Roman Polanski, Liberal Hero

As he arrived in Zurich, Switzerland for the Zurich Film Festival, Roman Polanski, admitted child molester, sodomizer, and rapist, was arrested on a new warrant from the United States. About damn time, too- thirty- two years after the fact, simply because the French, who are supposed to be our friends and allies, would not allow extradition  of this human pusbag for the crimes that he had already pled guilty to. 

A short synopsis- This forty- something man had drugged a thirteen year old girl, and well, I’ll let Kate Harding, writing in Salon.com take it from here-

Roman Polanski raped a child. Let’s just start right there, because that’s the detail that tends to get neglected when we start discussing whether it was fairfor the bail-jumping director to be arrested at age 76, after 32 years in “exile” (which in this case means owning multiple homes in Europe, continuing to work as a director, marrying and fathering two children, even winning an Oscar, but never — poor baby — being able to return to the U.S.). Let’s keep in mind that Roman Polanski gave a 13-year-old girl a Quaalude and champagne, then raped her, before we start discussing whether the victim looked older than her 13 years, or that she now says she’d rather not see him prosecuted because she can’t stand the media attention. Before we discuss how awesome his movies are or what the now-deceased judge did wrong at his trial, let’s take a moment to recall that according to the victim’s grand jury testimony, Roman Polanski instructed her to get into a jacuzzi naked, refused to take her home when she begged to go, began kissing her even though she said no and asked him to stop; performed cunnilingus on her as she said no and asked him to stop; put his penis in her vagina as she said no and asked him to stop; asked if he could penetrate her anally, to which she replied, “No,” then went ahead and did it anyway, until he had an orgasm.

salon.com

You would think that would be the end of the story- there could be no “defense” of the indefensible- the acts are so shocking simply because of the child’s age, but there are plenty of people in the film industry who are leaping to demand that this felon pedophile be freed- probably they think their jobs are riding on the outcome of this man’s case.

Do keep in mind one thing- he pleaded guilty- the only thing he was trying to escape was the punishment that he was due. As Kate Harding repeatedly says- He raped a child. Period. It really shouldn’t matter what the French say- the crime to which Polanski pled guilty to didn’t happen there- they have no standing to voice an opinion.

The French press, for instance (at least according to the British press) is describing Polanski “as the victim of a money-grabbing American mother and a publicity-hungry Californian judge.” Joan Z. Shore at the Huffington Post, who once met Polanski and “was utterly charmed by [his] sobriety and intelligence,” also seems to believe that a child with an unpleasant stage mother could not possibly have been raped: “The 13-year old model ‘seduced’ by Polanski had been thrust onto him by her mother, who wanted her in the movies.” Oh, well, then! If her mom put her into that situation, that makes itmuch better! Shore continues: “The girl was just a few weeks short of her 14th birthday, which was the age of consent in California. (It’s probably 13 by now!) Polanski was demonized by the press, convicted, and managed to flee, fearing a heavy sentence.”

Wow, OK, let’s break that down. First, as blogger Jeff Fecke says, “Fun fact: the age of consent in 1977 in California was 16. It’s now 18. But of course, the age of consent isn’t like horseshoes or global thermonuclear war; close doesn’t count. Even if the age of consent had been 14, the girl wasn’t 14.” Also, even if the girl had been old enough to consent, she testified that she did not consent

salon.com

All those “inconvenient” facts- and still the idiots in Hollywood are screaming for his release. It would be predictable that Woody Allen, a child molester himself, would rush to Polanski’s defense, but Scorsese? Does no one in Hollywood have children? Or perhaps they just swap them like recipes? Where’s the morality? Where’s the outrage?

Marie-Louise Fort, a French lawmaker in the Assembly who has sponsored anti-incest legislation, said in an interview that she was shocked that Mr. Polanski was attracting support from the political and artistic elite. “I don’t believe that public opinion is spontaneously supporting Mr. Polanski at all,” she said. “I believe that there is a distinction between the mediagenic class of artists and ordinary citizens that have a vision that is more simple.”

The mood was even more hostile in blogs and e-mails to newspapers and news magazines. Of the 30,000 participants in an online poll by the French daily Le Figaro, more than 70 percent said Mr. Polanski, 76, should face justice. And in the magazine Le Point, more than 400 letter writers were almost universal in their disdain for Mr. Polanski.

That contempt was not only directed at Mr. Polanski, but at the French class of celebrities — nicknamed Les People — who are part of Mr. Polanski’s rarefied Parisian world. Letter writers to Le Point scorned Les People as the “crypto-intelligentsia of our country” who deliver “eloquent phrases that defy common sense.”

Still, many others continued to rally to the Oscar-winning director’s defense.

Film industry leaders like Woody Allen, Pedro Almodovar, Martin Scorsese and Costa Gavras signed a petition with about 100 names that expressed “stupefaction” with the arrest of Mr. Polanski at the Zurich airport.

nytimes.com

Yea- regular people, by and large, get it, even in France. Back home, the Huffington Post, a blog that has grown increasingly unhinged, ran (or wrote) to Polanski’s defense- and then has been savaged by its readers, who feel overwhelmingly that the pedophile should indeed serve all of the time to which he was convicted.

Much of the initial criticism of the American and Swiss authorities behind the arrest centered on the question of timing: why was Mr. Polanski arrested now, three decades after his guilty plea, and not on any of the countless other visits he has made to Switzerland over the years (he maintains homes there and in France)?

Defending their actions, American law enforcement officials in Los Angeles have said the arrest was a simple matter of opportunity, and they issued a timeline that showed that they had quietly submitted an Interpol “red notice” — a request for international assistance in arresting a fugitive — concerning Mr. Polanski that was originally distributed in 2002. A spokesman for Interpol in Lyon, France, declined to comment on Tuesday. The red notice on Mr. Polanski apparently was not posted on Interpol’s public Web site, which is used to enlist the help of the public in pursuit of fugitives.

“He just showed up at a time and a place where we knew he would be available,” Sandi Gibbons, a spokeswoman for Stephen L. Cooley, the Los Angeles County district attorney, said Monday.

The district attorney’s office circulated a list of the actions it had taken and the inquiries it had made to track and try to apprehend Mr. Polanski as he traveled to at least 10 countries, including what appeared to be a near miss in 2007, when officials relayed a request for information from Israel about a visit he made there. By the time the information arrived, “Polanski had left Israel and was not arrested,” the prosecutors’ advisory said.

nytimes.com

The American authorities had not posted the notice, or request for extradition to Interpol’s website, because they thought, as has been the case  in the past, that a sympathetic government official might warn him, and allow him to flee. Not this time.

There is still work to do, in getting him actually back on American soil, and into the prison he so richly deserves. There are consequences for one’s actions- there should be penalties that deter, and allowing some pedophilic A**hole to thumb his nose at the American judicial system is not a good thing.

He should regret his actions every day, for the rest of his life, until he dies in prison.

Perhaps other prisoners can show him what sodomy is.

Now that would be justice.
Blake

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

53 Responses to “Roman Polanski, Liberal Hero”

  1. Macker says:

    How much do you want to bet Президент Оба́ма pardon’s him?

    • Blake says:

      If so, polanski will have to stand in line behind a slew of Democrats- Rangel, Murtha, Jefferson, Reid, Dodd, Waters, Blago, and a sh*tload of others.

  2. […] the original post: Roman Polanski, Liberal Hero Posted in Hollywood Movies | Tags: are-screaming, facts-and, for-his, had-been, her-mother, […]

  3. FairWitness says:

    I have often wondered why Roman Polanski was permitted to live freely in Europe after he fled there, following his guilty plea. We have extradiction treaties with all of Europe. Why wasn’t he sent back here to serve out his sentence?

    As for the victim’s stage mother, I think she should have been prosecuted for the rape, too. She served her child up to the deviant director for what? A film career? What right does ANY parent have to offer their children up like that? Disgusting.

    Polanski’s glitterati defenders in Hollywood and elsewhere should be thinking about justice for that innocent 13 year old child, not the fairness of the arrest’s timing. The man admitted he did this to this child, in a court of law. What’s left to say?

    Throw the scumbag in the slammer and tack on additional years for his fleeing justice. No wonder there’s so much pedophilia today, there are actually imbeciles out there who make excuses for it.

    • Darrel says:

      Hey, Fair, I’ll see your Polanski and raise you 60 leading republican child humpers.

      What’s your excuse for this?

      “Republican Offenders dot com” has produced a list of 272 Republicans charged with criminal activity, 60 of which are pedophiles (just 1998-2008). Each name is linked to a group heading of the type of crime. (Among the categories are rape, bribery and “assorted felonies”.)

      http://www.republicanoffenders.com/

      D.

  4. Blake says:

    Yes, and ALL of the apologists are liberals who pride themselves on their “open minds and european outlook”- there IS a reason our forefathers fled Europe- to get away from people like that-
    and now, they are in our midst…..

    • Darrel says:

      Well, they are especially in YOUR midst.

      Republican leadership, just the pedophiles, 60 of them:

      http://www.armchairsubversive.org/

      D.

      • Blake says:

        That is because liberals are afraid and morally unable to prosecute their own, and you have plenty of crooks, liars and thieves in among the child humping drug abusing, alcohol soaked, income tax evading others- and that is just the Kennedys- And you wonder why they die early.

      • Darrel says:

        BLK: “liberals are afraid and morally unable to prosecute their own,>>

        DAR
        Let’s see, Blagovich, gone, Eliot Spitzer, gone, John Edwards, politically toast (and that for adultery, you should see the list of current republican adulterers, whoa).

        Now let’s look at the moral party:

        Vitters, the fellow who likes hookers to put him diapers? Republican currently sitting in the Senate.

        Larry Craig, Mr. “Wide Stance” while cruising for gay sex in public airports? Republican sitting in the Senate.

        Mark Foley soliciting e-mails and sexually explicit instant messages with 16 year old congressional pages? Republican congressman.

        That’s just off the top of my head.

        Do note that each one of those 60 republican pedophiles referenced above are backed up with links you can check. A list of 20 or twenty republican pedo’s would be quite impressive. But sixty? That’s a little hard to dismiss.

        And that doesn’t include the ones who admit to sex with animals. Would you like to see those again? Just let me know.

        D.
        ——————-
        “What is up with all these Republicans?”

        –President George W. Bush responding to the revelation that Idaho Republican Sen. Larry Craig had plead guilty to soliciting an undercover cop at a Minneapolis airport.

        • Big Dog says:

          I think you are a bit mistaken Darrel. The Republicans who get in trouble are removed by the party (under party rules) the Democrats do not have such a rule. Spitzer quit and Edwards was not in office when he got in trouble (discovered by a tabloid no less).

          The kid Foley emailed was a few weeks shy of 18. I think it was wrong and called for him to resign but you should be accurate. Craig was found guilty of what? I think he pleaded to something that was not gay sex? I do not know what he was doing there only what a cop said about papers on the floor. As far as I know Craig never said I am looking for sex. He should still be gone because if he were innocent he would have fought it in court so he was probably up to some shenanigans.

          I do not defend any of them and think they should all be gone. I do however, note that Democrats do not work to remove their bad apples, they cover for them. William Jefferson, Charlie Rangel, and Bill Clinton come to mind.

          The reality is, the examples you gave do not involve prosecution of any Democrat. Blago was removed from the legislature and awaits prosecution. Spitzer and Edwards were not removed by Democrats or prosecuted by them.

          If you show the list please show the police reports or something credible like a public admission or the video of it taking place. These links to people saying this one did this or that don’t do it for me.

        • Darrel says:

          Bigd: “The Republicans who get in trouble are removed by the party”>>

          DAR
          My above examples show that isn’t true.

          Bigd: Spitzer quit>>

          DAR
          He was pushed, by Demos.

          Bigd: The kid Foley emailed was a few weeks shy of 18.>>

          DAR
          One was. Two others were 16. See references here

          Bigd: Craig was found guilty of what?>>

          DAR
          He plead guilty to “lewd conduct” but that was because he wanted to avoid exposing the fact that he was trolling for gay sex, in public.

          Bigd: I do not know what he was doing there>>

          DAR
          He was trying to get another man to play with his noodle.

          Bigd: Blago was removed from the legislature>>

          DAR
          Which is controlled by democrats.

          Gotta go.

          D.
          ——————-
          The Top Ten Republican Adulterers.

  5. Blake says:

    Its just like a liberal to ignore the subject and deflect, deflect, deflect- they can’t just say “Wow, that Polanski is a scumbag.” no- they have to try to “equate” his complete and ADMITTED guilt to someone else’s- preferably a Republican- when that is not the argument here, but they are real good at lying to themselves. That is why they can’t hold onto a government job for very long- no chops.

  6. Adam says:

    Once again Blake copies and pastes his way to an expose on how liberals support child rapists because a couple of guys from Hollywood are against the arrest of Polanski.

    It’s sad how the opinion of the dozens that signed a petition so quickly become the voice for all of Hollywood and how that in turn becomes the voice for millions of liberals everywhere.

    Blake has set it up now so that any liberal who doesn’t just rush to condemn Polanski to the degree he wants simply proves his point that liberals love child rapists.

    All in a day’s work for a wing nut liar like Blake.

    • Big Dog says:

      Amazingly Adam, you attack Blake and ignore Polanski or the cretins who are supporting him. You should be in line with the sane people condemning the man and instead, you go after Blake.

      There are quite a few people in Hollywood speaking up for the guy (and some at a few of the papers). That should give you a chill but you ignore it.

      I wonder how many of these same libs cheered when Madoff was sent to prison for the rest of his life? They liked seeing him go away because he did to them what Polanski did to that kid.

      • Adam says:

        You can defend Blake’s utter bull crap all you like. You could waste your whole day covering for his sheer idiocy.

        Liberals do not have to stand up and condemn Polanski to avoid appearing to be like a few folks in Hollywood who disagree with the arrest. That’s their opinion and it in no way reflects on liberalism. Stop making stuff up.

        • Blake says:

          Do you have children, Adam? I do- and I do not believe that children should be raped and sodomized- do you Adam?
          There is a petition of idiots supporting Polanski- and implicitly sup[porting what he did, or at least excusing what he did.
          THERE IS NO EXCUSE- if you think there is, you are a pedophile, period.
          What was “utter bullcrap”, Adam- Please point to what I said that was objectionable to YOU.
          Was it the prosecution of Polanski? Did THAT disturb you?
          Or was it that he drugged, raped, and sodomized a 13 year old-
          Come on- just WHAT was objectionable to you?
          Do you excuse his actions?

          • Big Dog says:

            Funny, Juan Williams was on hannity last night and when the subject of polanski came up a woman said something about having a 13 year old daughter and Juan said that if it was his daughter they would need to organize a get Juan out of jail party because “I would have killed his ass.”

            That says it all.

            If it were my daughter I would have tracked him around the world and killed him.

        • Big Dog says:

          Actually, there are many liberals who are standing up to oppose support of polanski. Unfortunately, the liberal upbringing and the decadent lifestyle of Hollywood has allowed a handful of liberals to cast a bad light on all of them.

          Funny how a small frings has signs equating Obama to the anti-Christ or some other objectionable thing and you paint all conservatives with a wide brush but when Blake does a similar thing you have a hissy.

          Look in the mirror…

    • Blake says:

      If you have ANY compassion and/ or morality in you, you SHOULD condemn what Polanski did- THERE IS NO EXCUSE- you should read the court testimony of the child- then try and condemn me for my stand
      Right now, you seem to be condoning this man’s actions- I would hope not.

    • Blake says:

      Apparently you are ignoring all the liberal voices that savaged HufPo for its stance on this topic- also you apparently did not see the mention I made of them.
      OR, you might just admire Polanski- I don’t know where the rage you feel comes from, but I never, at any point in this post, EVER said that this was the position of ALL liberals, but I did say there were a lot (about 100 signed a petition) of Hollywood people who thought this was an injustice.
      In addition, you might want to check out Whoopi Goldberg’s defense of Polanski- as ridiculous as anything I have ever heard- period.
      “This was not “Rape-rape””, she said-
      I say when you drug a 13 year old, vaginally rape, anally sodomize, and orally molest her- you should go to jail. PERIOD.

    • Blake says:

      So tell me, Adam- Please- Where did I lie? Come on, be a man, point it out.

  7. Adam says:

    First of all I judge you on your own idoicy, Blake. There’s plenty here for me to make a case with. I don’t judge you on the merits of people I think are conservatives. Second, even if I did, what conservatives do as a movement can reflect you because you too are conservative. You’re pretending what the folks in Hollywood are doing is because they are liberals. That’s garbage and you know it. You can pretend that conservatives hold the moral high ground on so many issues but you’d be a liar.

    • Blake says:

      So what liberals do as a movement reflect you, Adam? You lump yourself in with them in all things?
      What many folks in Hollywood do and think, they do because they live in a closed society, an echo chamber that bounces their own wrongful prejudices around and around- it should be plain to see, but apparently not for you.
      I am sorry that your apparent dislike for me colors your thinking, but you really need to take a deep breath and another look at what you are saying.
      And I guarantee you if you ever have children, especially a daughter, there will be no ambiguity as to how you feel regarding this situation.

  8. Adam says:

    I don’t have a problem condemning Polanski. It should be no surprise where I fall in support of child rape. I feel no need to defend myself for that. What I detest is this garbage you’re spewing equating liberals to supporters of child rape because folks in Hollywood who you think are liberals, are against the arrest. It’s reprehensible nonsense, and you know it. Once again logic and reason has escaped you and left you full of crap.

    • Blake says:

      ALL of the people who are supporting Polanski are liberals- I do not say ALL liberals do- but there are NO conservatives supporting him.
      I am full of crap? What a laugh- once again you do not read for comprehension- how reflexively indoctrinated you are. Pity- you seem so intelligent to be so pavlovian in your nature.
      So, as a service to Adam, I will try again-
      All of the people who defend Polanski ARE liberal- I do not say ALL liberals do. Can you understand that?
      Or do I have to try and dumb it down some more?

  9. Adam says:

    It would be like me writing “Timothy McVeigh, Conservative Hero” because I found some radical gun nuts cheering the bombing in Oklahoma. Then when you say that’s stupid I say things like “Its just like a conservative to ignore the subject and deflect, deflect, deflect- they can’t just say ‘Wow, that McVeigh is a scumbag…'”

    Don’t you see how lame that is to set up some false equivalent and then play coy when liberals don’t stand up and prove they hate Polanski? It’s garbage.

    No, Blake. I don’t have kids. Do I need to have kids to know child rape is wrong? Snap back to reality here. Liberalism as a movement does not support Polanski no matter how many Hollywood idiots disagree with the arrest. Cut the crap.

    • Blake says:

      Ironically, Gore Vidal, a longtime liberal, is and has been a great admirer of Timothy McVeigh- should I condemn ALL liberals because of him? No. Neither am doing that with liberals- that is in your own paranoid mind.
      How insecure you must be.
      Get over it.

  10. Adam says:

    First you concoct the bull crap. Then you deny and lie about. This is your pattern it seems.

    Title of the post: “Roman Polanski, Liberal Hero”

    Clearly that is suggesting that just some support Polanski, not all. Right. We both know your game. Point to an outrageous thing going on, find a way to link it to liberals so you can bash them. Not once did you list a liberal that supports the arrest.

    Now take your recent comment: “ALL of the people who are supporting Polanski are liberals- I do not say ALL liberals do- but there are NO conservatives supporting him.”

    To prove that wrong I need only 1 conservative against the arrest and you are wrong. Here is Anne Applebaum, a convervative writing in the conservative news paper the Washington Post against the arrest of Polanski. Your own Salon source cited that but I guess you must have that same reading comprehension problem you accuse me of.

    Then there is the case of Scorsese. I would love to see a man who isn’t known for supporting liberal causes, who’s subject matter is often on the conservative side, is one of the liberals you like to demonize.

    Stop lying. And don’t bother dumbing anything down more. You’re plenty dumb already.

  11. Adam says:

    Right, Anna Applebaum isn’t conservative at all:

    I’ve sometimes voted Democratic, sometimes Republican. I’m even a registered independent, though I did think of switching to vote for John McCain in 2000. But because the last political party I truly felt comfortable with was Thatcher’s Conservative Party (I lived in England in the 1980s and 1990s), I didn’t actually do it.

    Doesn’t matter why she is against the arrest. She’s against it and conservative. That’s all that matters for your argument. You didn’t look into the motive behind the support for Polanski when the subject was people you considered liberals.

    This is at the heart of my argument against you. These folks in Hollywood are clearly protecting their own. It has nothing to do with liberalism. Yet not once did you list a liberal that supported the arrest. Not once did you look deeper to see why these folks support Polanski. You instead did the opposite, pretending ONLY liberals support it, NO conservatives. You’re one dishonest son of a gun.

    Watching you try to weasel out of that and tell me I’m the one who needs to shut up shows you what kind of intellectual coward you are.

    • Adam says:

      I was wrong actually to suggest you didn’t list a liberal against them. You do cite Salon.

      It is incredibly offensive to me for you to suggest that Polanski is a liberal hero because some people in Hollywood are against the arrest.

      The title of this post: “Roman Planski, Liberal Hero”

      The tags for this post: brainless actors * justice delayed * liberals * pedophilia * polanski

      Your comments: Yes, and ALL of the apologists are liberals

      More: ALL of the people who are supporting Polanski are liberals– I do not say ALL liberals do- but there are NO conservatives supporting him.

      So my offense? Not once have you cited any evidence for how liberalism even needs to be mentioned in this as related to their support for Polanski. Because it’s Hollywood? What? You haven’t said. What you did do is basically say “liberal” and “pedophile” in the same conversation enough times without reason so as to blur that line between them. Your dishonesty and your denial is very pathetic.

      • Blake says:

        So go ahead and be incredibly offended- you have the right to be so- It doesn’t make my words any less true.
        And liberal and pedophile seem like a good fit, considering the apologists listed on the petition, plus Whuppi, and any other person who even thinks of supporting this child molester. True, you might be liberal and against polanski being freed, like the singer Jewel- Just as an “alleged” conservative like Applebaum might be for his release, but like I said, ( which YOU did not address at all), she has a stake in his well being and freedom- probably her hubby was paid- who knows- but my post is still valid, and you are still wrong.
        If you don’t like it, go back to Meat’s site, where you all can pleasure each other with reassurances that you are all right and we are all wrong.

    • Adam says:

      I mean, maybe all of the apologists are white. How many of them are Jewish? How many are men? Why draw the conclusion that it has anything to do with liberalism except because of your own bias and dishonesty? Why fight so hard to deny you’re making that connection?

      • Blake says:

        Liberalism is by definition permissive- therefore, the permissive people in this society have given Polanski a pass.
        Does THAT make you feel better?
        Did it sooth the hurt feelings?
        Should I give you a trophy just for showing up?

        • Adam says:

          I feel much better knowing your rampant ignorance is once again out in the open. Yes, in Blake’s mind liberalism and pedophilia go hand in hand.

  12. Adam says:

    We’ve finally gotten to the core with Blake. He equates liberals with pedophiles. Why? Well, because he says so. He hates liberals and he hates pedophiles. He’ll just dream up the connection in order to make it a two-fer. All in a day’s work for a wing nut like Blake.

  13. Adam says:

    Now that that is established let’s get back to DAR’s post showing all the pedophile conservatives. Surely they must be RINO’s or something if they claim to be conservative and yet are linked to pedophilia.

    • Blake says:

      I am laughing my A$$ off at you right now- you are so ignorant, that you just skim what I write and proclaim that I equate all liberals with pedophilia. I did not- I said that liberalism is permissive, and it is permissives that have given him a pass- I also said, (as did BD), that there are liberals who do not agree with polanski being freed- but apparently you missed that- since you do not read for comprehension.
      And while pedophilia has no “party”, the conservatives in this country would outnumber the liberals in their condemnation, if a vote was taken.
      You know this is true.

  14. Adam says:

    So you don’t equate all liberals with pedophilia, but you do think that liberalism creates an atmosphere that allows pedophilia? That’s so much better. I’m glad you cleared that up.

    • Blake says:

      Yes, liberalism creates an atmosphere that enables pedophilia- that is every bit as valid a statement as Harvey Weinstein’s comment that Hollywood has a “better moral compass because we are “compassionate”.”
      What ignorant arrogance on his part.
      He should know what happens when you assume.

      • Blake says:

        Try reading this- and even the court testimony itself-
        Fact: What happened was not some gray, vague he said/she said Katie-Roiphe-style “bad sex.” A 43-year-old man got a 13-year-old girl alone, got her drunk, gave her a quaalude, and, after checking the date of her period, anally raped her, twice, while she protested; she submitted, she told the grand jury “because I was afraid.” Those facts are not in dispute–except by Polanski, who has pooh-poohed the whole business many times (You can read the grand jury transcripts here.) He was allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge, like many accused rapists, to spare the victim the trauma of a trial and media hoopla. But that doesn’t mean we should all pretend that what happened was some free-spirited Bohemian mix-up. The victim took years to recover.
        Fact: In February 2008, LA Superior Court Judge Peter Espinosa ruled that Polanski can challenge his conviction. All he has to do is come to the United States and subject himself to the rule of law. Why is that unfair? Were he not a world-famous director with boatloads of powerful friends, but just a regular convicted sex criminal who had fled abroad, would anyone think it was asking too much that he should go through the same formal process as anyone else?
        It’s enraging that literary superstars who go on and on about human dignity, and human rights, and even women’s rights (at least when the women are Muslim) either don’t see what Polanski did as rape, or don’t care, because he is, after all, Polanski–an artist like themselves. That some of his defenders are women is particularly disappointing. Don’t they see how they are signing on to arguments that blame the victim, minimize rape, and bend over backwards to exonerate the perpetrator? Error of youth, might have mistaken her age, teen slut, stage mother–is that what we want people to think when middle-aged men prey on ninth-graders?
        The widespread support for Polanski shows the liberal cultural elite at its preening, fatuous worst. They may make great movies, write great books, and design beautiful things, they may have lots of noble humanitarian ideas and care, in the abstract, about all the right principles: equality under the law, for example. But in this case, they’re just the white culture-class counterpart of hip-hop fans who stood by R. Kelly and Chris Brown and of sports fans who automatically support their favorite athletes when they’re accused of beating their wives and raping hotel workers.
        thenation.com

  15. Adam says:

    You can cite whatever you want but the bottom line is you’ve made this Polanski case a conservative versus liberal battle where liberals are on the side of the rapist. Why would liberals do this? Well, liberals are permissive you say. They want to give a rapist a pass. Right. That’s just classic wing nut conservatism for sure, injecting a partisan argument where it doesn’t belong in order to club liberals and backing it up with imaginary links between liberals and the things you hate most in the world.

    • Blake says:

      Liberals have been on the side of the child molester- liberals are permissive, if not, they would be conservative.
      It is liberals who want to give the child molester a pass-
      Conservatives do not
      These are true statements, even thought they make liberals look like child humping apologists.
      I am sorry liberal behavior offends you so- you should consider changing parties.

    • Blake says:

      Click here for transcript pages 1-18

      Click here for transcript pages 19-36

      • Blake says:

        Forget it- I can’t seem to link today- if you are interested you can find it yourself- it is disgusting, and to try and deflect the subject from his guilt and fleeing from punishment, you choose to attack the messenger- Typical, and just tiresome.

  16. […] “In a Fighting Mood: Roman Polanski Will Contest Extradition to US” (Washington Post 9/29/09), Roman Polanski, Liberal Hero (OneBigDog.net 9/30/09), and other articles referred to below. Read the petition to free Polanski […]