# Roman Polanski Redux **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 10, 2017, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618 "2017-06-10T16:54:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/62 "2017-06-23T16:37:29Z")
But did you look at my link? The first footnote mentions the Texas “promiscuity defense” was abolished in 1994! ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/63 "2017-06-23T19:52:52Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > For the one thousandth time, Polanski plead guilty to statutory rape only. At the time, he maintained the sex was consensual. That’s the point of a plea bargain. You agree to plead guilty to a lesser crime. Polanski may have claimed the sex was consensual at the time. But he has since admitted it was not. The victim has consistently said it was non-consensual all along. She said so on the day of the crime and reported it to the police. And she still says it was non-consensual even though she now says she doesn’t want Polanski to be prosecuted for it. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/64 "2017-06-23T20:12:56Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Recent article: Roman Polanski compares US court system to Nazi Germany > > [Roman Polanski compares U.S. justice system to Nazi Germany in court filing | Toronto Sun](http://m.torontosun.com/2017/04/14/roman-polanski-compares-us-justice-system-to-nazi-germany-in-court-filing) Its a fair comparison. I mean Nazi courts did probably prosecute rapists and absconders at times. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/65 "2017-06-25T13:09:41Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > Actually a lot of decadent Hollywood of 1970s didn’t think Polanski’s behavior was unusual or inappropriate at the time. > > [Anjelica Huston on catching Roman Polanski with a 13-year-old: 'I thought nothing of it' | The Independent | The Independent](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/anjelica-huston-on-catching-roman-polanski-with-a-13-year-old-i-thought-nothing-of-it-9863814.html) > > Notice also how casually the drugs are discussed. It really was a different era. We understand it was a different time. But I still reject your minimizing his conduct and the way it would have played at that time. He has one version of the story and she has hers. If you believe what he agreed to in the plea deal, it was statutory rape. (Or it wasn’t “rape rape” as Whoopie would say). While some would have just chalked that up to it being cool that an old dude was scoring a 13 year old child (seems to be your take), I’ll continue to maintain that the majority of Americans wouldn’t have viewed it that way. It was certainly just after Nixon was elected twice by the silent majority of (conservative) Americans. I’ll continue to believe that the good people of the mid-west in the mid-1970s wouldn’t have thought that was cool. They certainly wouldn’t have that if they believed her side of the story. That she was drugged and actively said “no!” at each stage of the rape. No amount of 70’s hipness would have washed that away to the majority of Americans. Anjelica Huston was in the home and began to intervene as one point, only to leave at Polanski’s behest. Some argue she should have indeed intervened, stopped what ever type of rape that you categorize this to be, and failed to do so. Her subsequent statements seem very self serving to me. You’re fighting to hard to be on the wrong side of history as they say. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/66 "2017-06-25T13:42:54Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Polanski may have claimed the sex was consensual at the time. But he has since admitted it was not. Do you have a cite? I hadn’t heard that before. ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/67 "2017-06-25T20:01:44Z")
> [@spifflog](#): > > We understand it was a different time. But I still reject your minimizing his conduct and the way it would have played at that time. > > He has one version of the story and she has hers. If you believe what he agreed to in the plea deal, it was statutory rape. (Or it wasn’t “rape rape” as Whoopie would say). While some would have just chalked that up to it being cool that an old dude was scoring a 13 year old child (seems to be your take), I’ll continue to maintain that the majority of Americans wouldn’t have viewed it that way. It was certainly just after Nixon was elected twice by the silent majority of (conservative) Americans. I’ll continue to believe that the good people of the mid-west in the mid-1970s wouldn’t have thought that was cool. > > They certainly wouldn’t have that if they believed her side of the story. That she was drugged and actively said “no!” at each stage of the rape. No amount of 70’s hipness would have washed that away to the majority of Americans. > > Anjelica Huston was in the home and began to intervene as one point, only to leave at Polanski’s behest. Some argue she should have indeed intervened, stopped what ever type of rape that you categorize this to be, and failed to do so. Her subsequent statements seem very self serving to me. > > You’re fighting to hard to be on the wrong side of history as they say. The majority of conservative Americans would have viewed a 13 year old that went alone to a topless modeling shoot as a teenage slut, a “bad” girl who had no right to complain if someone got “a little rough” during sex that everyone would have assumed was consensual based on the alleged victim’s previous sexual history. If Polanski had been an auto worker rather than a Hollywood celebrity whose prosecution would add to the prestige and reputation of both the prosecutor and judge, the alleged victims would have been laughed out of the police station. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/68 "2017-06-25T21:06:33Z")
Gonna disagree with that. Sex with a 13 year old wouldn’t be laughed at by _nearly_ any police chief or D.A. in the country. ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/69 "2017-06-25T21:15:36Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Gonna disagree with that. Sex with a 13 year old wouldn’t be laughed at by _nearly_ any police chief or D.A. in the country. If the 13 year old was considered “promiscuous”, sex with her, consensual or not, was a non-crime in many law authorities’ eyes. Of course, they only mirrored the larger society in that. Opinions about sexuality were different. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/70 "2017-06-25T22:02:55Z")
ZPGZ does have a point that as late as the 70s, yes, even in US statutory cases the condition of “good moral reputation” of the victim could still be brought into discussion – not an \*automatic \*GOOJF card but something that could weigh on a jury’s minds or a prosecutor’s discretion. > [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > As far as I can tell from the news reports, his position is that he will come back to the States and appear in the California court if he gets an assurance in advance that the court will give him favourable treatment. > > The California courts have rejected those arguments, saying that fugitives from justice don’t get to dictate the terms of their appearance to the court. Right. It is an entirely unreasonable demand on the part of Polanski, the court \*must \*reject such kind of terms. Even if the intention all along were to show favorable treatment, the court can not signal that. In a plea deal, the court wants to see the convict act duly chastened. All signs point to that Polanski to this day believes he did nothing wrong and would seek to project a slap-on-the-wrist zero-discomfort sentence as a vindication, and even more so a dropping of the case as an admission that it was a witch hunt all along. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/71 "2017-06-26T06:40:01Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > It’s not about European attitudes about rape, it’s about the extradition process. > > First, France. It’s nothing to do with attitudes to rape. Rather, it’s a constitutional right in France that a French citizen cannot be extradited. Instead, they provide that the requesting country should bring the evidence to a court in France, which will then conduct a trial of the French citizen. The California prosecutors have not tried that approach. > > Next, Switzerland. The US tried to extradite him a few years ago when he was in Switzerland. The Swiss court found that the US had not provided all the documents about the case, including some sealed sworn testimony from earlier proceedings in the California courts about the plea bargain. The Swiss court found that it was not safe to extradite, given the incomplete record. > > Third, Poland. The Polish court also found the missing documents to be concerning, and ultimately concluded that Polanski could not get a fair trial in the US, given the allegations against the former trial judge and the passage of time. All of that still amounts to latitude towards rape. The France case falls to preferring to have a rapist than to extradite a citizen. The Swiss and Polish case are both situations where it was a judgment call, meaning they didn’t even have that excuse. He pled guilty. He’s admitted it was not consensual. No evidence is needed. And he’s not going to get the death penalty, so claims about it not being safe are farcical on their face. Punishing an admitted rapist should be more important than any of this bureaucratic nonsense. Anything less is giving rape latitude. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/72 "2017-06-26T11:32:54Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > All of that still amounts to latitude towards rape. The France case falls to preferring to have a rapist than to extradite a citizen. The Swiss and Polish case are both situations where it was a judgment call, meaning they didn’t even have that excuse. Golly, only America has a real legal system then? Thanks for dropping that knowledge on us. > [@](#): > > He pled guilty. He’s admitted it was not consensual. So you have a cite for this admission? Little Nemo made the same claim earlier but I’ve never seen this news. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/73 "2017-06-26T12:13:40Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > The majority of conservative Americans would have viewed a 13 year old that went alone to a topless modeling shoot as a teenage slut, a “bad” girl who had no right to complain if someone got “a little rough” during sex that everyone would have assumed was consensual based on the alleged victim’s previous sexual history. If Polanski had been an auto worker rather than a Hollywood celebrity whose prosecution would add to the prestige and reputation of both the prosecutor and judge, the alleged victims would have been laughed out of the police station. We’ll have to agree to disagree. I admit there is/was some element of “she had it coming” or “she shouldn’t have been there in the first place.” But this wasn’t some drunk, 23 year old barfly. This was a 13 year old _child_ who stated the anal rape wasn’t consensual. Where I grew up (New England) and where I’ve lived once (the mid-west) that would not have been waived away. They would have been disgusted that a rich adult did this to a child. You’re painting with too broad a brush, and giving our parents and grand parents too little credit. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/74 "2017-06-26T13:05:47Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > If the 13 year old was considered “promiscuous”, sex with her, consensual or not, was a non-crime in many law authorities’ eyes. Of course, they only mirrored the larger society in that. Opinions about sexuality were different. Reading up on the caselaw presented by **CarnalK** it appears to have mixed up two separate points. Admissibility of previous sexual activity by the minor and whether such evidence would vitiate a conviction. The case cited is only evidence for the first, that sexual history was admissible, not that it provided an escape for the accused. Indeed the fact that consent was immaterial in such cases is accepted in the authority presented. ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/75 "2017-06-26T14:54:29Z")
> [@spifflog](#): > > We’ll have to agree to disagree. > > I admit there is/was some element of “she had it coming” or “she shouldn’t have been there in the first place.” But this wasn’t some drunk, 23 year old barfly. This was a 13 year old _child_ who stated the anal rape wasn’t consensual. > > Where I grew up (New England) and where I’ve lived once (the mid-west) that would not have been waived away. They would have been disgusted that a rich adult did this to a child. > > You’re painting with too broad a brush, and giving our parents and grand parents too little credit. This was an already sexually active 13 year old that went alone to a topless modeling shoot. She would not have been considered a child by the standards of behavior at the time. Where I grew up (the South in the 70s) and lived for too much of my childhood this would have been immediately waived away as the actions of a disgruntled “slut”. People would have been disgusted that the courts wasted time on the matter. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/76 "2017-06-26T16:06:57Z")
It wasn’t waved away; Polanski attacked the child on 10 March 1977 and was arrested the next day. Whether or not she consented is irrelevant - children under fourteen cannot consent to sex and therefore any sex with a 13 year old is rape in CA. Can you mention a few of the other times someone drugged and sodomized a thirteen year old and it was dismissed as the actions of a disgruntled slut? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/77 "2017-06-26T16:50:44Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > It wasn’t waved away; Polanski attacked the child on 10 March 1977 and was arrested the next day. Whether or not she consented is irrelevant - children under fourteen cannot consent to sex and therefore any sex with a 13 year old is rape in CA. > > Can you mention a few of the other times someone drugged and sodomized a thirteen year old and it was dismissed as the actions of a disgruntled slut? > > Regards, > Shodan More incidents than I can count occurred (and probably still do occur) among the Southern white, working poor I encountered in the 1970s. And I imagine, people being people, incidents among Black and Hispanic communities probably occurred in similar numbers. And once again for the historically impaired while consent may not be a factor in current age of consent law because the promiscuity defense has been legally eliminated (though it no doubt remains as a cultural force), it was a factor in the 1970s. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/78 "2017-06-26T17:01:40Z")
Then why was he arrested the day after he attacked the child? It doesn’t seem to have been a factor. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/79 "2017-06-26T17:08:02Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Then why was he arrested the day after he attacked the child? > > It doesn’t seem to have been a factor. > > Regards, > Shodan I would say because some people in the Los Angeles law enforcement and legal communities wanted to make names for themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/80 "2017-06-26T18:02:36Z")
If they wanted to make a name for themselves, why would they choose a case most people would consider a waste of time? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2017, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618/81 "2017-06-26T18:06:03Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If they wanted to make a name for themselves, why would they choose a case most people would consider a waste of time? > > Regards, > Shodan Law careers can be made on prosecuting celebrities and hard to win cases. Polanski was famous. His name brought notoriety and it’s not beyond the pale that some of his professional rivals in Hollywood might have encouraged things. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-polanski-redux/788618.md?page=5)