Polanski Punishment Should Fit the Crime - Period
Don't be distracted by the recent debate over whether fugitive movie director Roman Polanski should return to America and do time for sex crimes.
Don't let ill-informed daytime talk show hostesses convince you it wasn't really a crime.
Don't get distracted by Hollywood types who claim the deed was done more than 30 years ago and poor Polanski has been through enough in his life. After all, they argue, Polanski lost family in the Holocaust and his pregnant wife, Sharon Tate, was brutally murdered by Charlie Manson's gang.
Don't let the media convince you that angry prosecutors, stung by an HBO documentary on the case, suddenly sprang to life to go after a case they'd abandoned. That's been proven to be malarkey and structured around a former DA who now he admitted he lied about influencing the judge in the original case.
All of that is beside the point. This case boils down to a few simple questions: Is rape okay if the perpetrator is famous? Is it okay for a 44 year old man to feed drugs and drink to a 13 year old girl and have sex with her? Should all be forgiven if the man involved has won accolades, like say, an Academy Award?
How about NO, NO and NO!
So why are so many people, from TV gabber Whoopi Goldberg who said it wasn't "rape rape" since Polanski pleaded guilty to only "unlawful sex with a minor" to tainted actor Woody Allen and on to movie mega-producer Harvey Weinstein, who said he's "calling on every film-maker we can to help fix this terrible situation," all about forgiving and forgetting what Polanski did?
I can't imagine why. Sex with a minor is rape - period.
What if it were their 13 year old child drugged and demeaned by a 44 year old man? Would a sexual attack on their youngster be excused if the attacker was a famous creative type? For those who would ask, "Well why did her mother let her go alone to actor Jack Nicholson home (the scene of the crime) for a solo photo shoot?" - don't give it a second thought, that's just more obfuscation. Do I think her mother was smart about it? I do not but that's not the point.
Some facts you may not have known: The 1977 "photo session" was not a spur of the moment event during which Mr. Polanski simply lost his head. This was the second time Polanski requested to photograph this particular 13 year old girl. The first time he convinced her to go topless so he asked her back again to arouse himself and see what else he could get her to do. This second meeting was pre-meditated, done with criminal intent in my book. Polanski lured this child again and when she complained of having an asthma attack from the steam in the hot tub he'd cajoled her into and asked to be taken home his answer was to give her booze, a Quaalude and direct her to a nearby bedroom where he anally raped her.
For goodness sakes don't buy that distracting argument that the girl somehow consented to the sex because a 13 year old cannot give informed consent and it doesn't matter that the victim, now a 40-something mother of three, desires the case be dropped. It isn't up to the victim and besides we now learn she took a half million dollars to buy her silence. No wonder she wants it to go away. This case was filed on behalf of the people of the State of California vs. Roman Polanski and it is the state that calls the shots.
The only outstanding question right now should be why Roman Polanski fled the United States 32 years ago and denied justice for the child in the first place. He'd pleaded guilty to the crime and ran away like a coward.
I don't care how many of Polanski's peers come forward to discuss how dismayed they are by the decision to finally pluck Polanski from his cushy life and put him behind bars. HE RAPED A CHILD.
No one gets a pass on a crime like this. Not the guy next door and not the guy who just happened to direct movies like Rosemary's Baby, Chinatown or The Pianist.
I saw an old video clip on the CBS Early Show this week in which a young looking Roman Polanski demurely shrugged his shoulders and with a crooked smile admitted, "Well, I like young girls ... I suppose most men do."
Yes, Roman, I suppose you're right but most adult men realize it is a crime to interact sexually with them! Your cavalier attitude when asked about the crime makes me wonder how many other unsuspecting girls you despoiled in your smarmy career.
As the mother of a daughter I'm outraged that what Polanski did doesn't matter to some people. I'm aghast that once again a celebrity is thought to deserve a pass. I'm disgusted that some actors and Polanski's fellow film industry luminaries are circulating a petition for his immediate release from prison. Shame on them.
Diane Dimond can be reached through her official web site www.DianeDimond.net
Ariel Gonzalez: A Child Rapist Is Not a Political Prisoner
A middle-aged man who treats a 13-year-old girl like an inflatable sex doll, and who then flees justice, is a degenerate and a coward. This is Humbert Humbert, not Nelson Mandela.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Finally!
There is at least one decent blog here concerning this matter. After reading the other blogs on the Polanski BIG NEWS page, I had just about given up entirely on Social Liberalism. All I have been reading is blaming the victim for Polanskis crime.
Holy cow. I can't believe the amount of people that are taking Polanski's side in this. Have we become so enamored with celebrity that anything they do must be excused? He had sex with a 13-year old girl and he pleaded guilty to it. He then ran. Why shouldn't he be brought back to serve his time?
I guess this is why America is the why America is. If this were someone not famous the public would be screaming for justice for the child.
The child has already made known what she considers justice: she does not want Polanski to be punished any further.
But that doesn't matter. Many times victims of rape just want to forget and not prosecute. Look up statistics for how many rapes go unreported and/or unprosecuted because victims didn't want to press charges. NO. This man committed a heinous crime and got away scott-free. He needs to be brought to this country to face his charges like a man.
The law does not work that way. It's the state versus Polanski. And at the moment, the issue at hand is Polanski's fleeing from justice.
Calm down, Diane. Since the victim herself has asked that all charges against Mr. Polanski can we show less Christian forgiveness?
Since SHE does not accuse him then neither will I.
See Diane Dimond's Profile
Cassandra, you obviously didn't read the column closely. It's not up to the now-adult victim to go forward with this case. It's the State of California which is empowered with protecting the public. The fact that the victim took money to stay quiet does not absolve the state of its duty to keep all other young girls safe from Mr. Polanski. - Get it now? ~ DD
The problem you have is that both the victim and her mother have ALWAYS said they did not Polanski to be imprisoned. She may have gotten a settlement from Polanski, but even back in 1977, the victim and her mother both wanted probation for Polanski.
As for your argument that the state should ignore the victim's wishes in deciding Polanski's punishment, it loses some steam when you consider that every representative of the state--the DA, the probation officers, the prison psychiatrists--every one of them recommended probation for Polanski. The only calls for jail time came from the tabloid headlines. I suggest you read the probation officers' report.
So now you're left arguing that not only the victim and her family be ignored, but that the state's represenattives with the most knowledge of the crime be ignored. You're just left with a bag full of vengeance.
"has an incestuous relationship with the father"
i meant :
"has an incestuous relationship with the child"
"Polanski's fellow artists were even more forthcoming in his defense. Krzysztof Zanussi, the well-known Polish film producer, called the 13-year-old with whom Polanski had sex in 1977, “an underaged prostitute.”
“I don't believe in the innocence of the victim,” he said on Poland's TVN24 television. “She didn't give the impression that she was there by chance.”
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/poland/091001/poles-cool-their-longtime-hero-polanski
Absolutely agreed. He should be treated no different than any other pedophile.
A thought just occurred:
Do you suppose Hollywood would start a boycott of anyone who DIDN'T sign that damn petition?
See Diane Dimond's Profile
Ergon, stranger things have happened! ~ DD
Let me see - a 40 year old man sodomises a 13 year old girl - if they were in Africa these same celebrities
would be calling out for justice for the child - but because the perp is a famous, intelligent, wealthy, talented guy, then he gets a pass?
I should hope not!
As the author notes, this incident isn't about the girl, who got over it a long time ago and simply wants the circus to end.
It's about an angry mob, all revved up for a lynching, and the girl just happens to be a convenient pretext. It's all about bloodlust -- a 21st century Roman coliseum. Gotta stomp hard on something -- anything -- to discharge the rage stemming from America's ongoing collapse.
AIG, Wall Street, GM, Chysler, Detroit, California... The county is swirling down the toilet. But of course, there's still one growth industry to take pride in: the lawyer-prison industrial complex.
The anger people are feeling is being fueled by Hollywoods defense of Polanski. By minimizing his crimes, and trying to free him they have brought attention to a man that most of us never gave a thought to. The anger is against the cruelty of blaming the victim, and the attempt to use their influence to avoid justice for their friend and financial partner.
This blog captures the arguments against Hollywood’s support of Polanski. Read it it is good.
http://johnshore.com/2009/10/05/hollywood-go-polanski-yourself/
Thanks for the link... Fantastic article. (And I love the title of it.)
Good points. Throw a little Jewish meat to the mob.
The Larry King interview is must reading for anybody trying to understand what happened (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0302/24/lkl.00.html). The woman involved, Samantha Geimer, did not want Polanski to go to jail when she was 13 and she does not want Polanski to go to jail today. She clearly states that her abuse has come at the hands of the justice system, the judge in the case and the mass media.
What actually happened between them is only known to Ms. Geimer and Mr. Polanski and neither of them want the case prosecuted. Unfortunately, people with low self-esteem seem to enjoy slandering Ms. Geimer and Mr. Polanski and want the incident repeated over and over again.
As far as the whole statutory rape thing,. 1/2 of about 120 million males in America had sex before age 17. (http://www.swivel.com/data_columns/spreadsheet/2372915) If they had sex with someone under 17, they committed statutory rape, if they had sex with someone over 17, they were raped. This suggests that about 30 million American men committed statutory rape and 30 million adult women have committed statutory rape. Since rape is rape, period, we better start spending a lot of time building prisons for those 60 million Americans. Or a better idea.. As Samantha Geimer has been begging for 32 years, drop the damn ridiculous case against Roman Polanski..
See Diane Dimond's Profile
Joe,
I beleive you may be over-thinking this just a bit. ~ DD
"Well, I like young girls ... I suppose most men do."
Yes, Roman, I suppose you're right but most adult men realize it is a crime to interact sexually with them!
"
I like your article except for this, Roman is wrong. Most men do not "like young girls".
Great article, Diane.
As a woman writer who is a real woman and a real writer,
Dominique Sels, said in today's Liberation (a French news-
paper), : "Let us protect the girls from their mothers before
we think of protecting them from Polanski).
"Let us protect the girls from their mothers before we think of protecting them from Polanski"
Yes, one 'angle' here in Europe is that the victim was an under-aged prostitute.
I found these comments horribly disgusting. Fortunately, Dominique Sels is not the only real woman writer in France.
I wonder if the victim's mother is still alive to respond to this.
You got it totally wrong. What this writer said doesn't mean that the victim was
a child-prostitute, it means that instead of fearing Roman Polanski's actions,
(he never was concerned with little girls, only with very young women), 'mothers'
may be more dangerous when they impose on their daughters a culture of
Voyeurism, Sensationalism, Hatred, Lies and insane Hypocrisy. Give credit to
the kids!
Just think of all these mothers (seeking a divorce) who falsely accuse the fathers
of their offspring of child molesting. Now, that is a real danger to the social fabric.
Have you read Samantha Geimer's moving supplication to be forgotten and for
Polanski to be forgiven? But of course, World Citizen and so many others know
better: She is wrong! Who is she to have an opinion?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
