives him the right to a new trial, not the right to flee the country and avoid facing his charges for 3 decades.
October 3, 2009 at 9:55 a.m.
artichokeheart (anonymous) says…

Sure the victim wants it to go away. Sadly it never will. Child sexual abuse scars are not forgotten over time. In 32 years the victim has made a life for herself in spite of that and with that many who know her may not be aware of the experience from 32 years ago. This coming back into focus will put her in the position of responding to questions from people and too the press will be there to get a response.

The problem here is that Roman Polanski is a child sexual abuser. That will never change. People who commit such acts cannot be cured.

No doubt Roman Polanski has had more than his share of heartache, but that does not excuse the crime he commited and he must pay his due.

So someone involved in the case lied. That often happens where situations involve a person of celebrity status. That does not alleviate the offender of his guilt. Laws are in place to protect the offender's rights in order to assure a fair trial. Roman Polanski has thumbed his nose at the justice system for far too long by avoiding this. These actions of avoidence by him cancel out any wrong doing on the part of another involved in the initial prosecution. Whatever lies have been told do not make him innocent. Bottom line he commited a crime against a young vulnerable child.

I don't care how many big names sign a petition on his behalf. If you look at the list you will see most( if not all) of them have benefited in some way by and through the work of Roman Polanski. I venture to guess most would support a person who can line their pockets.

Roman Polanski needs to pay the piper.
October 3, 2009 at 10:03 a.m.
notjustastudent (anonymous) says…

artichoke- I agree with you except for the whole bad actions cancelling eachother out thing. Definitely wrong. You could easily flip that statement around and say that the attorney and judges bad actions cancel out him fleeing. Luckily, that's not the way our system of laws works. I think what you intended to say was that his avoidance is the main issue and that the bad actions by others are a non-issue in regards to him fleeing? But you are so definitely correct in saying "whatever lies have been told do not make him innocent."
October 3, 2009 at 10:13 a.m.
Fangorn (anonymous) says…

Off-thread warning: This post is a response to a question posed by Marion. It is off-topic. Unless you are interested in this side thread, you may want to skip this post.

Marion: Sorry for the delay. Busy morning, but I do want to answer your question (asked a bit more delicately than earlier in the discussion). If Islam (or an odd Christian sect) practices marriage traditions that are outside US law on US soil, the practioners should be prosecuted. Muslims who emigrate from their homelands to the US know our laws. The sects that pop up here and there (like the one in Texas a number of months ago) also know the nation's laws. Living here - especially voluntarily, in the case of immigrants - means agreeing to abide by our laws.

Now if you are talking about Islamic practice in their home nations, this is a different matter. A sovereign nation has the right to its own laws and traditions, no matter how abhorrent they may be to us. Our only real choices in this matter are: 1) accept it while not liking it, 2) work with others to bring about internal reform in the offending nation or 3) invade that nation militarily and force our laws and traditions on them.

I hope this provides a clear answer to a relevant side question.
October 3, 2009 at 11:13 a.m.
artichokeheart (anonymous) says…

No I ment that. Marion asserts that because someone lied Polanski should walk on this. Polanski commited a crime then someone lied in to strengthen the case. After that Polanski went into hiding to avoid the consquences. Polanski still commited the crime and if we are to consider the reaction of the offical to the initial crime by Polanski, then Polanski fleeing has supported the initial subsequent actions by the court/others to bring him to justice.

Prosecution of child sex offender is difficult often these offenders get away with such crimes because the victims are children. maybe they are too young to verbalize or feel shame. The victim might identify with the perp. Sometimes those who involved in the legal process must be creative in order to nail thse offenders. I support putting sex offenders behind bars no matter what those in the system have to do to achieve it.
October 3, 2009 at 11:20 a.m.
rbwaa (anonymous) says…

One more thing: allowing Polanski to escape punishment sends the wrong message to victims of rape - that is, if you go through the emotional trauma of reporting the rape it makes no difference because he will just get away with it anyway. Victims need to know that everything possible will be done to punish the rapist.
October 3, 2009 at 11:42 a.m.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…

girlfriend

,

you've

lost

the

plot

entirely

.

Couldn't

you

post

all

your

randomness

over

on

your

own

stinking

pit

of

a

'forum'

?

BTW

,

still

having

a

wonderful

internet

life

.
October 3, 2009 at 3:39 p.m.
Godot (anonymous) says…

This interview of John Malkovich to publicize his movie, "Disgrace," illuminates the mindset of the Hollywood so-called creative talent:

"The book, which won the Booker Prize in 1999, is a bleak depiction of post-apartheid South Africa. In the movie, Malkovich stars as David Lurie, a professor who loses his position in disgrace after an affair with a student goes sour.

Well, in "disgrace," anyway. As Malkovich tells Renee Montagne, "Clearly [Lurie] rejects not just the politically correct mores about [his offense]; he really rejects the notion, it seems to me, that he did anything wrong." Malkovich says Coetzee offers one clue about why in his choice of a career for the professor: Until his downfall, Lurie teaches Romantic poetry.

"Probably if you spend your whole life reading Byron and Keats and Shelley, partaking of their worldview, then you might have a different moral compass than those who don't."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/st...

Substitute Byron and Keats and Shelley with the screenplays depicting violence, sex, drug use, deceit, blood and gore that these Hollywood so-called creative genius vomit onto the world, and you have the answer.

In their minds, morals equal being, "politically correct." That is why Whoopi believes, quite sincerely, that drugging a child, giving her alcohol, then forcibly raping her against her protestations is not "rape rape."

Interesting blog topic. Don't forget about the Light the Night walk tonight.
October 3, 2009 at 5:30 p.m.
rbwaa (anonymous) says…

thanks, snap, i needed that chuckle....
:>)
October 3, 2009 at 5:30 p.m.
Fangorn (anonymous) says…

Marion: An interesting, if a bit long, article. The largest flaw in the logic of the assertion is that extradition was sought, on several occasions. But the issue of timing was always a factor. Paperwork had to be filed to coincide with Polansky's visit to a country with which we had an extradition treaty. On at least one occasion, Polansky became aware of such efforts and changed his travel plans, avoiding the possibility of arrest. Far from being "arbitrary", this is a fine example of persistence in law enforcement.
October 4, 2009 at 9:25 a.m.