This is absolutely disgusting

[beefche]

Looks like our Hollywood elite is promoting a child rapist--Roman Polanski. In particular this is what Whoopi Goldberg said:

"I know it wasn't 'rape' rape. I think it was something else, but I don't believe it was 'rape' rape," said Goldberg, dismissing the possibility that Polanski had forced himself on anyone.

"Rape" rape--is that like being "dead" dead? Rape is rape--especially when the man pleaded guilty to drugging and forcing himself on a 13 y/o girl. Why am I ever surprised at the immorality of Hollywood?

[Just_A_Guy]

I had the misfortune to stumble upon some extracts of the grand jury testimony. It was revolting.

[MrsAri]

Such is Hollyweird.

[prisonchaplain]

These cases are always hard. The story is that this fellow's crime is decades old, he made restitution with the victim, the victim has asked for the case to be dismissed, and people naturally defend their own (Hollywood defending a cinematic artist). Of course, all of these mitigating circumstances need to come out in a court of law. Proper mercy might mean a slight reduction in sentence...not a dismal and a wink and nod at the guy's intentional fleeing from justice.

[beefche]

Ah yes, the poor man. This is what Harvey Weinstein said about Polanski:

Whatever you think about the so-called crime, Polanski has served his time. A deal was made with the judge, and the deal is not being honoured. The theory going around is that the reason Switzerland cooperated and acted on a longstanding extradition order with the United States this time was because of their own troubles in the financial crisis.

It is a shocking way to treat such a man. Polanski went through the Holocaust and the murder of his wife, Sharon Tate, by the Manson family. How do you go from the Holocaust to the Manson family with any sort of dignity? In those circumstances, most people could not contribute to art and make the kind of beautiful movies he continues to make.

The deal was that if he spent time in prison, which he did pre-sentencing, his sentence would be commuted but when he came back to sentencing the judge went back on the deal. Forget about the Seventies era and whether this is excusable – this is a miscarriage of justice, and the government is making him a scapegoat.

(emphasis mine)

Since there isn't any other injustice in the world that needs Hollywood's attention, and this man doesn't deserve to serve any time for raping a child, and since he's a "brilliant" artist he shouldn't have to suffer consequences of running from his punishment, they should take time to blame the government and make them stop harrassing this poor man. /sarcasm

[Vort]

Looks like our Hollywood elite is promoting a child rapist--Roman Polanski. In particular this is what Whoopi Goldberg said:

"Rape" rape--is that like being "dead" dead? Rape is rape--especially when the man pleaded guilty to drugging and forcing himself on a 13 y/o girl. Why am I ever surprised at the immorality of Hollywood?

I agree with your feelings on this matter.

Having said that, I see a huge difference between a man forcibly penetrating a woman who doesn't want him or who is incapacitated and a man having sex with a physically adult woman who is not legally allowed to give consent. They are two different crimes that (in English) happen to share the common legal name of "rape". I have little sympathy for Polanski and his apologists, but I believe the muddy thinking on this issue is not all on one side.

For the record, I do not disagree with the DOJ on the matter. I would just like to see a sober, clear-eyed, non-histrionic treatment of the matter in public discussion. (Like THAT's likely to happen.)

[Guest Godless]

I agree with your feelings on this matter.

Having said that, I see a huge difference between a man forcibly penetrating a woman who doesn't want him or who is incapacitated and a man having sex with a physically adult woman who is not legally allowed to give consent. They are two different crimes that (in English) happen to share the common legal name of "rape". I have little sympathy for Polanski and his apologists, but I believe the muddy thinking on this issue is not all on one side.

I agree. From what I understand, however, Polanski drugged the girl. That's rape, plain and simple. I believe the case should be dismissed, but only because the victim requested it. Otherwise, I'd say let the man burn.

[beefche]

Having said that, I see a huge difference between a man forcibly penetrating a woman who doesn't want him or who is incapacitated and a man having sex with a physically adult woman who is not legally allowed to give consent. They are two different crimes that (in English) happen to share the common legal name of "rape". I have little sympathy for Polanski and his apologists, but I believe the muddy thinking on this issue is not all on one side.

Vort, I'm not sure I'm understanding you. Can you explain the bolded portion?

[Just_A_Guy]

I believe the case should be dismissed, but only because the victim requested it. Otherwise, I'd say let the man burn.

I'm unconvinced. Here, the victim received an undisclosed amount as a civil settlement.

Do we really want to provide a(nother) mechanism whereby the rich can buy their way out of criminal prosecution?

[unixknight]

I don't know what to think of this, but a lot of the protests I've heard on TV over the potential extradition seem to revolve around the idea that he makes good movies, ergo he shouldn't be punished...

"We the Jury find the defendant, John Doe, guilty of First Degree Murder."

"Ah, but wait, your honor... I'm an artist and my paintings are AWESOME."

"Hmm... Good point. You're free to go."

"Score!"

[Guest Godless]

I'm unconvinced. Here, the victim received an undisclosed amount as a civil settlement.

Do we really want to provide a(nother) mechanism whereby the rich can buy their way out of criminal prosecution?

No, but I do believe that the victim's wishes should be honored. This is a high-profile case that's going to get a lot of publicity if it gets blown wide open again. I don't blame the woman for wanting to avoid that sort of attention.

[Mahone]

"We the Jury find the defendant, John Doe, guilty of First Degree Murder."

"Ah, but wait, your honor... I'm an artist and my paintings are AWESOME."

"Hmm... Good point. You're free to go."

"Score!"

John Doe the moderator? Well it's all coming out now - always thought he was very devious

[Moksha]

Can judicial agreements be easily voided?

[bytebear]

It's very easy to condemn someone who has no contribution to society. I am not particularly a fan of Polanski's work, but many people find him brilliant, and for that alone he deserves clemency. If he was just some down and out druggie, or even just some insurance salesman from Iowa, there would be no outreach. It's the same with OJ and Michael Jackson. They have contributed to your life, and to society, so they deserve better treatment. I think it's sick personally.

[Just_A_Guy]

Can judicial agreements be easily voided?

Technically, plea bargains are between the prosecutor and the defendant and the judge has only the prerogative to approve or reject the deal struck by the other parties.

I have no idea how Polinski's arrangement came about, or whether it was ever approved by a court in the first place.

[Generally_Me]

It's very easy to condemn someone who has no contribution to society. I am not particularly a fan of Polanski's work, but many people find him brilliant, and for that alone he deserves clemency. If he was just some down and out druggie, or even just some insurance salesman from Iowa, there would be no outreach. It's the same with OJ and Michael Jackson. They have contributed to your life, and to society, so they deserve better treatment. I think it's sick personally.

The answer to this is, Hitler was a writer and a painter; we should have never fought against him!

[Generally_Me]

Also, it was "rape-rape"; here's a link to the LA Times article: Fugitive filmmaker Roman Polanski is seized in Switzerland -- latimes.com

The arrest is the latest twist in a legal saga that has captivated and outraged the public since Jimmy Carter was president. In 1977, Polanski -- a household name both for his movies and for the Manson family murder of his then-wife, Sharon Tate -- was arrested at a Beverly Hills hotel and charged with raping and sodomizing a 13-year-old aspiring model. The girl told police the director had plied her with champagne and a piece of a quaalude during a photo shoot at actor Jack Nicholson's Mulholland Drive home. He then forced himself on her as she begged him to stop.

Polanski reached a deal with prosecutors in which he pleaded guilty to a count of unlawful sex with a minor and prosecutors agreed not to pursue rape, sodomy and other charges. A judge ordered Polanski to spend 42 days in state prison for pre-sentencing "diagnostic testing." Polanski served the time and was released. But on the eve of his sentencing in 1978, he boarded a plane for Europe, never to return to the U.S.

[Dravin]

"Rape" rape--is that like being "dead" dead? Rape is rape--especially when the man pleaded guilty to drugging and forcing himself on a 13 y/o girl. Why am I ever surprised at the immorality of Hollywood?

I bet you dollars to donuts she's convinced herself that it wasn't forceable (and thus the quotes around rape to mean, I'm guessing, statutory) and that the gal lied in some effort to get money. So basically he's the poor victim of a 13 year old's plot to seduce him and "blackmail" him for a fat settlement or some such. I mean he's brilliant! Smart talented people don't do bad things!

Edited September 30, 2009 by Dravin

[StallionMcBeastly]

I feel he should be punished to the full extent. He fled the country to avoid prosecution... we can't tolerate that. He should spend the rest of his days in a jail cell, end of story.

[annewandering]

I laughed at the idea that a person who has undergone stress can not be creative. Ha. Most truly great creative works draw from the artists agonies in life.

My husband read me some opinions in Europe that nearly made me gag. Rich creative people are not the new 'aristocracy. Long ago the so called upper class was not held accountable for anything. I thought we were to the point that no longer was done or at least not openly. If found out that is usually grounds for scandal not approval.

To be honest this mans creativity is not all that hot either. It is almost always, if not always, depictions of perverted and degrading aspects of life. It might be artistic but it is hardly wonderful.

[john doe]

He raped a 13 year-old girl. He admitted to it. Consensual or not, in the eyes of the courts a girl of 13 cannot consent to sex, even if she said yes and seduced him. It doesn't matter how long ago it happened, except for the statute of limitations, which does not apply since he was convicted for it before that ran out. I wonder how many people out there defending him would allow their young daughters to go through the same thing just because the perpetrator is famous?

[annewandering]

Oddly enough some people think that is ok if the guy is famous. Even for their own kids. Sick isnt it?

[jadams_4040]

Looks like our Hollywood elite is promoting a child rapist--Roman Polanski. In particular this is what Whoopi Goldberg said:

"Rape" rape--is that like being "dead" dead? Rape is rape--especially when the man pleaded guilty to drugging and forcing himself on a 13 y/o girl. Why am I ever surprised at the immorality of Hollywood?

Whoopi goldberg does not speak for all of hollywood. Whoopi goldberg speaks for whoopi goldberg.

[annewandering]

There is a petition in hollywood for him to be released. Amazing who is pushing it. It is not just whoopi.

Here is the CNN report on it: Filmmakers demand Polanski's release - CNN.com

ZURICH, Switzerland (CNN) -- Woody Allen, Pedro Almodovar and Martin Scorsese have "demanded the immediate release" of fellow filmmaker Roman Polanski, who was arrested in Switzerland on a U.S. arrest warrant related to a 1977 child sex charge.

A supporter displays a "free Polanski" tag on his shirt during the Zurich Film Festival.

They were among 138 people in the film industry who signed a petition against the arrest.

Polanski was on the way to the Zurich Film Festival when Swiss police detained him in response to the American warrant.

The filmmaker pleaded guilty in 1977 to having unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor but fled before he could be sentenced. He settled in France, where he holds citizenship. Investigators in the United States say Polanski, then 43, drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl.

The filmmakers objected to his being arrested en route to the film festival, which held a tribute to him this year.

"It seems inadmissible to them that an international cultural event, paying homage to one of the greatest contemporary filmmakers, is used by the police to apprehend him," said the petition, backed by France's Societe des Auteurs et Compositeurs Dramatiques (Society of Dramatic Authors and Composers). Watch report on Polanski's detractors among the Swiss »

"The arrest of Roman Polanski in a neutral country, where he assumed he could travel without hindrance ... opens the way for actions of which no one can know the effects," said the signatories, who also included actresses Monica Bellucci and Tilda Swinton and directors David Lynch, Jonathan Demme, John Landis, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu and Wim Wenders.

In the United States, powerhouse movie producer Harvey Weinstein is trying to recruit more supporters for Polanksi.

"We are calling every filmmaker we can to help fix this terrible situation," his company told CNN in a statement.

Edited September 30, 2009 by annewandering

[Elphaba]

"Rape" rape--is that like being "dead" dead? Rape is rape--especially when the man pleaded guilty to drugging and forcing himself on a 13 y/o girl. Why am I ever surprised at the immorality of Hollywood?

You're misunderstanding Whoopi's point.

She did not say the incident itself was not rape. She was clarifying that, legally, Polanski had not been convicted of rape, so it is futile to keep demanding he go to prison for “rape,” because he cannot serve time for a crime he was not convicted of.

Like you say, Polanski did admit he had done everything the child accused him of; however, in an effort to spare the young girl from public exposure, a plea bargain was struck that dropped the rape and sodomy charges. Thus, he was only legally convicted of “unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor,“ (which is a felony).

That is what Whoopi was trying to explain. Everyone, naturally, wants the man in prison for the heinous acts he committed, including rape and sodomy--but it’s not going to happen. In the eyes of the law, he had not raped her. Whoopi was not supporting Polanski’s reduced sentence. She was just explaining what it was.

I was very put off when Whoopi didn't seem to have a problem with Polanski fleeing the country, because he believed he was going to get a very long sentence that didn't fit the crime. That may or may not be true, but it is not a point I would defend. She could focus on the legal issues all she wanted, and I did appreciate the clarification. But the fact is he did, literally, and horrifically, rape a child.

Finally, I do not believe his victim, now in her ‘40s, is “over it.” Just my opinion.

Elphaba