?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

I love, love, love this guy.

And for the record, it absolutely blows my mind to see so many people--including women! Women!--lining up to support a rich white guy who drugged and forcibly raped a 13-year-old child, then skipped away scot-free1.




---

1 Edited to add: Okay, so he didn't really get away scot-free. While on the lam, he was forced to endure certain privations, such as spending his time with his movie actress wife shuttling between a luxury penthouse in Paris and an enormous chalet located in an exclusive ski resort in the Swiss mountains, but if he wanted an ironing board or a new set of sheets, could he pop down to a Wal-Mart and get them? Could he?


Comments

( 54 comments — Leave a comment )
dwer
Oct. 7th, 2009 09:45 pm (UTC)
sigh. He didn't skip away scot free. He pled out to a reduced charge, and then ran when it became clear that the judge, who wanted to enhance his reputation as a celebrity-buster, was going to void the plea-bargain.

Polanski needs to face justice. But it's not a black-and-white story the way people want to make it.
tacit
Oct. 7th, 2009 10:04 pm (UTC)
I'm with the judge on this one.

If Polanski were poor and black, and ended up in the slammer for a few decades for drugging and forcibly raping a 13-year-old, nobody would say that it was a gross miscarriage of justice and the judge was only interested in burnishing his reputation as a rapist-buster. The fact that the plea bargain existed in the first place is a testament to the privilege that white wealthy celebrities have in the first place. The fact that the judge would get a reputation for being a celebrity-buster simply for enforcing the same standard on a white rich guy that would get enforced on anyone who wasn't rich, white, or famous is a sad commentary indeed.

The man drugged and forcibly raped a 13-year-old girl. How in the name of God is there any moral gray area here?

Edited at 2009-10-07 10:05 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - dwer - Oct. 7th, 2009 10:41 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - tacit - Oct. 7th, 2009 10:57 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - dwer - Oct. 7th, 2009 11:02 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - londubh - Oct. 7th, 2009 11:47 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mantic_angel - Oct. 14th, 2009 09:01 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - londubh - Oct. 7th, 2009 11:37 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - malaika02 - Oct. 8th, 2009 05:18 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - tacky_tramp - Oct. 7th, 2009 11:50 pm (UTC) - Expand
kindredsgirl
Oct. 7th, 2009 09:56 pm (UTC)
thanks for reminding me about this blogger. .he's the best!
bmajors
Oct. 7th, 2009 09:59 pm (UTC)
Wow, I like that guy too.

Yup, it is mind boggling to me too how people try to sweep what Polanski actually did under the rug. He drugged and forcibly raped and sodomized a child. If he was a regular person and not a famous rich director then they would be petitioning for him to not be able to move into their neighborhoods.

Edited at 2009-10-07 10:01 pm (UTC)
the_xtina
Oct. 7th, 2009 10:22 pm (UTC)
Sort of, yes - there's a Walmart in Dublin, Ireland, and quite a few in Deutschland.

*cough*
tacit
Oct. 7th, 2009 10:27 pm (UTC)
Yeah, but do you know how much it costs to call the airport and have them fuel the jet so you can fly to Dublin? This man suffered!
(no subject) - the_xtina - Oct. 7th, 2009 10:31 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mizzpyx - Oct. 8th, 2009 11:20 am (UTC) - Expand
solar_diablo
Oct. 7th, 2009 10:41 pm (UTC)
Yeah, he repeatedly raped a child. But dude - he's like, gifted, and stuff.
rain_herself
Oct. 7th, 2009 10:55 pm (UTC)
I don't have anything to say about Roman Polanski, but I'm glad you posted this, because it let me to this hysterical piece of genius:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bieDx14M-m8&NR=1

Oh, man, I will never stop laughing.
gentleindiff
Oct. 8th, 2009 04:51 am (UTC)
The best part about that video is watching the ridiculous kitty in the background.
(Deleted comment)
tacky_tramp
Oct. 7th, 2009 11:52 pm (UTC)
He has a gift for discussing complex, nuanced issues while still being hilarious. And also hot (she said shallowly).
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - miss_lisa_ma - Oct. 8th, 2009 02:39 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - tacit - Oct. 11th, 2009 08:27 pm (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - tacit - Oct. 11th, 2009 09:03 pm (UTC) - Expand
writersblock_va
Oct. 8th, 2009 12:03 am (UTC)
Dude~ That is probably the best breakdown I've seen on the entire thing. AWESOME video :)
joreth
Oct. 8th, 2009 02:38 am (UTC)
He summed it up brilliantly in the first few sentences. He forcibly had intercourse with a woman/girl WHO WAS SAYING NO.

There are a number of LEGAL ways Polanski could have dealt with any possible misconduct on the part of the judge, as mentioned both in the video and in your responses in the comments.

Polanski got away with it because he's rich and white.

Anyone who was not famous/rich or white would not have been offered that plea deal and would not currently have anyone rich or famous standing in his corner now saying "but it wasn't rape-rape".

Send him to prison & put him in general population. I hear they have a special way of dealing with child molesters there.
londubh
Oct. 8th, 2009 02:51 am (UTC)
Anyone who was not famous/rich or white would not have been offered that plea deal

No? And here I thought that it was the Family who proposed a plea to save a young girl from the trauma of being forced to give up her anonymity and testify in court. I didn't realize that her rapist's complexion entered into their decision making process.

Yes, he was/is rich and powerful. Yes, that means he'd have been able to mount a pretty powerful defense. Yes, his money & power came to him easier due to accidents of birth, but to say that he was only offered the plea on what would have likely been a nearly impossible case to defend simply because he's white is insulting to the family who originated the proposal.

I mean, do you Honestly believe that any family would care more about a rapist's melanin content than their recently violated daughter's mental health when it comes to bringing the bastard to justice? Really?
(no subject) - joreth - Oct. 9th, 2009 01:38 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - londubh - Oct. 9th, 2009 02:37 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - joreth - Oct. 9th, 2009 02:40 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - tacit - Oct. 11th, 2009 08:32 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - fallingupthesky - Oct. 8th, 2009 03:08 am (UTC) - Expand
dorklord07
Oct. 8th, 2009 05:40 am (UTC)
I'm not going to lie, this whole travesty has been a wonderful teaching moment on everything wrong with the American justice system. Like so:

1. Rich? Famous? White? Do people think the law applies to you? Guess which one of those questions is answered 'no'. How many people signed a petition for Micheal Vick saying 'it wasn't dog fighting-dog fighting'.

2. Plea bargains. The reason we have them is so that a judicial system overburdened and overbooked with criminal cases can save time. Why is it overburdened and overbooked? The legislation of morality, the war against drugs, and a nation of lawyers.

3. Punishment of sexual offenders. 18 year old getting a consensual blowjob from his 15 year old girlfriend? Sex offender. Older person who drugs and rapes an underage girl? Sex offender. Difference between the two in terms of job prospects, living situations, social stigma, etc? None. (Unless you're rich, famous, and white, as mentioned before)

4. Politicization of the judicial branch. Why the fuck should a judge even be thinking about his renown when deciding whether or not to try a case? Because he needs to look good when someone above him resigns. Because when you don't have the skill, the fame will do just as well.

I would love if the high profile-ness of this case resulted in some kind of judicial reform. But that's the same thing I've said before every high-profile case.
londubh
Oct. 8th, 2009 06:15 pm (UTC)
Difference between the two in terms of job prospects, living situations, social stigma, etc? None. (Unless you're rich, famous, and white, as mentioned before)

I would think that living outside of US jurisdiction might have a little something to do with why he isn't subjected to the Cruel and Unusual lifelong punishment applied to so called sex offenders.
(no subject) - londubh - Oct. 8th, 2009 06:16 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - joreth - Oct. 9th, 2009 01:46 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - londubh - Oct. 9th, 2009 03:35 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - joreth - Oct. 9th, 2009 03:46 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - londubh - Oct. 9th, 2009 04:22 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - joreth - Oct. 9th, 2009 06:51 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - claws_n_stripes - Oct. 10th, 2009 03:23 am (UTC) - Expand
aclaro
Oct. 8th, 2009 11:57 am (UTC)
"Women!--lining up to support a rich white guy who drugged and forcibly raped a 13-year-old child, then skipped away scot-free1."

Well, "support" is not the right word, but one of the women who is asking that they leave this alone is the woman he raped. Because everytime this ends up in the spotlight, she has to re live it. She says she does not want him "held to further punishment." Is it her call to make? No. But I think her opinion should count for something. And getting outraged on her behalf 32 years after the fact is a little weird.
dorklord07
Oct. 8th, 2009 02:05 pm (UTC)
HA! I claim the 'wasn't born yet' defense for my outrage. XD
(no subject) - londubh - Oct. 8th, 2009 06:25 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mantic_angel - Oct. 14th, 2009 09:39 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - londubh - Oct. 14th, 2009 06:35 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mantic_angel - Oct. 15th, 2009 04:25 am (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
kawakiisakazuki
Oct. 9th, 2009 09:05 pm (UTC)
What particularly bugged me was how Poland was acting all upset about Polanski's arrest, about the same day they passed a law requiring mandatory castration of "child molesters".

I think it shows people have a habit of imagining criminals as the worst kind of inhuman monsters, so when it's suddenly someone they "know" all kinds of excuses and exceptions are made, rather than questioning the sanity of the law.

It's probably human nature; one of my teachers murdered his wife, and in some ways that still doesn't compute for me.

It's hard to be sure what actually happened with Polanski, but it sure sounded like really fucked-up "rape-rape" and not some questionable statutory rape charge for otherwise wholesome consensual sex involving a legal minor...
mantic_angel
Oct. 14th, 2009 09:14 am (UTC)
Yes, rich and white. Surely it has absolutely nothing to do with "Hoping to protect Geimer from a trial, her attorney offered Polanski a plea bargain" (source, via Wikipedia)

Do you have sources that refute Wikipedia, and the linked sources? I'd love to hear it.
dig_your_self
Oct. 26th, 2009 01:07 am (UTC)
haha - i love that guy! he has a point.
i too was disgusted by all the people coming out in his defense - he's a rapist! plain and simple
( 54 comments — Leave a comment )