# Polanski falls for the old "We'd Like to Give You a Lifetime Achievement Award" Trick!
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742
**Category:** Cafe Society
**Created:** [September 27, 2009, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742 "2009-09-27T11:49:45Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 8
### Author:  [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/141 "2009-09-29T16:12:46Z")
[Film Makers Demand Polanski Release](http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Movies/09/29/polanski.filmmakers.protest/)
Whatever.
---
### Author:  [@justrob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/justrob)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/142 "2009-09-29T16:13:15Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#):
>
> 2.) the difference between 1970 and 2009, for many people other than Polanski in the 70s drunken or drugged consent was still consent and 13 year olds were not sacrosanct in 70’s either. Many more people in the 70s would have approved of having consentual sex (which Polanski at times has claimed it was) with a 13 (especially one that attended Hollywood parties), than would approve of it now. Therefore, they view judging a crime committed in the 70s by the social mores of the 21st century wrong.
I don’t know about you but someone repeatedly saying no and asking someone to stop doesn’t sound like consent to me.
[QUOTE=ZPG Zealot]
3.) the girl’s mother, who many people suspect basically pimped the kid out to Polanski and should therefore be partially held to blame for whatever happened.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know how much blame to put on the mother for letting her go of unsupervised with a 44 year old man but after it happened she showed her support by giving up a possible carreer to take her daughter and leave Hollywood.
[QUOTE=ZPG Zealot]
4.) the girl herself, I’m certain people will jump on me for “blaming the victim”, but what the hell was she doing at Nick Nolte’s with drugs and alcohol freely flowing, if she wasn’t up to something, maybe a blackmail plan that backfired? In any con the most dangerous moment is when the mark figures out what’s going on. When that happens people get dangerous.
[/QUOTE]
This didn’t happen at a Hollywood party. Polanski went to her home and picked her up. Theoretically to take pictures of her for the french version iof Vague. He then took her to a house (the testimony and wiki seem to indicate it was Jack Nicholson’s house) and gave her champagne and part of a quaalude. Then he proceeded to rape and sodomize a 13 year old while she said no and asked him to stop.
I feel like a broken record here but people keep trying to draw this as a picture where poor Roman just happened to have sex with a girl who although she consented was just barely too young to take it forcibly in the ass. Which, according to the deposition, is exactly NOT what happened. None of which Polanski denied.
---
### Author:  [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/143 "2009-09-29T16:47:46Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#):
>
> So if you run away and years pass, you’ve gotten away with the crime?
If your victim asks that the crime not be prosecuted, I defer to her. She has repeatedly said she suffered more from the media exposure than the crime and that she has recovered from the crime; I think her wishes should be honored.
Years ago when Bobby Delaughter prosecuted Byron de la Beckwith for the 30 year old murder of Medgar Evers I was completely for it. This was because-
= the Evers family wanted it
= the previous trials had been a travesty of justice
= his actions in the meanwhile had been reprehensible (bragging about the murder, suspected involvement in others, various prison sentences for other crimes)
= it was a powerful symbolic act as well
I though the same when Egar Ray Killen was jailed a few years ago for his passive involvement in the Mississippi Burning murders, and there were other cold-to-frigid civil rights era crimes also being prosecuted.
HOWEVER, once Delaughter and others got massive publicity and book deals others seeking to make a name for themselves came out of the woodwork. There’s in fact been an on-again/off-again attempt to indict Carolyn Bryant, the woman Emmett Till allegedly whistled at and was subsequently tortured to death over his actions toward. Till’s murderers not only got away scot free but, thanks to double jeopardy, _sold their story to a national magazine_ completely admitting they were guilty as hell. They are dead now, but Carolyn Bryant is still alive, and the pandering and “I’m against the murder of Emmett Till and it’s time his killers saw justice!” outcries of various prosecutors and investigators was sickening. Bryant was not involved in the murder- she did not even tell her husband about him whistling at her- and she was in fact terrified of the man [he was a wifebeater] and left him soon after the trial, and she’s now an old woman living on a pension who’s had a blameless life other than the Emmett Till incident- again, it profits nobody to incarcerate her.
Polansky is not blameless (as I believe Bryant is), but I do see in his arrest much of the same mentality. It’s not about the victim, it’s about the decriers. It’s about people wanting to say “I’m against child rape!” (is anyone sane for it?) and “There must be justice!” when in fact the victim is MORE VICTIMIZED BY THE MEDIA than by the trial. It should be about what _SHE_ wants, THAT IS JUSTICE.
Polanski is able to afford the best attorneys on Earth. How hard do you think it will be for them to delay and poke holes in a 31 year old case that had improprieties revealed by judicial review 30 years ago? There’s a very good chance he won’t even _be_ incarcerated, and it’ll just cost a fortune and ruin the life of a woman who people are allegedly seeking to avenge (this again and again and again). If incarcerated it’ll be after a very expensive media heavy trial and it’ll cost a fortune to incarcerate him and keep him safe from other prisoners (can you imagine what the Aryans would do? A 76 year old foreign born Jewish holocaust survivor and rapist and rich besides- his life wouldn’t be worth a plug nickel- thus he has to be provided incredible security that no other prisoner is likely to receive) and all for the sake of justice- he destroyed a girl’s life.
Well in fact he didn’t destroy it. She recovered. Now she pleads that that media destroyed her life and the best thing to do for her is NOT to proceed. But in the name of Justice let’s destroy her life again, we know what’s best.
How is this justice?
---
### Author:  [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/144 "2009-09-29T16:57:20Z")
But justice isn’t about just doing whatever the victim wants. Prosecuting a murderer won’t bring back their victim, but we do it anyway.
---
### Author:  [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/145 "2009-09-29T17:13:43Z")
> [@Sampiro](#):
>
> If your victim asks that the crime not be prosecuted, I defer to her. She has repeatedly said she suffered more from the media exposure than the crime and that she has recovered from the crime; I think her wishes should be honored.
>
> Years ago when Bobby Delaughter prosecuted Byron de la Beckwith for the 30 year old murder of Medgar Evers I was completely for it. This was because-
>
> = the Evers family wanted it
> = the previous trials had been a travesty of justice
> = his actions in the meanwhile had been reprehensible (bragging about the murder, suspected involvement in others, various prison sentences for other crimes)
> = it was a powerful symbolic act as well
>
> I though the same when Egar Ray Killen was jailed a few years ago for his passive involvement in the Mississippi Burning murders, and there were other cold-to-frigid civil rights era crimes also being prosecuted.
>
> HOWEVER, once Delaughter and others got massive publicity and book deals others seeking to make a name for themselves came out of the woodwork. There’s in fact been an on-again/off-again attempt to indict Carolyn Bryant, the woman Emmett Till allegedly whistled at and was subsequently tortured to death over his actions toward. Till’s murderers not only got away scot free but, thanks to double jeopardy, _sold their story to a national magazine_ completely admitting they were guilty as hell. They are dead now, but Carolyn Bryant is still alive, and the pandering and “I’m against the murder of Emmett Till and it’s time his killers saw justice!” outcries of various prosecutors and investigators was sickening. Bryant was not involved in the murder- she did not even tell her husband about him whistling at her- and she was in fact terrified of the man [he was a wifebeater] and left him soon after the trial, and she’s now an old woman living on a pension who’s had a blameless life other than the Emmett Till incident- again, it profits nobody to incarcerate her.
>
> Polansky is not blameless (as I believe Bryant is), but I do see in his arrest much of the same mentality. It’s not about the victim, it’s about the decriers. It’s about people wanting to say “I’m against child rape!” (is anyone sane for it?) and “There must be justice!” when in fact the victim is MORE VICTIMIZED BY THE MEDIA than by the trial. It should be about what _SHE_ wants, THAT IS JUSTICE.
>
> Polanski is able to afford the best attorneys on Earth. How hard do you think it will be for them to delay and poke holes in a 31 year old case that had improprieties revealed by judicial review 30 years ago? There’s a very good chance he won’t even _be_ incarcerated, and it’ll just cost a fortune and ruin the life of a woman who people are allegedly seeking to avenge (this again and again and again). If incarcerated it’ll be after a very expensive media heavy trial and it’ll cost a fortune to incarcerate him and keep him safe from other prisoners (can you imagine what the Aryans would do? A 76 year old foreign born Jewish holocaust survivor and rapist and rich besides- his life wouldn’t be worth a plug nickel- thus he has to be provided incredible security that no other prisoner is likely to receive) and all for the sake of justice- he destroyed a girl’s life.
>
> Well in fact he didn’t destroy it. She recovered. Now she pleads that that media destroyed her life and the best thing to do for her is NOT to proceed. But in the name of Justice let’s destroy her life again, we know what’s best.
>
> How is this justice?
I don’t agree that justice is about doing what the victim wants.
Consider the cases in which wealthy and influential celebrities indulge in a little good old fashioned rape. Normally, people caught committing such crimes do hard time, and no-one I think would deny that this crime deserves hard time.
Hiowever, the truly rich and influential have resources denied to the rest of us - in particular, the ability to pay off or otherwise exert influence on the victims. Giving the victim the power, in essence, to “forgive” the crime after prosecution would be a procedure simply begging to be abused. I hardly think any truly wealthy man would prefer years in jail to a simple pay-off; how does that square with equality under the law?
In my opinion the wealthy and powerful should do the same hard time for crimes as the rest of us, were we guilty. The deck is already stacked in their favour somewhat, as they can afford the best representation etc.
To my mind (and again it is just my opinion) it sends a very important message _not_ to forgive those fleeing justice in such cases. Otherwise, the obvious message is that fleeing justice (if you have the resources to do it) is basically a good idea.
As for the jollies gotten by right-wing media commentators, I’m basically indifferent to that: my solution is not to watch them or let them influence my opinion on matters of justice, either way.
---
### Author:  [@Terraplane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terraplane)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/146 "2009-09-29T17:16:52Z")
> [@Sampiro](#):
>
> Well in fact he didn’t destroy it. She recovered. Now she pleads that that media destroyed her life and the best thing to do for her is NOT to proceed. But in the name of Justice let’s destroy her life again, we know what’s best.
>
> How is this justice?
We don’t do this sort of thing just for the victim though. You say that, “It’s not about the victim, it’s about the decriers.” and you’re partly right. The decriers are members of society and they have a right to ensure that the most horrible of crimes against society are punished and that they are punished consistently.
There are many cases where a young teenager consented to sex with a much older partner, never regretting the encounter, yet the older partner was still prosecuted for statutory rape (I’m not talking about Romeo/Juliet situations, but where the other partner is well into adulthood). Domestic violence victims forgive their attackers all the time, often before they’ve even stopped bleeding. What the victim wants isn’t the end-all be-all determining factor in prosecuting cases of violence or sexual assault because society has a stake in the matter as well. This is ignoring the issue of a convicted criminal fleeing sentencing, which I think is inarguably in society’s best interest to enforce.
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/147 "2009-09-29T17:18:10Z")
It doesn’t matter how good his lawyers are. He’s already been convicted. The public outcry is about more than child rape (though what’s wrong with being against child rape?), but against the idea that he should be allowed to escape punishment simply because he was able to run away for a long time. That didn’t fly for Sarah Jane Olson, why should it fly for him?
---
### Author:  [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/148 "2009-09-29T17:28:47Z")
[quote=“justrob, post:142, topic:511742”]
I don’t know how much blame to put on the mother for letting her go of unsupervised with a 44 year old man but after it happened she showed her support by giving up a possible carreer to take her daughter and leave Hollywood.QUOTE]
Or she realized that was now impossible, cut her losses and left. I wonder how much the undisclosed settlement she received from Polanski was?
---
### Author:  [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/149 "2009-09-29T17:40:25Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#):
>
> But justice isn’t about just doing whatever the victim wants. Prosecuting a murderer won’t bring back their victim, but we do it anyway.
A bit of a simulpost from the Pit Thread, but since it’s relevant equally in both places I’ll do it anyway.
Oliver Wendell Holmes once told an idealistic young lawyer who argued that in “a court of justice” he would win that
> [@](#):
>
> This is a court of _law_ young man, not a court of justice.
In my opinion the victim’s right is the course of justice. Prosecuting Polanski is done for the law. Personally I side with justice.
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#):
>
> Or she realized that was now impossible, cut her losses and left. I wonder how much the undisclosed settlement she received from Polanski was?
Certainly not enough, even if it was in the millions. Though there is no price that he can pay in money or in time served.
---
### Author:  [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/150 "2009-09-29T17:46:24Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes]
It doesn’t matter how good his lawyers are. He’s already been convicted.
[/QUOTE]
Thirty-one years ago in a case that was as recently as this year was ruled to have been characterized by “substantial misconduct” and “prosecutorial misconduct”. I don’t think a skilled lawyer would have a hard time getting a new trial.
---
### Author:  [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/151 "2009-09-29T18:02:12Z")
> [@Sampiro](#):
>
> Certainly not enough, even if it was in the millions. Though there is no price that he can pay in money or in time served.
Depends on what exactly he did. Polanski may not have mounted a vigorous defense in the first court case, but he was also expecting a good plea agreement. The fact that the victim accepted the undisclosed settlement raises serious questions to me. Specifically, this reeks of a con job that went wrong, a mark that got violent, and both parties dealing the reprecussions afterward.
---
### Author:  [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/152 "2009-09-29T18:08:45Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#):
>
> Depends on what exactly he did. Polanski may not have mounted a vigorous defense in the first court case, but he was also expecting a good plea agreement. The fact that the victim accepted the undisclosed settlement raises serious questions to me. Specifically, this reeks of a con job that went wrong, a mark that got violent, and both parties dealing the reprecussions afterward.
Are you making this shit up from whole cloth for your own amusement or are you fundamentally incapable of basic reading comprehension?
Stranger
---
### Author:  [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/153 "2009-09-29T18:08:48Z")
> [@Sampiro](#):
>
> Thirty-one years ago in a case that was as recently as this year was ruled to have been characterized by “substantial misconduct” and “prosecutorial misconduct”. I don’t think a skilled lawyer would have a hard time getting a new trial.
Are you sure it was ruled to have those things? All I have seen is a judge giving his opinion on what he saw in a movie.
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/154 "2009-09-29T18:13:25Z")
> [@Sampiro](#):
>
> Thirty-one years ago in a case that was as recently as this year was ruled to have been characterized by “substantial misconduct” and “prosecutorial misconduct”. I don’t think a skilled lawyer would have a hard time getting a new trial.
Who ruled on these things? In what court? I’m not aware of prosecutorial misconduct even being alleged at all.
---
### Author:  [@justrob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/justrob)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/155 "2009-09-29T18:14:05Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#):
>
> Or she realized that was now impossible, cut her losses and left. I wonder how much the undisclosed settlement she received from Polanski was?
I would just like to point out that this quote in **Sampiro** ’s post was actually **ZPG Zealot**. Not me.
---
### Author:  [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/156 "2009-09-29T18:17:14Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#):
>
> Specifically, this reeks of a con job that went wrong, a mark that got violent, and both parties dealing the reprecussions afterward.
That has long been an accusation, but for argument’s sake even if it is true that her mother set him up on an Errol Flynn Badger Game (which if she did or didn’t I wouldn’t know) Samantha was 13. At that age she couldn’t even get free records from Columbia House and **IF** she was the daughter of a con-artist (emphasis added because I’ve no knowledge whatever of her mother) she almost certainly went along at the demand of her mother and still did not deserve what happened to her. Plus even if she was the 13 year old daughter of Satan and Mata Hari, no reasonable man could have been enticed to drug and repeatedly rape her.
---
### Author:  [@justrob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/justrob)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/157 "2009-09-29T18:18:37Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#):
>
> Depends on what exactly he did. Polanski may not have mounted a vigorous defense in the first court case, but he was also expecting a good plea agreement. The fact that the victim accepted the undisclosed settlement raises serious questions to me. Specifically, this reeks of a con job that went wrong, a mark that got violent, and both parties dealing the reprecussions afterward.
This is what I found. Posted in the BBQ Pit thread.
[[QUOTE=Answers.com](http://QUOTE=Answers.com)]
Repeated attempts to resolve Polanski’s legal situation in the United States proved unsuccessful, even though his victim, Samantha Geimer, had gotten what she wanted in a civil suit reportedly settled for $225,000 and said she felt he should be able to return. “I have suffered enough,” Polanski told Ivor. And he told the New Yorker: “I’d like to be able to return … to just be able to work in a normal fashion. I miss the logic and efficiencies of the Hollywood system.”
[/QUOTE]
I didn’t see when this happened in the whole timeframe.
and as I said there …
[QUOTE=justrob]
Those quotes from Polanski sure make it seem like he’s remorseful about the whole drugging and raping and sodomizing of a 13 year old thing. :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
---
### Author:  [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/158 "2009-09-29T18:21:45Z")
By being a scofflaw, Polanski showed disrespect for the California court system. He in turn will get no consideration from that system. He’ll do time.
The California prison system already has facilities to deal with high profile prisoners, senior citizen prisoners, and non-Aryan white prisoners. Phil Spector’s a Jew, and a senior citizen, and they’ve found a place for him. The added cost for Polanski is trivial relative to the cost of the whole prison system in Cali.
---
### Author:  [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/159 "2009-09-29T18:21:46Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#):
>
> Who ruled on these things? In what court? I’m not aware of prosecutorial misconduct even being alleged at all.
My apologies: a misreading and mistake on my part, but I promise not an effort to defraud. Prosecutorial misconduct was Polanski’s _allegation_ in the hearing that occurred earlier this year. Since google is understandably bringing up mostly stories from this week I’m going to go to Lexis to find pre-arrest in Switzerland details- will be back.
---
### Author:  [@justrob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/justrob)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2009, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742/160 "2009-09-29T18:22:22Z")
Sorry for the double post but one thing I forgot to mention about the quote from [Answer.com](http://Answer.com) is I fail to see how Polanski has suffered in any way because of this? Having to spend time in your mansion in France and being careful about what countries you travel instead of being in prison is suffering?
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742.md?page=7)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-falls-for-the-old-wed-like-to-give-you-a-lifetime-achievement-award-trick/511742.md?page=9)