Top Leaderboard, Site wide
August 2, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


Give Kerry a Break




My Age of Anxiety


Truthdig Bazaar
Dateline Havana

Dateline Havana

By Reese Erlich
$17.90

more items

 
Arts and Culture

Sex, Drugs and Roman Polanski

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Jul 13, 2010
Polanski
AP / Franka Bruns

No more chalet arrest: Director Roman Polanski waves during a media event in Berlin in October 2006.

By David Coleman

Should a crime be viewed through a lens adjusted to the era during which the crime was committed—or viewed through a lens conformed to a later time, after social values and laws have changed?

This seems like an easy question to answer when the adjustment in the view of the crime’s seriousness is downward.

Take, for example, marijuana. Thirty years ago, possession of marijuana in California was punishable by a sentence to state prison. That was a sentence sometimes—even if infrequently—imposed. People who possessed marijuana for personal use in the ’70s were sent off to prison to serve “hard time” in comparison to a probationary, local county jail sentence.

Today, of course, one cannot be sentenced to prison in California for possessing marijuana for personal use. Indeed, since the passage of Proposition 36, a marijuana user cannot be sentenced to a day in jail. A fine of $100 is the maximum punishment. And if enough voters in California express a preference in November to legalize possession of marijuana, no punishment whatsoever will be exacted.

Now, test your opinion about bringing Roman Polanski to further justice with this mind experiment: Imagine that his doppelganger, let’s call him Truman Polanski, was arrested and an old, outstanding arrest warrant was found. Lo and behold, assume it was discovered that Truman had not served his prison sentence for a conviction of marijuana possession imposed 40 years ago! 

Would the public, would the Los Angeles district attorney, would conservative law-and-order advocates argue that Truman Polanski should serve a prison term for the drug crime he committed—but has not as yet been punished for—under the law as it existed in 1978?

I think you know what the answer would be. And that answer frames the Polanski sentencing problem.

The 34-year-old lens through which we view Roman Polanski’s crime is clouded because society’s viewpoint about his “sex crime” has swung in the opposite direction from that of a drug crime. Standards for evaluating whether sex occurred consensually have evolved in the past four decades on campus, in the workplace and in the law. 

Even the language employed to discuss serious crime has changed. Despite the fact that the same office he now heads agreed to a plea of a charge of having underage sex, or statutory rape as it was then called, Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley now describes the case as one where, “Mr. Polanski [was] … convicted of serious child sex charges.”

Really, Mr. Cooley? That does not appear to have been the view of your office in 1978. The Los Angeles district attorney’s office agreed to a plea deal then that probably would result in a probationary sentence for what Cooley now calls a “serious child sex” offense. 

The facts of the case haven’t changed. But attitudes, language and the politics of crime have escalated quite drastically when a sexual offense is involved. Thus, the question remains: If society’s view of the crime changes, should the offender be punished under the new, more condemning view or the more tolerant one prevalent at the time of the crime?

What would have happened in 1978 in adjudication of Polanski’s case?

I was a new deputy public defender in a Northern California county in 1978 when Polanski was charged. I have recently read the police reports, including that of a Sgt. Phillip VanAtter, who was last heard from as the investigating detective in the O.J. Simpson case and who, Zelig-like, seems to crop up in every notorious West Los Angeles crime investigation. 

On the one hand, based on the facts from that investigation that the prosecutor could prove beyond a reasonable doubt, sex with an underage girl (aka statutory rape) would have been a slam dunk. On the other hand, what about sex with a precocious teenager in Jack Nicholson’s hot tub when the girl’s mother had encouraged Polanski to use her daughter for a risqué photo shoot? Based on any theory of criminal liability—other than that it was a crime to have sex with a girl of her age—it was far from a slam dunk. A trial would have produced the exact outcome the DA obtained by agreement: a conviction on the underage sex charge and nothing more.  Everyone, including the DA and the judge, would have shared that opinion.

What role did Polanski’s celebrity play then?

An indigent public defender client with no sex offense record would most likely not have been sent to prison on an underage sex conviction plea in 1978. Need I say that an award-winning Hollywood director—who barely escaped the Holocaust and whose pregnant wife, Sharon Tate, was slain in the Hollywood Hills by the Manson family—is far from the profile of a defendant who would have been sent to prison in 1978 for the crime of statutory rape?

Based on 35 years of experience as a California criminal defense attorney, my professionally educated guess is that the agreement between the judge, the deputy DA and defense counsel for Polanski was that he was only going to prison for a 90-day diagnostic observation period. In that era, the 90-day diagnostic was used by judges (and acceded to by prosecution and defense) to give a defendant a two-to-three-month “taste of steel,” in the criminal justice argot of the day. 


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 23, 2010 at 6:34 pm Link to this comment

David Ehrenstein,

Good riddence, light a candle for Roman at the next fan club meeting.

Don’t do the crime if you cant do the time.

Report this

By christian96, July 23, 2010 at 5:12 pm Link to this comment

Perhaps the child porn perverts in the Pentagon
could join Polanski in Switzerland.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 23, 2010 at 5:50 am Link to this comment

“Are they so quick to excuse Bernie Madoff? Or Scooter Libby?”

Roman Polanski affected international finance and the CIA?

“Bernie and Scooter were non violent offenders whose actions most likely caused the deaths of others.  Polanski is a violent offender of crimes against women and as a high profile figure serves as an example to our youth.  We don’t want that example to be one of privilage and connections over justice.”

And until he’s flayed alive no example will be set.

I don’t know about you, but I’m done here.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 23, 2010 at 3:11 am Link to this comment

Actually, Roman Polanski has to LIVE WITH IT!!!!!!
He’s not off the hook while he draws breath.

Inherit, we see eye to eye on this.  I’t a clear cut issue of right and wrong, morally and criminally.

Bernie and Scooter were non violent offenders whose actions most likely caused the deaths of others.  Polanski is a violent offender of crimes against women and as a high profile figure serves as an example to our youth.  We don’t want that example to be one of privilage and connections over justice.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 22, 2010 at 8:51 pm Link to this comment

PH:
This is one time you and I are in lock-step.  I see all these rationalizations that try to excuse a 40+ year old man having sex with a 13 year-old child, KNOWING she was 13, and pleading guilty to it.
“She’s a whore”
“Her mother sent her to him”
“She was precocious and fully developed”
“The 16 year old other victim is a liar”
“The victim doesn’t want the case re-opened”
“The Swiss court found something wrong with the extradition request”
“Only those who are child molesters themselves are so quick to condemn Polanski” (this one is particularly odious)
“‘“A separate charge of fleeing justice remains to be prosecuted.’

And won’t be.

LIVE WITH IT!!!!!!!!!!! “

Are they so quick to excuse Bernie Madoff? Or Scooter Libby?

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 22, 2010 at 6:07 pm Link to this comment

“A separate charge of fleeing justice remains to be prosecuted.”

And won’t be.

LIVE WITH IT!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 22, 2010 at 5:33 pm Link to this comment

The prosecution for the rape charge is done, we are in the sentencing phase. 

Unless the state wants to reneg on the plea deal because Polanski fled and thereby the plea deal is void, no one has to testify.

A separate charge of fleeing justice remains to be prosecuted.

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 22, 2010 at 5:19 pm Link to this comment

You are STILL not addressing the fact that the victim does not want this case reopened. I find it grotesquely fascinating that her wishes are not to be taken into account. In doing so you no more recognize her personhood than Roman Polanski did 32 years ago. Your interest in prosecution—your presumption it would be successful, which is not at all a given—and punishment trumps all, and the victim be damned.

I will once again state I have no sympathy with ANY adult male who has sex with underage girls. I also have no sympathy with those whose own peculiar drives make this case so phenomenally important to them, quite out of proportion to the significance of the crime.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 22, 2010 at 4:08 pm Link to this comment

Tobysgirl, I am a law and order type when it comes to crimminal sexual assault on children.

Irregardless of how others attempt to frame this as ‘her fault’, Polanski was a 30+ year old adult male at the time who should of known better and controlled his actions, they were crimminal and he knew it. 

The burden of responsibility is his and his alone.

Testimony and depositions were given, which Polanski did not dispute.  He plead guilty and was placed under mental evaluation (who rapes 13 year olds?), he fled prior to recieving his sentence.

Whether or not the victim was paid off, became born again or owns a brothel is not relevant since this was a criminal and not a civil action, meaning it was a feloneous crime against all of us.

I for one am not letting him off the hook and I don’t give a fig about his fan club.

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 22, 2010 at 2:27 pm Link to this comment

Maybe for the benefit of the guy who thought I had better marry Toby or go to hell, I should say Toby did not see The Ghostwriter with me. He wanted to go, but doesn’t fit in the front seat of the truck, and I knew he would eat all the popcorn in the theatre, including what they hadn’t popped yet.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 22, 2010 at 2:12 pm Link to this comment

The character Pierce Borsnan plays is obviouslyTony Blair. There is no Cheney character as such in the film, but the entire Iraq fiasco is his doing—especially in relation to “renditioning,” which is the chief crime the Brosnan chacter wants covered up and the previous ghostwriter was murdered for learnign the truth about.

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 22, 2010 at 1:19 pm Link to this comment

David, we saw The Ghostwriter and loved it. Which one was the Cheney character?

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 22, 2010 at 1:17 pm Link to this comment

PatrickHenry, I wouldn’t call a 13-year-old child a whore, though I call most of our elected representaives whores. However, you need to realize how many children out there are being neglected, abused, exploited, and made into drug runners, prostitutes, caretakers for their parents, etc.

They are, unfortunately, NOT innocents. My foster daughter, who was 13 when we fostered her, couldn’t wipe her bottom properly at that age, but knew all there was to know about sex and drugs. She had seen more violence personally than I have. And her mother wasn’t pimping her out. Yet. There is no comparison between children like this—who are often dead inside—and a child raised in a normally dysfunctional family. I don’t know how the victim in this case is doing now, but I do know she does not want to revisit this case, something that you law-and-order types would force her to do (we don’t yet hold trials in this country where the witnesses are excused from examination and cross-examination). So your concern for her strikes me as phony because you are NOT listening to HER wishes.

christian96, I suspect I know the Gospels (I am far more interested in the Bible’s prophets than in laws) better than you do. Your obsession with condemning others to hell (what was that about “Judge not”?) is perverse and SICK. I suspect you fantasize sitting in the Seat of Judgment yourself and condemning all those you don’t like to hell, which once again strikes me as blasphemous. You constantly prosyletize, and what did Jesus say about prosyletizers and their converts? That their converts are twice as much children of hell as the prosyletizers themselves. Not a very nice statement.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 22, 2010 at 5:47 am Link to this comment

Anytime anyone posts “Nor do I care” it’s perfectly obvious that the opposite is the case.

As for Tom Cruise, he threatened to sue me some time ago

http://www.ehrensteinland.com/htmls/library/tomcruiseletters.shtml

He’s as deluded as you are.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 22, 2010 at 3:32 am Link to this comment

David Ehrenstein

Maybe if Polanski made a film starring Tom Cruise, you would feel different.  Not that Tom Cruise would threaten to sue you personally for your fictitious commentary, would he?

It’s apparent by your inane comments regarding 13 year olds and the evil they do, that you don’t have any children.  Good thing, let the illness end with you.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 21, 2010 at 8:38 pm Link to this comment

So I spelled his name wrong.  BFD.  And you defend his raping of a child.

I don’t know how soundly Roman Polanski sleeps. Nor do I care.

I don’t know how soundly YOU sleep, and I don’t care about that either.

You are SO glad this rapist is now free. You think a 13 year old child can be condemned as a “whore”.  Your moral compass is so fucked up I’d feel sorry for you—if I felt you deserved my pity, which you don’t.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 21, 2010 at 8:05 pm Link to this comment

He sleeps sounder than you do, dear.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 21, 2010 at 5:45 pm Link to this comment

Re: David Ehrenstein, July 20 at 11:11 pm #

“Polansky is Abraham (“Body and Soul,” “Force of Evil,” “Odds Against Tomorrow,” “Tell Them Willie Boys (spellcheck?) is Here,” “Romance of a Horse Thief”—films you obviously despise)

Polanski is Roman (“Kinife (spellcheck?) in the Water,” “Repulsion< “Cul-de-Sac,” “The Fearless Vampire Killers,” “Chinatown,” “Death and the Miaden (spellcheck?),” “THe (spellcheck?) Pianist,” “The Ghostwriter”—again films you obviously despise)’”

I see someone has the readers digest book set of Polanski fiction.  YAWN.

He’s guilty and belongs in a cell regardless of what the Hollywood hacks blather in his defense.  If he roams free I hope paranoia haunts his every waking moment that a Blackwater goon lurks behind every bush ready to render him to the U.S.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 21, 2010 at 5:53 am Link to this comment

Polanski doesn’t make hack films.

And he’s not going to jail.

LIVE WITH IT!!!!!!!!

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 21, 2010 at 2:54 am Link to this comment

By David Ehrenstein, July 20 at 6:12 pm #

“So he needs to be sentenced for TWO crimes”.

Actually the 6 felony counts he was initially charged with and the added count of fleeing from justice.

This should give professional Hollywood hack-critics fuel to report on for years.  I expect the studios and agents will deny access to those who don’t tow the studio line on condemning the victim, given the poodle circus Hollywood is.

Whats up with all the hack films?

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 20, 2010 at 7:11 pm Link to this comment

“Your moral compass is as fucked up as that other defender of Polansky-the-rapist.”

First LEARN TO FUCKING SPELL!!!!!

Polansky is Abraham (“Body and Soul,” “Force of Evil,” “Odds Against Tomorrow,” “Tell Them Willie Boys is Here,” “Romance of a Horse Thief”—films you obviously despise)

Polanski is Roman (“Kinife in the Water,” “Repulsion< “Cul-de-Sac,” “The Fearless Vampire Killers,” “Chinatown,” “Death and the Miaden,” “THe Pianist,” “The Ghostwriter”—again films you obviously despise)

“I don’t see her as my child. That’s more bullshit on your part.”

No that’s bullshit on YOUR part.
YOU’RE the one who brought up your son.

“But as a parent I seek to protect my children from such an awful situation. And I empathize with children who are in that position.”

Cue Alfred Newman and the 20th Century-Fox orchestra.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 20, 2010 at 6:05 pm Link to this comment

“a whore” you called her.  How can a 13 year old child be a whore? It’s not possible.  She may be used for sex, may even be so confused as to solicit it, the way an adult prostitute does, but she is not a “whore”.  She is a VICTIM, and every one who sells her body and every man who screws her is raping her and deserves to be treated as the worst kind of rapist.

Your moral compass is as fucked up as that other defender of Polansky-the-rapist. It ain’t cause he’s a Jew—I’m a Jew. It’s because he’s a rapist of children, who’s arrogant enough to think he doesn’t have to live with it.

I don’t see her as my child. That’s more bullshit on your part. But as a parent I seek to protect my children from such an awful situation. And I empathize with children who are in that position.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 20, 2010 at 3:23 pm Link to this comment

Ah yes, the “I know you are but what am I?” defense.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 20, 2010 at 2:48 pm Link to this comment

“Manure in which nothing may grow”.

A statement made in the link you provided which characterizes your comment completely.

Report this

By christian96, July 20, 2010 at 2:48 pm Link to this comment

Tobysgirl—-You should keep your comments to an
area you know something about.  You obviously don’t
know much about the Bible or Christianity.  Since
you and David seem to heading to the same place
perhaps it would be a good idea to play together.
Let David ride Toby.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 20, 2010 at 2:12 pm Link to this comment

“He needs to serve a just sentence like all the others who commit sex acts on minors, with added time in for rape.”

So he needs to be sentenced for TWO crimes.

Why stop at two? Obviously he’s the most evil Jewish dwarf who ever drew breath.

Consider the execution of Damiens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLC9rShGXt0

Right up your alley Patrick Henry.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 20, 2010 at 1:56 pm Link to this comment

“I believe it’s a reaction to the lynch mob’s persistent characterization of Polanski’s deeds as forcible drugging and rape of a child, as if Samantha Geimer had been a five-year-old at the time.” 

“as if”?

ITW’s right, it is seldom one meets those whose moral compass is so fucked up it’s a wonderment they can find the keyboard to defend Polanski.

Polanski is guilty. He needs to serve a just sentence like all the others who commit sex acts on minors, with added time in for rape.

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 20, 2010 at 1:16 pm Link to this comment

This is almost enough to make me into a radical agnostic, which is:

I don’t know if there is a god or not, and

YOU DON’T EITHER.

Quit forcing the beliefs in your head, which are fine right where they are, onto other people, christian96. You can think whatever you want, but you know one surefire test of faith?

Those who actually possess it don’t talk about it. Only those who are deeply unsure within themselves have to foist it onto others. Please see the gospels about PRAYING IN SECRET.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 20, 2010 at 8:32 am Link to this comment

No he’s Gore Vidal—which is why I trust him.

Report this

By christian96, July 20, 2010 at 7:48 am Link to this comment

David—-Your spirit survives death.  Gore Vidal is
correct in that we should try to change the evils
in this world but as to his assertion that there is
no other world he is flatout “WRONG.”  I hope you are
not trusting in Gore Vidal for your spiritual
development.  Gove Vidal IS NOT GOD!

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 20, 2010 at 5:28 am Link to this comment

“Next life”? Sorry dear. The brain doesn’t survive decompsition. This is it. Make the most of it. Or as Gore Vidal once said “Alas no other world. This is the one to change.”

Report this

By christian96, July 19, 2010 at 8:43 pm Link to this comment

David—-Enjoy this life as much as possible.  You
are not going to like the next life.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 19, 2010 at 8:37 pm Link to this comment

You’re the one that’s wacky, Inherit—converting a female Hollywood whore into your own male child.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 19, 2010 at 8:04 pm Link to this comment

I believe it’s a reaction to the lynch mob’s persistent characterization of Polanski’s deeds as forcible drugging and rape of a child, as if Samantha Geimer had been a five-year-old at the time. 
***************************

This is truly sickening. Anarcissie, I have no idea where your morals went.

My 15 year old is taller than his mother, nearly as tall as me and (occasionally) shaves. Smart, talented, empathetic, he’s STILL a child, easily susceptible to being victimized by adults as authority figures.  Understand? As a child he is SUSCEPTIBLE.

Polansky took this “precocious” 13 year old and raped her—and admitted it.  Yet not only does Anarcissie persist in defending him, she insists she is NOT defending him!

How much wackier can you get? She’s almost ready to be the next Sarah Palin!

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 19, 2010 at 8:05 am Link to this comment

Roman Polanski carries no weight in Hollywood at all anymore. He’s part of a previous generation. Brett Ratner gave him an acting role in “Rush Hour 2” but that’s about it. The industry is no longer geared to his sort of filmmaking. had the whole thing never happened and the only “clouds hanginf over his head” were being a Holocaust survivor and a Manson victime, the director of “Chinatown” woudl be exceedinly hard-pressed to make anything an indistry geared to big-budget cartoons would be interested in seeing.

Add to that his antipathy to Dick Cheney (conveyed with supreme wit and insight in “The Ghostwriter”) and you’ve got yourself a pariah.

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 19, 2010 at 5:57 am Link to this comment

Why this venom toward David? And, one more question for you, David. I can’t imagine that Roman Polanski actually carries a lot of weight in Hollywood, not known for its obeisance to European and independent directors. Am I wrong about this? In fact, I would guess that those engaging in their own questionable sexual practices would be gung-ho for his immediate conviction without trial followed by boiling in oil.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 18, 2010 at 5:35 pm Link to this comment

My what a vivid imagination you have.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 18, 2010 at 4:18 pm Link to this comment

David Ehrenstein

I’m sure glad I don’t have to kiss any Hollywood producer ass to get and keep a job, unlike you.

Given your bio, I imagine you like it.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 18, 2010 at 2:17 pm Link to this comment

“Jezebel” is absolutely right, Patrick Henry. Hollywood is in a state of terror. Anyone who dares to so much as THINK of speaking out against Roman Polanski will be immediately subject to a Ninja Hit Squad who will short-sheet their beds.

Report this

By christian96, July 18, 2010 at 1:26 pm Link to this comment

Would Roman Polanski be prosecuted if we had a one
world goverment? Would there be a court for trying
criminals who flee from one country to another?

Report this

By christian96, July 18, 2010 at 1:19 pm Link to this comment

Tobysgirl—-I’m afraid you are correct about the
sins of many Christians sitting in Church on Sunday.
The last time I heard the divorce rate among Christians was over 50% just as is the rate among
antichristians.  Someday true Christianity will return as it was in the days of Yeshua.  Sabbath will
be on Saturday, the dietary laws will be kept, and
the festivals will be kept instead of Christmas and
Easter.  Easter was only mentioned once in the Bible
and it was mistranslated.  Should have been Passover.
The only birthday celebration I can find is when
John the Baptist lost his head because Herod’s wife
didn’t like him.  Herod was turned on by her daughter
which would have been his step-daughter.  Herod got
drunk at his birthday party and ask her to dance
for him.  He promised her anything she wanted if she
would dance.  I imagine his daily thoughts were
fantasies about her.  The girl’s mother said, “Go
ahead and dance and when Herod asks what you want
tell him the head of John the Baptist.”  She danced
and after Herod was turned on she ask for the head
of John.  Herod delivered it on a platter.  Sort of
like Roman Polanski in a way except Polanski is
definitely no John the Baptist.

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 18, 2010 at 12:27 pm Link to this comment

christian96, still not worried about YOUR judge. And no, I’m not married to Toby, though he thinks so. He’s a 1700-pound Belgian gelding who thinks he’s Stud of the Century. Really, the things Christians come up with, marriage to horses! Living in sin! The only people I know around here who are open adulterers (everyone in town knows they screw around) and who have five children by five different fathers call themselves ... Christians!

Anarcissie: “you are quite right—no one is deserving of sexual exploitation at any age—and in any case the savagery of the lynch mob condemns itself and the people who participate in it.” That about sums it up. I have no sympathy for adults who have sex with children, but the tone here has been, as you put it, savage. You’d think Polanski was the first, last, and only adult male to have sex with a 13-year-old. So why him, I kept asking.

David, I agree that much of this venom is antisemitic; what else can explain the explosive rage that Polanski incites? No one has chosen to address my comments about adult heterosexual males and their interest in pubescent girls, interestingly enough. That’s why I always suspect such righteous indignation: What exactly does the lynch mob get up to in its spare time?

I’m actually a Christian (among other things) and Yeshua bar Yosef was a Jew, not a Christian, never intended to found a religion, and wouldn’t believe the people who go around today muddying his teachings. All the scholars at the Jesus Seminar, including the conservative ones, agree that the Gospel of John was not said by someone known as “Jesus.” Christianity as a state religion, rather than a cult, was founded by the Emperor Constantine who, among other charming deeds, murdered various family members, including his own son. How great to found a religion incorporating many Roman practices, including the soldiers’ god, Mithras, who was killed and rose three days later. Sunday, really!

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, July 17, 2010 at 10:00 pm Link to this comment

REDHORSE, July 17 at 4:01 pm:

‘This is not the first Polanski article I’ve encountered where the girl is described as “precocious”. Is this some sort of hair splitting rationalization, that makes this “Lolita”, somehow different, and more deserving of sexual exploitation, than other girls? ...’

I believe it’s a reaction to the lynch mob’s persistent characterization of Polanski’s deeds as forcible drugging and rape of a child, as if Samantha Geimer had been a five-year-old at the time.  This modification of the story then releases them to demand savage punishments, like life imprisonment, torture, rape, castration, and death.  It’s an unfortunate and mistaken reaction, because you are quite right—no one is deserving of sexual exploitation at any age—and in any case the savagery of the lynch mob condemns itself and the people who participate in it.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 17, 2010 at 7:36 pm Link to this comment

We Have Entered Fugue State.

Report this

By christian96, July 17, 2010 at 7:04 pm Link to this comment

David—-Don’t try to turn the tables on me.  In some
of your posts you almost seem childish.  So I’ll
pull the old childish game on you.  I ask you first!
What is a Jew?  Na! Na! Na! Na!

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 17, 2010 at 6:52 pm Link to this comment

Polanski fled the US out of fear and fear alone.

No altruistic motives there, fear of the magic negro in the shower.  Prisons accord special treatment for child rapists.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 17, 2010 at 4:35 pm Link to this comment

“American televised mass marketing and film is the major destructor of American childhood and one of it’s greatest pornographers. Its’ trillion dollar investment in destroying parental and adult moral authority for the sake of profit, is criminal, and,  a taboo topic for the MSM.”

Quite true. And there is nothing more pornographic than Nacy grace the CNN sob sister, coveirng missing and murdered children night after night.

“This is a gratuitous distraction from real American criminality. No one gives a #@%K about the girl. They yammer about rich boy Polanski (Perhaps Manson was right—they were pigs.) “

This is PRECISELY why Polanski fled the country.You’d have made an ideal juror for Steve Cooley.

Obviously you feel Pasolini ran his car over his own head. Correct?

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 17, 2010 at 4:25 pm Link to this comment

Your inability to read is also well-documentaed Patrick Henry.

Are you going to accuse me of being a self-hating negro?

Report this

By REDHORSE, July 17, 2010 at 12:01 pm Link to this comment

This is not the first Polanski article I’ve encountered where the girl is described as “precocious”. Is this some sort of hair splitting rationalization, that makes this “Lolita”, somehow different, and more deserving of sexual exploitation, than other girls?  This article, and posters comments, reflects how sexually and emotionally wounded, confused and manipulated Americans are. Only in a land of perpetual half-adults could the line between adult responsibility and child sexual abuse become so blurred.

      American televised mass marketing and film is the major destructor of American childhood and one of it’s greatest pornographers. Its’ trillion dollar investment in destroying parental and adult moral authority for the sake of profit, is criminal, and,  a taboo topic for the MSM. Our culture despises innocence, sees it as weakness, and, exploits it. The sado-masochistic revenge fantasies voiced here speak volumes about the American psyche. Fascism is about absolute power, domination, and the violation of innocence. We’ve all been emotionally,  politically and financially raped, and abused. The process continues. Look at the repressed rage boiling below the surface of this discussion. This manufactured capitalist culture doesn’t care about the adult OR the child. It in fact, is paranoid, that the family may possess power and act.

      Child prostitution. Blind political ambition. A “for sale” legal system. The whore MSM. A sick in the soul movie maker. A self-righteous, wounded, hypocritical, exploited populace. A young woman who just wants to forget. Truth so twisted, no one knows what to believe. It’s so—US. And, WE are so profligate.


      This is a gratuitous distraction from real American criminality. No one gives a #@%K about the girl. They yammer about rich boy Polanski (Perhaps Manson was right—they were pigs.) but allow a mutlti-million dollar porn industry, to exploit the teenage human blowback, of the Fascist destruction, of the last great Democratic Nation. Human trafficking ascends.  American life is cheap. Meanwhile, President O gives the Bush/Cheney thugs a walk and the “gold sacks” theives violate the law with impunity.

      Don’t you remember Orwells 1984? The torturers knew victory was theirs, when the poor powerless citizen, at last gave up his dignity and humanity, by betraying, the last vestige of human love within him, when he uttered the words: “DO IT TO HER.”

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 17, 2010 at 11:43 am Link to this comment

Another Polanski film?

Ehrenstein, your renown as a Hollywood homosexual news critic speaks volumes for your position on Polanski.  Your racism is also well documented.

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/19/opinion/oe-ehrenstein19

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 17, 2010 at 11:22 am Link to this comment

Here’s the trial of your dreams Patrick Henry!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAHQKYp90oA&feature=related

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 17, 2010 at 11:03 am Link to this comment

“He methodically sought to have sex with this girl and demonstrated premeditation to do so.”

Her mother METHODICALLY and with PREMEDITATION made her daughter available to Polanski.

“Ehrenstein, the only persons I know of who happen to be Jewish and support Polanski in this crime are those who are in the Hollywood culture, who make their money off of it some way or another, like you.”

Ah yes—JEWS and MONEY. Anti-Semitism’s Old Sweet Song. 

” A crime against that 13 year old girl is a crime against my 13 year old girl.”

You’re clearly suffering from delutional paranoia.

Get help.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 17, 2010 at 10:26 am Link to this comment

Because Polanski had a unfortunate past doesn’t excuse him for his actions against the 13 year old.

He methodically sought to have sex with this girl and demonstrated premeditation to do so.

The court case is done, he pled guilty, all that remains is returning him to the US and his final sentencing.

Ehrenstein, the only persons I know of who happen to be Jewish and support Polanski in this crime are those who are in the Hollywood culture, who make their money off of it some way or another, like you.

I have read posts relating to Polanski from extreme Jewish zionist posters like Peter Knopfler who would throw him to the wolves or to more moderate and sane poster like ITW, who like myself would like to see justice served.  A crime against that 13 year old girl is a crime against my 13 year old girl.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 17, 2010 at 9:53 am Link to this comment

“Polanski is famous and a pervert who hurt a child to satisfy his perversion.”

BULLSHIT.

Love the “famous and a pervert.” I imagine you believe Pasolini ran himself over with his own car.

“I didn’t even KNOW Polanski was Jewish all these years until his arrest came up for discussion here a few months ago.”

That indicates you know nothing about his life or his work—yet still fancy you can speak with authoirty about the Geimar affair.

Did you know his mother died in the extermination camps and that he escaped from the Krakow ghtto with his life? Obviously you haven’t seen “The Pianist.”

“Polansky has FLAUNTED his evasion of American law.  I have no sympathy for him.”

In the immortal words of Mel Brooks (via Zero Mostel) “FLAUNT IT, BABY—FLAUNT IT!!!!!”

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 17, 2010 at 8:27 am Link to this comment

David Ehrenstein, July 16 at 1:48 pm #

“What is it about Polanski that gets all these people fired up? I’m sure they could find cases in their own communities of grown men having sex with 13-year-olds in the 1970s (the 1980s, the 1990s, 2000+) and getting away with it.”


Indeed. And almost all of them were Catholic priests.

“Why is Polanski such a trigger?”

Short, brilliant, and Jewish.
**************************************

Bullshit. Polanski is famous and a pervert who hurt a child to satisfy his perversion.

I didn’t even KNOW Polanski was Jewish all these years until his arrest came up for discussion here a few months ago.  My two problems with him being a fellow Jew was:

1) The anti-Semites MAY use that against all Jews (There’s been no evidence of THAT on TruthDig, for all the OTHER attacks on Jews here).

2) Fellow Jews wouldn’t look at what he did but claim he’s a victim of anti-Semitism.  He isn’t.

Polansky has FLAUNTED his evasion of American law.  I have no sympathy for him

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 17, 2010 at 8:11 am Link to this comment

You tell me.

(I can hardly wait. )

Report this

By christian96, July 17, 2010 at 6:48 am Link to this comment

David—-What is a Jew?

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 17, 2010 at 5:26 am Link to this comment

Anti-semite is as anti-semite does.

Jews devoted to the mythical Gallilean carpenter are not Jews.

Report this

By christian96, July 16, 2010 at 8:12 pm Link to this comment

David—-I just returned from Shabbat services on
Friday night.  More than 90% of the congregation
are Jews who believe in Jesus as Messiah.  Saturady
morning I will return for Torah studies.  How can
you possibly deduce I am ALL anti-semite?

Report this

By ofersince72, July 16, 2010 at 8:07 pm Link to this comment

Sex, Drugs, and Roman Polanski….....

  86 comments   to   date….........

      impressive

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 16, 2010 at 6:43 pm Link to this comment

I’m half Jewish.

And you’re ALL Anti-Semite.

Report this

By christian96, July 16, 2010 at 4:17 pm Link to this comment

Tobysgirl—-You said, “I don’t believe in THE judge.”
Well, I hate to break this to you but it doesn’t
really matter what you believe.  You will die some
day and meet THE judge. I hope you and Toby are
married and not living in sin.


David Ehrenstein—-I wasn’t a prisoner in Chino.
If you read my post at 12:50 a.m., July 15th, you’ll
find out why I visited Roman Polanski at Chino. Is
Ehrenstein Jewish?  If so you should be pleased to
know Jesus said, “I have come for the Jews.”

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 16, 2010 at 3:51 pm Link to this comment

“Alot of folks out there are angry with the Swiss and want to see him back in the U.S. to face justice once again.”

TOUGH SHIT!!!!!

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 16, 2010 at 2:35 pm Link to this comment

Polanski is still on the wanted list and will have to serve up to three years if the prosecutors still want to abide by the plea bargin.  Since he fled, the agreement may be considered as null and void and he would face the 6 felony counts he was originally charged with.

Alot of folks out there are angry with the Swiss and want to see him back in the U.S. to face justice once again.

http://online.wsj.com/community/groups/europes-question-day-695/topics/do-you-agree-swiss-governments?dj_vote=11989

Majority rules, Polanski loses.

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 16, 2010 at 1:40 pm Link to this comment

christian96, I don’t believe in THE judge. By most people’s lights, I would be considered an atheist, no old man in the sky making pronouncements and pulling strings for me, thank you. I am a deeply religious person, but find picturing a human judge judging people after death to be blasphemous as it reduces whatever God is to some old fart in robes.

I have no idea how Polanski feels about his bad behavior; I don’t think I know anyone who feels their behavior when young is necessarily something they want exposed to the entire world.

I’ve been far more interested in trying to comprehend how mass murderers, such as Bush and Obama, live with themselves. Very interesting hearing John Wayne Gacy’s sister describing her brother confessing to her, then later saying he only killed one or two of the men buried in his basement. Isn’t the human mind a fascinating thing?

David, christian96 was in Chino trying to get Polanski to make a movie. He obviously holds an enormous grudge, googles everything about Polanski, then spouts his belief system, which includes thinking that all people who describe themselves as Christian are stellar characters. Really kind of sad.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 16, 2010 at 12:37 pm Link to this comment

What were you in Chino for “Christian96”? Rape or theft?

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 16, 2010 at 12:30 pm Link to this comment

BINGO! And the fact that Polanski said as much only enraged them more.

Report this

By christian96, July 16, 2010 at 12:28 pm Link to this comment

If anyone is entertaining fantasies of raping a
young child you should be aware of what Jesus had
to say about such thoughts and behaviors.  The only
time Jesus suggested that people tied a rope around
their neck and a rock on the other end and jump in
the water to commit suicide was when they harm youngsters.  I wish I would have known that at the
time in the 1970’s when I spoke with Polanski at
Chino prison but I didn’t.  It was around that time
that I seriously began reading the Bible.  He may
escape justice by our legal system but he does have
to die someday and face judgment by THE judge. I’m
afraid being Jewish and a famous film personality
will not help him.

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 16, 2010 at 11:30 am Link to this comment

Ah, so he’s Jewish. We weren’t sure. My husband, who sometimes takes care of a quadriplegic who fumes about Tiger Woods, says it’s all about jealousy. Men are simply jealous of another man who has had what they want (Polanski?) or can only dream about (Woods?).

This is why I still think these rabid commenters are sitting at home wishing they could be screwing an adolescent girl, and are outraged that a SHORT, BRILLIANT, JEWISH movie director might have done so.

Report this

By doctor benway, July 16, 2010 at 10:36 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Prosecution for “pimping and pandering” the LA cops threatened the mother of the girl, who, knowing the truth of the matter, agreed to “cooperate” with the cops. Yes, the acts, all of them, were ill advised and common, but so is a political witch-hunt decades old. Let Polanski be

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 16, 2010 at 10:34 am Link to this comment

I’m sure she’s very happy that Polanski hasn’t been extradicted and there will never be a trial at which she, and more important her mother (who sells real estate in Hawaii), will have to testify—and face cross-examination.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, July 16, 2010 at 10:25 am Link to this comment

David Ehrenstein, July 16 at 12:07 pm:

‘Cooley can posture all he wants to, Anarcissie. But at the end of the day he hasn’t extradicted him and Polanski is back at work making films and living his life.’

But Cooley’s got his votes.  Polanski has his movies.  And the lynch mob has something to get all sanctimonious and vindictive about, without ever having to have their fantasies reality-tested.  So everyone should be happy, except poor Samantha Geimer.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 16, 2010 at 9:48 am Link to this comment

“What is it about Polanski that gets all these people fired up? I’m sure they could find cases in their own communities of grown men having sex with 13-year-olds in the 1970s (the 1980s, the 1990s, 2000+) and getting away with it.”


Indeed. And almost all of them were Catholic priests.

“Why is Polanski such a trigger?”

Short, brilliant, and Jewish.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, July 16, 2010 at 8:39 am Link to this comment

wildflower, July 16 at 11:50 am:

‘Re Anarcisse: “How come you don’t care about the legal processes which preceded Polanski’s flight?  Why are they so totally irrelevant?”

What legal processes preceding Polanski’s flight are you referencing? ...’

Those processes leading up to and including his guilty plea, which the lynch mob insists on rewriting, apparently in order to excite itself into the imagining of grotesque punishments.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, July 16, 2010 at 8:24 am Link to this comment

If anyone out there is really interested in the sexual abuse of minors, my Congresswoman, Carolyn Maloney, has a bill before the House that would provide Federal money in the form of block grants to states and localities wishing to set up facilities that would enable teenagers being forced into prostitution to escape from their pimps (who are sometimes their parents or guardians) and from the system in general.  As it stands they are often treated as criminals.  The amount of money is trivial given the estimated size of the problem, but at least it’s something.  Maybe members of the lynch mob could consider taking a moment away from the joys of fulminating sanctimoniously about Polanski to write to their Congresscreature in support of the bill.

I am sorry to say I cannot post the URL of the bill’s text because it is “blacklisted” by Truthdig.  It is not going to be easy to solve problems we are not allowed to discuss.  But try http://maloney.house.gov/

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 16, 2010 at 8:15 am Link to this comment

David, isn’t Cheney’s heart like the one in the joke about the agent? A patient needing a heart transplant was asked which donor he preferred, the healthy, vigorous 25-year-old, or the actors’ agent who smoked and drank. He chose the agent because he figured the heart had never been used.

What is it about Polanski that gets all these people fired up? I’m sure they could find cases in their own communities of grown men having sex with 13-year-olds in the 1970s (the 1980s, the 1990s, 2000+) and getting away with it. Why is Polanski such a trigger?

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 16, 2010 at 8:07 am Link to this comment

Cooley can posture all he wants to, Anarcissie. But at the end of the day he hasn’t extradicted him and Polanski is back at work making films and living his life.

“Are these people equally interested in prosecuting our leaders for the deaths of approximately one million Iraqis? Are they working at rape crisis centers in their areas to help people (I’ve known men who were raped) who have been assaulted? Do they get as upset about police brutality in their area, which often includes either threats of rape or actual penetration? What is it about Polanski that gets people so hot under the collar? Whatever happened to right-wing Kelsey Grammer and his 12-year-old girlfriend?”

Precisely, Tobysgirl! You’ll find the answer in Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery.”

“If the U.S. Justice Department was really interested in the Polanski’s case,34 years ago,it could have requested THEN THE ITERPOL’S OFFICE WITHEN ITS OWN STRUCTURE TO FOLLOW POLANSKI’S CASE THROUGH THE INTERPOL’S OFFICES IN EUROPE OR WORLD WIDE,FOR HIS APPREHENSION,AS AN INTERNATIONAL FUGITIVE. I am not sure that the U.S. Justice Department had done so then or not. If not,the question is raised: WHY NOT?”

Because it wasn’t seen as beneficial to the powers that be. Having Roman Polanski on tap for a Two-Minute Hate, draws attention away from the criems of the state. Just the other day we were told to feel sorry for Torqemada Cheney’s heart problems.

That this Lectroid from Planet 10 actually HAS a heart is major news. His responsibility for the deaths of HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE is needless to say to be ignored. After all—

HEY LOOK IT’S ROMAN POLANSKI!!!!!

Report this

By wildflower, July 16, 2010 at 7:50 am Link to this comment

Re Anarcisse: “How come you don’t care about the legal processes which preceded Polanski’s flight?  Why are they so totally irrelevant?”

What legal processes preceding Polanski’s flight are you referencing? Are you referring to the judge’s decision to let him work on that movie before his sentencing?  Granted, it does appear Polanski may have been given special treatment here, but other than this everything seems pretty straightforward.

Report this

By Sodium-Na, July 16, 2010 at 7:38 am Link to this comment

If one considers that the drugging and raping of a 13 year old girl by an adult,even if she was a “child prostitute”,is a crime against the very basic humanity of the little girl,bringing Roman Polanski back to the United States to face justice should have taken place 34 years ago,when the case against him was still fresh. That way,the excuses claimed by deceptive lawyers that the lense through which people look through at such a crime has changed would have not taken place,let alone allowed.

If the U.S. Justice Department was really interested in the Polanski’s case,34 years ago,it could have requested THEN THE ITERPOL’S OFFICE WITHEN ITS OWN STRUCTURE TO FOLLOW POLANSKI’S CASE THROUGH THE INTERPOL’S OFFICES IN EUROPE OR WORLD WIDE,FOR HIS APPREHENSION,AS AN INTERNATIONAL FUGITIVE. I am not sure that the U.S. Justice Department had done so then or not. If not,the question is raised: WHY NOT?

The good thing about the INTERPOL whose real name is International Criminal Police Organization(ICPO)are two facts:

~ It is backed by more than 180 member-countries,world wide,including the U.S.

~ According to the wordings,as spelled out by the INTERPOL’s constitution,no intervention characterized as racial,religious,political or militaristic bias can influence its investigative activities.

As far as I know there is no status of limitation on either war crimes or crimes against humanity. Therefore,Polanski is still can be brought to the U.S.to face justice,inspite of the different lenses’ interpretations,for different times,claimed by some clever lawyers. That should not,or rather must not, mean that I am after him to be punished. All I am after is to allow justice in the case to take hold and be respected,whether he would be convicted or set free.

Report this

By Tobysgirl, July 16, 2010 at 7:35 am Link to this comment

Anarcissie wrote “real trials are not like the lynch-mob proceedings being recommended here.” You are a voice of reason. What I find most interesting is the virulence. Are these people equally interested in prosecuting our leaders for the deaths of approximately one million Iraqis? Are they working at rape crisis centers in their areas to help people (I’ve known men who were raped) who have been assaulted? Do they get as upset about police brutality in their area, which often includes either threats of rape or actual penetration? What is it about Polanski that gets people so hot under the collar? Whatever happened to right-wing Kelsey Grammer and his 12-year-old girlfriend?

dihey, My understanding is that the reason the Swiss arrested Polanski and considered extradition is because they were playing nice with the U.S.A. over the bank account situation. This was not playing nice as defined by self-promoting DAs and rabid Americans (see below, over and over and over).

I also appreciated the discussion of the age of consent. I live in what is essentially Appalachia (described by one Mainer as “Deliverance with lobsters”) and adult men have been having sex with pubescent girls for centuries. Often a man of 25 would marry a girl of 14. Now he is arrested, convicted, and labeled a sex offender because he is lower-class and can’t afford a fast-talking lawyer. What is it about poor people? They’re always making stupid choices compared to us smart, bourgeois types. (This is called irony for all your literalists.)

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, July 15, 2010 at 8:29 pm Link to this comment

<blockquote>
David Ehrenstein, July 15 at 3:50 pm:

‘... The Swiss Court has decided it will not supply Steve Cooley with a “campaign issue” to win election as state Attorney General of California. ...’

On the contrary, it has worked out perfectly for him.  Real juridical procedures can take embarrassing turns and expose inconvenient facts.  In any case, Polanski would probably be able to tie the case up with a variety of appeals for the remainder of his life, which might make the prosecutors look like fools—recall the O.J. trial.  This way, Mr. Cooley can posture nobly and does not have to do anything but collect his votes on election day.  I wonder if it wasn’t set up this way in the first place.  The “missing papers” business is so well-known as to be rather corny.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, July 15, 2010 at 5:04 pm Link to this comment

Inherit The Wind, July 15 at 1:20 pm:

‘Anarcissie:

Why do you want US justice denied?  Wanting a fugitive returned and forced to serve his sentence isn’t lynch mob hysteria. It’s justice.’

I was discussing the extensive rewriting of Polanski’s crimes and the suggestions that he be tortured, raped, castrated, hanged, and so forth.  That’s the lynch mob mentality at work.  A mob, a tree and a rope may be justice in your view, but it’s not in mine.  In fact, I find it pretty repulsive, and surprisingly so in this venue.  It’s the kind of stuff I would expect to see on the Free Republic or the New York Post web sites.

Your concern for ‘U.S. justice’ is touching, but it is oddly selective.  How come you don’t care about the legal processes which preceded Polanski’s flight?  Why are they so totally irrelevant?  (Other members of the lynch mob may wish to tackle this question as well.)

Jody—Your question about whether an adult should be legally able to have sex with a 13-year-old is interesting.  At one time, 13-year-olds were adults in most of the known world.  In the U.S., in many states, the age of consent for sex or marriage was 12 before the 20th century.  However, we live in a different world, one in which childhood has been vastly prolonged and even fully grown adults are extensively infantilized.  The power relationships between people have changed.  So I don’t know the answer.  In any case, it will be impossible to discuss the question while the howling is in progress, so it will have to take place in another place and another time.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 15, 2010 at 1:07 pm Link to this comment

“We were on a cruise and were walking around St. Barts and around the corner walked James Levine.  Yes, THAT James Levine.  I quickly put myself between him and my 5-year old son, before I even realized who he was.  Levine’s child molesting was long covered up by the opera houses he worked for because he is “James Levine, Conductor”. “

Your point?

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 15, 2010 at 12:28 pm Link to this comment

It’s textbook lynch mob hysteria. The Swiss Court has decided it will not supply Steve Cooley with a “campaign issue” to win election as state Attorney General of California.

*****************************

I suggest you get your “textbook” from someplace other than “PopPsychologyCheap.com.

We were on a cruise and were walking around St. Barts and around the corner walked James Levine.  Yes, THAT James Levine.  I quickly put myself between him and my 5-year old son, before I even realized who he was.  Levine’s child molesting was long covered up by the opera houses he worked for because he is “James Levine, Conductor”.

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 15, 2010 at 11:50 am Link to this comment

“it is the law in this country that an adult cannot have sex with a minor.”

Exactly—HAVE SEX.

as opposed to

“Hedruggedandrapedherwhileshebgeedforhimtostop!”

“Why do you want US justice denied?  Wanting a fugitive returned and forced to serve his sentence isn’t lynch mob hysteria. It’s justice.”

It’s textbook lynch mob hysteria. The Swiss Court has decided it will not supply Steve Cooley with a “campaign issue” to win election as state Attorney General of California.


Meanwhile Roman Polanski has gotten back to work. His next will be a film adaptation of the much-lauded play “God of Carnage.”

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 15, 2010 at 11:50 am Link to this comment

NYCartist, July 15 at 2:49 pm #

Re Jody: your reply to Anarcissie is excellent.
The discussions over the years, particularly men who trivialize it and those women who blame the women, have diminished, but are brought out whenever there is a high profile rape case/story.

Rape in our society is rampant in movies, books,and life. Very few men suffer any consequences of/for their crime.

I know 3 rape survivors. I am one of the 3.  Two were raped by strangers.  All as adults.  It’s an ugly crime.
The echoes last forever.

*******************

Sadly, you probably know more than that. 

I’ve known 6 females and one male.

Three women were raped by complete strangers—knife at the throat. 

One woman was date-raped in college. She since passed away.

One woman was repeatedly molested and raped as a child by the “nice man down the street”. 

The last woman was raped repeatedly as a child over many years by her father. 

The boy was raped in orphanages and homes and was on his way as a young man to a life in jail.

Yeah, most of them made lives for themselves as survivors and I honor them for that.  But all were horribly scarred by it.

Report this

By jr., July 15, 2010 at 10:52 am Link to this comment

The notion of crime being relative, if one is wanting to prosecute someone, prosecute the child’s care taker(s) for their allowing such things to occur in the first place i.e., for their gross negligence; but that would be too much like Justice.

Report this

By NYCartist, July 15, 2010 at 10:49 am Link to this comment

Re Jody: your reply to Anarcissie is excellent. 
The discussions over the years, particularly men who trivialize it and those women who blame the women, have diminished, but are brought out whenever there is a high profile rape case/story.

Rape in our society is rampant in movies, books,and life. Very few men suffer any consequences of/for their crime.

I know 3 rape survivors. I am one of the 3.  Two were raped by strangers.  All as adults.  It’s an ugly crime.
The echoes last forever.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 15, 2010 at 9:20 am Link to this comment

Anarcissie:

Why do you want US justice denied?  Wanting a fugitive returned and forced to serve his sentence isn’t lynch mob hysteria. It’s justice.

Report this

By dihey, July 15, 2010 at 9:00 am Link to this comment

Knowing the Swiss as I do, they are a very unlikely nation to shelter a child rapist even a famous one. The fact that Switzerland has refused to extradite Polanski means, in my opinion, that their judges suspected that there was something fishy with the US request. An alternative but much less likely explanation is that Switzerland has retaliated against our insistence that their banks open their accounts to our IRS.

Report this

By Jody, July 15, 2010 at 8:36 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

re: “This was a child prostitute, people. Can you get your minds around that? Gore
Vidal can. DO try and keep up.”

I read Vidal and appreciate his novels but that hardly makes him an expert to
make me sway my opinion on this crime.  According to what you are saying, why is
Lawrence Taylor being charged for having sex with a 16 year old prostitute? 
C’mon, this is an easy one:

Because it is the law in this country that an adult cannot have sex with a minor. 
Case closed tail-gunner Joe.  Anyone want to justify any situation where an adult
can have sex with a 13 year old kid, regardless if that 13 year old is a prostitute as
so many people are alleging (I am not alleging this, but putting it out as a
hypothetical)?

Report this
mindful's avatar

By mindful, July 15, 2010 at 7:57 am Link to this comment

I have been accused of being a child sex pro because I have wondered how some of the laws now on our federal registry could be Constitutional.

For example taking a sexually explicite picture of s child, apparently defined as uner age of 18, has a mandatory sentence of 15 years?

What hysteria and over kill, since even rape and murder, clearly physical contact sex crimes, get less of a sentence.

Is anyone watch the hysterical,  Fundamentalist and hypocritical politicians at work?

Report this

By David Ehrenstein, July 15, 2010 at 5:46 am Link to this comment

“the drugs, and the anal penetration,
are claims that were never challenged in court”

In the medical examination, which can be found at The Smoking Gun, it was noted that the girl was not anally penerated.

Let me repeat that—she was not anally penetrated.

As for drugs she had plenty of her own.

This was a child prostitute, people. Can you get your minds around that? Gore Vidal can. DO try and keep up.

Report this

By Fernando Collor de Mellow, July 14, 2010 at 11:05 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’ always bugged me that Polanski never paid for his crime but now that I know about
Christian96’s visit, I can rest easy.

Report this
UreKismet's avatar

By UreKismet, July 14, 2010 at 10:52 pm Link to this comment

I really enjoyed xtian96’s yarn although I can’t help but say there is a logical inconsistency in her prejudice and that after her experience with the xtian lawyer and xtian real estate agent, it would xtians who I wouldn’t be doing business with.  That is if I were a person who decided on people based upon what another person who shared one commonality with the person, had done.

As for Mr Polanski it seems to me that the amerikan judicial system’s egregious behaviour was simply too much for the Swiss Courts to ignore.  That is really saying something because the Swiss courts system is generally far more conservative and mindful of paying obeisance to authority than the rethug californian courts are.

Everyone - hang on, no not everyone, but most posters here are behaving as though this case was re-litigated in the Swiss courts which is exactly what the judge emphasised is what did not happen.
The judge needed to know if Polanski had completed his sentence when he left amerika.
This was because both Polanski and his legal representatives, claimed he had - this was supported at least in part by documents from the original case the Polanski side offered up.  The amerikan lawyers alleged that Polanski had not completed his sentence and Polanski was either lying or mistaken.

OK said the judge Mr Polanski has presented documents which suggest he had completed his final sentence but your side has only stated he had not but offered up no evidence that is so, therefore I would like to see the transcripts of the hearings where the judge sentenced Polanski to the 90 days and then we will know what was in the judge’s mind when he made the determination.
The amerikan lawyers said ‘no worries your honour’ left the court and began agitating through non-legal channels (eg threatening Swiss banks) to get Polanski back without having to present the transcripts.

I can’t think of a worse way to get a swiss judge onside.  As I said Swiss courts are conservative as all get up and they bow to all authority figures.  The one institution with the most authority in the eyes of many Swiss judges, is the Swiss banking system.
So when the amerikan attorneys finally admitted the transcripts were not going to be forthcoming there was no way Polanski was going to be extradited.
All of these two bit vigilantes should be asking themselves why it is the amerikans won’t release the transcripts of the judges sentencing instructions.  Could it be because Polanski is telling the truth that the judge had given him 90 days in return for his guilty plea, but had then decided to go back on his word?
That is what it seems like to me and as much as y’all claim that is irrelevant under californian law, it is most certainly not irrelevant under the terms of the extradition treaty between Switzerland and amerika.
Still it would be a pity at such a late stage in the game to begin letting the facts get in the way of a good story.

Report this

By christian96, July 14, 2010 at 8:50 pm Link to this comment

While Polanski was in prison in Chino, California
I happened to be in California.  Polanski is Polish.
I was raised in a coal mining community in West
Virginia where my father worked 40 years in the mines.  Most of my friends were Italian, Polish,
Hungarian, etc.  When they came from the old country
they shipped them from New York to West Virginia to
work in the mines.  A coal contract had been passed
which neglected widows.  I had gone to Sen. Byrd’s
office to inform him how the miners were deceived
by the media into passing a contract which neglected
widows.  The miners were voting just before Christmas
and it was the time of the phony oil shortage with
long lines at the pumps.  The media told the miners
they had to pass the contract to help America while
we struggled with the oil crisis.  When I told
Sen. Byrd about the neglect of the widows and deception by the media he rose from his desk, shook
my hand and said “You can’t please everyone Son”
and exited me out the door.  Many of the neglected
widows were Polish.  Since I was in California I
decided to drive to the prison in Chino and ask
Mr. Polanski if he would make a movie depicting the
neglect of the widows and deception of the media.
When I got to the prison the guard ask, “Do you know
Mr. Polanski?”  After I responded “yes” the guard
took me to a table and ask me to sit facing a glass.
After a period of time some guards brought Mr. Polanski in the room and set him across from me.
I explained to him why I was there and ask if he would make a movie about the neglect of the widows.
He began screaming, “Get me out of here! Get me out
of here!”  Some guards escorted him from the room.
As I was leaving the guard said, “I thought you said
you know him.”  I said, “Yeah, I know him. He doesn’t
know me.”  As far as I’m concerned they can hang
him from the highest tree. Rich people stick together. But someday those rich people are going
to find out what Jesus meant when he said, “It’s
easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle
than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of Heaven.”

Report this

By camnai, July 14, 2010 at 7:07 pm Link to this comment

By equating, even for the sake of discussion, possession of marijuana with
statutory rape, Mr Coleman has given his opponents a hostage. One should be
careful of analogies, even when there is a grain of truth to them.

The ‘facts’ of the case people are citing, though, are not established. Polanski
did later on admit to sex with the girl, but the drugs, and the anal penetration,
are claims that were never challenged in court (the girl’s statement does not
sound at all like it was made by a 13 year-old, and the mother was a would-be
actress who let her daughter go off alone for a ‘photo shoot’. ‘What if it were
your daughter?’ you ask…my daughter would not be there in the first place).
Polanski was promised time served if he pleaded guilty, which he did, and then
the judge reneged on the promise. The prosecutor, or even the judge, should
be cited for impropriety, but they’re both dead. The former 13 year-old wants
nothing to do with a reopening of the case. Polanski has been going in and out
of Switzerland for years now; suddenly a DA who wants his name in the paper
decides one is to be filed.

The same DA did not even see fit to deposit with the Swiss court all the
documentation it had requested on the case. And there were vague threats of
retaliation against Swiss bank operations in the U.S. if the extradition were not
granted. Swiss judges are not political appointees, and the American attitude
must have been like the proverbial red flag to the bull. The assumption seems
to have been—and remains so, if the comments here are any indication—that
‘we are Americans, and no one will tell us no.’ My advice to you is to be very
careful of the people who don’t tell you no. They are not your friends.

Americans, liberal and conservative, don’t seem to understand that nobody
trusts the U.S. any more. Your Supreme Court justices are political players, and
nobody foreign can expect justice in America in an actual court, let alone the
court of public opinion. You had more than twice as many political prisoners in
Guantanamo as Havana had in its jails even before they let a quarter of them
go; just as American taxpayers are bailing out GM, Toyota is pilloried over
cases in which drivers didn’t seem to realize what happens when you put a car
in neutral; the ‘British’ in BP is suddenly rediscovered, when it was Halliburton
actually doing the work that went wrong (and Exxon still hasn’t paid up for its
oil spill); a Canadian rendered to Syria because he had the same name as
someone else is not allowed to file suit in the U.S.; the list goes on and on.

Being in your late 30s and having sex with a 13 year-old was illegal in 1978,
and it is illegal now. But there is also an international—if not American—
presumption of the right to a fair trial. He didn’t get one in 1978, and he
certainly wouldn’t get one now. That is what the Swiss courts have said, and
well they should have.

Report this

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.