I am in shock at how many celebrities condone pedophilia and rape

[codex57]

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehumancondition/archive/2009/09/29/roman-polanski-raped-a-child-a-primer.aspx?GT1=43002

Article sums things up nicely. Dude drugged and then raped a child. What is there to support?

At this point, I think Whoopi, Harrison Ford, Martin Scorcese, Harvey Weinstein, and Woody Allen (shocker), among others, need to be on Megan's List along with Polanski himself.

[MamaKath]

I have been shocked by the same thing! We watched a few minutes of an interview with Sharon Tate's sister this morning only to hear that it wasn't really rape (the drugged 13 year old didn't say no I guess?!?!) and that she forgives him and that he isn't really guilty. We turned it off wondering how she would feel if someone said her sister's death wasn't really murder or that her sister's killer should have walked because of her age/illness, etc.

I do believe that justice should be served by the courts, no matter who he is.

[BelleoftheBallFlagstaff]

As a woman that was sexually abused as a child, it is SO rape. Hollywood needs a reality check!

[codex57]

No, the girl said no. She didn't kick and scream cuz she was scared, but she did say no. She just wants to get it behind her now cuz the media attention and constantly reliving it can't be fun, but she was still raped. It's out of her hands at this point anyways.

[MamaKath]

No, the girl said no. She didn't kick and scream cuz she was scared, but she did say no. She just wants to get it behind her now cuz the media attention and constantly reliving it can't be fun, but she was still raped. It's out of her hands at this point anyways.
I figured this might be more accurate, but she was definitely spinning away! He is lucky he will be able to go before someone in the courts rather than me. I would put him into general population after sentencing him on today's terms.

[katydid1971]

It makes me mad that people say "look what he's been through" but the bad things that have happened are no excuse for RAPE!!!!! And BTW a minor can not consent to sex period!!!!! The fact that he drugged her is just more proof that she was raped.

[jacksmomtobe]

He left the country instead of facing his punishment. Why should time absolve him from facing his punishment? Why doesn't every other criminal leave the country then and then say oops now so much time has gone by. He was found guilty so regardless he should be punished. I respect the victim feelings of wanting this matter dropped but I think that has more to do with the media attention than anything else. Just doesn't seem like fair and equal justice if he gets off even at this point.

[AshleyAnn]

No, the girl said no. She didn't kick and scream cuz she was scared, but she did say no. She just wants to get it behind her now cuz the media attention and constantly reliving it can't be fun, but she was still raped. It's out of her hands at this point anyways.

She was 13, she could have begged for it and said yes a million times. Doesn't matter she wasn't capable of agreeing to sex. Statutory rape is RAPE.

I don't blame her for wanting it all to go away, bring it up again brings all that hurt right back to the surface like it was yesterday, but that doesn't mean the law can give him a free ride just because she don't want to deal with it. Justice isn't just about the victim, its about society and justice for everyone including his next potential victim.

[mommy111]

IMO, there are a lot of grey areas regarding the statutory rape law, but a grown man drugging and having sex with a 13 year old???? There is no grey area there.
I was wondering the same thing when I read the news item and it seemed like everyone in the news/visible disagreed with me that he should be prosecuted as we would anyone else. It is good to find a bunch of mamas who agree!

[TwinFoxes]

and Woody Allen (shocker)

Shows how out of touch they are if anyone thought having Woody Allen voice support was a good idea! Geez, why not just get Gary Glitter to add his name to the list of supporter.

[TwinFoxes]

I would like to point out that if you read the Newsweek link, it's got a lot of quotes from journalists who do not support him being released. I don't think most people "in the media" support him being freed, but a some big name stars do. (I'm surprised at Whoopi.)

[Melaine]

This is SOOOOO disturbing. The article is great, I especially like the quote from the Guardian.

[miki]

And the bail jumping is a separate crime with its own penalty on top of everything else.

[Sillygirl]

That was an excellent article, thanks for posting.

[writermama]

that many of the people supporting him are unaware of the facts of the case, as I was until recently. What I had always heard was a convoluted story about him being at a party and girl being there and she was drunk and maybe he didn't know how young she was ... and it was consentual but she just young. Having learned the acutal facts of the case, that it was a premeditated, predatory act of rape and humiliation, I would hope that no one would condone that, no matter how famous or talented the rapist and sexual predator.

Unfortunately, it's not that uncommon for people to simply not believe that someone they've known in a different context could do such a thing, even when confronted with the facts.

[Laurel]

that many of the people supporting him are unaware of the facts of the case, as I was until recently. What I had always heard was a convoluted story about him being at a party and girl being there and she was drunk and maybe he didn't know how young she was ... and it was consentual but she just young. Having learned the acutal facts of the case, that it was a premeditated, predatory act of rape and humiliation, I would hope that no one would condone that, no matter how famous or talented the rapist and sexual predator.

Unfortunately, it's not that uncommon for people to simply not believe that someone they've known in a different context could do such a thing, even when confronted with the facts.

I think this is a big part of it. Also, the amount of time that has passed, and the Hollywood climate at the time. If someone was accused of such a crime today, you can bet these people would not be so vocal with support. Shame on Whoopi for saying it wasn't "rape-rape". WTF?

Polanski was also aided by some big name actors on the night of the crime.I have never understood why they didn't face some sort of charges as well.

[codex57]

Shows how out of touch they are if anyone thought having Woody Allen voice support was a good idea! Geez, why not just get Gary Glitter to add his name to the list of supporter.

I was thinking this too. Maybe they haven't gotten the petition to him yet.

[BabyMine]

Whoopi clarified her comment this morning. I didn't think she would condone it.

http://allday.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/10/01/2084644.aspx

[dcmom2b3]

Where were their publicists?

Be loyal to your friend if you must, but the strongly worded demand for his release? *Demand* for his release? The arrogance is astonishing. One demands the release of political prisoners. . . .

[Melaine]

Whoopi clarified her comment this morning. I didn't think she would condone it.

http://allday.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/10/01/2084644.aspx

I still don't really get the clarification....maybe that's because my kids were talking so loudly I couldn't really hear the entire clip, but still....how did she justify it exactly?

[codex57]

The reason we have a "statutory" rape charge in the first place is because we know children are easily pressured or coerced by adults. Thus, we still consider it "rape".

Especially when it's a 40+ yr old man with a 13 yr old child where the child says no but the man still has anal sex (among other things) against her will. I do think there's a difference between that situation and an 18 yr old with a 16 yr old girlfriend.

[kozachka]

Here is transcript of Samantha Gailey's testimony to the grand jury, in case someone is interested in the first hand account of what happened:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskicover1.html

I just read it and it is pretty shocking.

[Toba]

^^^ I read that years ago and was appalled. I would HOPE that anyone that would want to support him would read that first ... I can't imagine they'd continue their support after reading that.

[dcmom2b3]

I still don't really get the clarification....maybe that's because my kids were talking so loudly I couldn't really hear the entire clip, but still....how did she justify it exactly?

IMO she didn't really clarify, just spun a series of stupid senseless comments with another series of senseless comments. She said (rather Meredith Viera said Whoopi said) that she's not a Polanski supporter and that she was only speaking about the charges (when she said it wasn't 'rape-rape'). She reportedly decined an invitation to come on the Today Show and discuss in person, though.

I'm still too disappointed in her for words. In all of the folks who've rallied to justify, explain, excuse, rationalize etc. his behavior and condemn his arrest.

At least the French government has backed away from their initial call for his release.

[citymama]

It's one thing to stand with a friend in times of need. It's another thing to try and justify, or turn a blind eye to rape of a child. No matter how long ago it happened. He should be tried as any other criminal in the same situation would be.

[codex57]

It's one thing to stand with a friend in times of need. It's another thing to try and justify, or turn a blind eye to rape of a child. No matter how long ago it happened. He should be tried as any other criminal in the same situation would be.

Exactly. It's one thing to say something like, "He's a good friend, a genius at his work, and I'm gonna support him in his time of need." It's another to twist and otherwise try and diminish the rape and drugging of a child and say he should get off scott free cuz it was so long ago.

[Melaine]

Ok, I just watched the entire clip of the View conversation. Whoopi can't clarify her position IMO; she was very clear. After the "rape-rape" comment she goes on to say that other countries view the ages differently and she clearly thinks it was consensual (which it clearly wasn't) and that it was therefore ok (which it wouldn't have been, even had it been consensual). I am shocked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NX_D0Bv9M0

[citymama]

ETA: See my original post 2 posts prior!

To add to the previous post linking to the View, here's an interview with the young woman who was the rape victim.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymc6LDd1QPg&feature=fvw

[codex57]

It somewhat clarifies it to me, but yeah, she kept running her mouth and she lost my benefit of the doubt again.

At the end of teh day, he plead guilty to statutory rape. I understand Whoopi's point on that. However, she goes on about attitudes towards age of consent, but except for Spain, she'd still be too young in the rest of Europe.

Ok, fine, that's all he was convicted of, but then you have to look at what the possible maximums are for statutory rape. You get to the sentence by looking at things like the circumstances of the incident. In this case, it was BAD. My point is, you still have to consider the fact that he drugged a child. "Consensual" is very iffy since he drugged her up. You still have to look at the facts of the incident. Only pleading to statutory rape merely limits the max penalty he could face.

Which is where Polanski looks pretty bad (and Whoopi for standing up for him). She says he was worried he'd get 100 yrs. Please, he couldn't get 100 yrs for stat rape. He prolly couldn't get that even if he had plead guilty to the original charges. He just didn't want to spend a day in jail, and it needs to be emphasized that he never spent any time in jail. He spent about a month in a psychiatric facility for observation, but it wasn't jail. He didn't even spend the amount of time there that he was supposed to.

Plea bargains are subject to the approval of the judge. He's used to everyone cutting him a break cuz of who he is, apparently even including the psych ward he was at. When he found out the judge wasn't impressed with his celebrity, he basically took his ball and ran away to avoid facing the music.

[KBecks]

I don't know if folks have seen this - an interview with the young woman who was the rape victim. I still can't get over how the child's parents let her go do steamy photo shoots alone at night at home with a notorious playboy 40 yr old director. Boggles the mind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymc6LDd1QPg&feature=fvw


Yet, what matters is that what he did was wrong. I don't care if the victim is OK with what happened now, or if she was paid off, or whatever. That does not excuse the fact that he committed rape and basically got away with it. And, just because he got away with it, does not mean that he still should be allowed to get away with it. We should not let rapists go unpunished.

Our society lets celebrities and star athletes get away with terrible crimes because of who they are. It is sad and we should not let people go unpunished just because of "who they are".

[citymama]

Yet, what matters is that what he did was wrong. I don't care if the victim is OK with what happened now, or if she was paid off, or whatever. That does not excuse the fact that he committed rape and basically got away with it. And, just because he got away with it, does not mean that he still should be allowed to get away with it. We should not let rapists go unpunished.

Our society lets celebrities and star athletes get away with terrible crimes because of who they are. It is sad and we should not let people go unpunished just because of "who they are".

That's exactly what I said - see 2 posts before.

[dcmom2b3]

[quote=codex57;2490286]Ok, fine, that's all he was convicted of, but then you have to look at what the possible maximums are for statutory rape. You get to the sentence by looking at things like the circumstances of the incident. In this case, it was BAD. My point is, you still have to consider the fact that he drugged a child. "Consensual" is very iffy since he drugged her up. You still have to look at the facts of the incident. Only pleading to statutory rape merely limits the max penalty he could face.

Which is where Polanski looks pretty bad (and Whoopi for standing up for him). She says he was worried he'd get 100 yrs. Please, he couldn't get 100 yrs for stat rape. He prolly couldn't get that even if he had plead guilty to the original charges. He just didn't want to spend a day in jail, and it needs to be emphasized that he never spent any time in jail. He spent about a month in a psychiatric facility for observation, but it wasn't jail. He didn't even spend the amount of time there that he was supposed to.[quote]

Well, to be fair, statutory rape was what he plead to, not what he was charged with. He was facing a multiple count indictment that was far more serious than "just" statutory rape. So, had the judge rejected the plea, he may well have been looking at serious time -- I've heard life bandied about, somehow I doubt that, but have no desire to find a copy of the Cal Crim Code from 1977 and do the math myself.

I'm certain, however, that the law at the time didn't call for "imprisonment" for 30 years in an apartment in Paris, in all of France for that matter. With sojurns at the chalet in Gastaad. With family and friends.

If that's prison, I'm off to pull a caper and get myself that sentence.

[kwc]

Chris Rock on Leno, compares Polanski to OJ... finally, NOT a Polanski apologist.

It appears some people in Hollywood still have some sense and values.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/02/chris-rock-compares-roman_n_307816.html

[Naranjadia]

Chris Rock on Leno, compares Polanski to OJ... finally, NOT a Polanski apologist.

It appears some people in Hollywood still have some sense and values.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/02/chris-rock-compares-roman_n_307816.html

I saw that clip and I thought he was right on the mark both in terms of calling a spade a spade, as well as critiquing the idea that Polanski's work somehow mitigates what he did.

[kijip]

as well as critiquing the idea that Polanski's work somehow mitigates what he did.

Of all the defenses of Polanski this is the one that really bugs me the most. His movies may be great films, but why would talent make one less guilty of anything on any level?