This is a hearty “fuck you” to all the celebrities supporting the release of child rapist Roman Polanski. I’m looking at you, Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese, and Harvey Weinstein.
Here’s a fact check you dumb fucking celebrity scum: he drugged and anally raped a thirteen-year-old girl. She was 13. He was 43. He knew the girl’s age. It does not matter if the mother said it was OK. He pled guilty, then when he realized what kind of deep shit he was in, he fled the country.
I don’t give a rat’s ass if the guy can make movies or if he can shit gold bricks, he’s a criminal, a pervert, and he deserves to be punished. It’s mind boggling that morons like Whoopi Goldberg, who claims “it wasn’t rape-rape” supports his release. Why wasn’t it rape-rape? Because he’s a movie director and no one who does that is a criminal? Do you celebrities think making good movies is more important than bringing a child rapist to justice? Jesus CHRIST it’s disgusting and moreover it really tells you what kind of people the celebrities supporting his release are. I mean, of course we knew Woody Allen would support it, but the others…
This is shaping up to be the McDonalds Hot Coffee Lawsuit of our generation. The issue is significantly more nuanced than either side is making it out to be. He didn’t just “rape a 13-year-old girl in the butt and run away,” and neither was he railroaded and only fled to get away from a corrupt justice system hell-bent on repressing him.
I know you are trying to be all objective but with the addition of the fact that he was worried that his plea bargain was going to be thrown out, that’s pretty much exactly what it “just” is.
Anyways there a 5 page ongoing thread about this that I guess the OP here missed.
I’ve been waiting for a newer one of these threads to bring something up. But first, for the purposes of this conversation, lets aside the fact that under the law, sex with a someone below the age of consent is often defined in criminal codes as a type of rape. For clairty, let’s simply refer to the act as ‘unlawful sex’ or ‘sex with an underage girl.’ This avoids confusion with the other kinds of rape(s) for whcih there are different snetencing guidelines. With that out of the way . . .
Everyone keeps saying, or at least implying, that he admitted to drugging and anally raping a 13 year old girl, yet, far as I can tell, he did not and those allegations have not been established by any court. He plead guilty to unlawful sex - in tjhis case, sex with an underage girl who was not his wife. Here’s the plea, see for yourself. That’s a far cry from what he stood accused of. Did he at some point later fess to the the entire sotry as she told it? This is a sincere question.
The only thing to be said in his favour is that it was so long ago. It depends whether you believe time absolves someone. I do - primarily because my understanding is our molecules are refreshed every seven years - but this is a minority viewpoint.
Nevertheless this conduct was especially reprehensible. If these celebrities do not generally agree with that or similar rules I cannot understand their point of view at all.
They’re not being convited of it. Polanksi fled what appeared to be an inevitable trial on much graver charges than those to which he copped. Folks claiming or implying that he admitted to drugging and anally raping a 13 year old girl are wrong. How much does that change the complexion of this? Maybe some, maybe none, but at least let’s be clear.
You do realize that this isn’t entirely true as the hardware and software are synonymous. Yes, the computational theory of the mind is quite useful, but it’s still hardware.
A question from someone unfamiliar with the details of the case (and too lazy to look it up): did he “drug” her in the sense of forcibly or covertly giving her drugs, or was it that he handed her a pill, told her to take it, and she complied?
This was the late 70s after all; you still had the carryover of the “sex and drugs” culture of the 60s and early 70s, and the child abuse moral panic hadn’t gained momentum yet. To the extent that moral blindness aided and abetted by the fashions of the day can be said to be less culpable than conscious wrongdoing, Polanski might have genuinely believed that he wasn’t pushing the envelope that far. Doubtless he was rudely surprised to discover that middle class America didn’t subscribe to the progressive mores of Hollywood.
Mate, I entirely agree. Even now in my country it isn’t too wrong to shag thirteen year olds in the right context. And the seventies were far better in this respect, although I were slightly more appropriate age then.
But ignoring "no"s… that’s more a fifties thing. By the seventies that was obvious rape. I don’t see any way that, assuming his conduct was as reported by the victim, he wasn’t morally culpable.
Yeah, see, I don’t know. I don’t know Polanski or the vicitim, so I have no guage of either’s credibility. Since he hasn’t copped to the drugging and sodomy, I’ll assume that it’s possible that he did not do those things (just that it’s possible - he hasn’t admitted it).
Knowing what I know about the system, if I was accused of a crime much more serious than the one I had committed, that circumstances were such that I sure looked guilty, and I had the money and means to avoid hanging judge who had it out for me, I don’t know what I’d do.
That’s a possiblity. It’s also why these things are often better left to the court.
Why would there be a trial involved? I though he plead guilty of the lesser charge and then fled to avoid a sentence that was likely to be more harsh than the one he bargained for in the plea deal.
Are you saying that if he’d stayed he woud have rather gone to trial with the more serious (rape) charges than accept the plea deal with a slightly tougher sentence?
First off, the girl’s testimony is utterly damning. There’s not a hint of deception in it and she completely lays out how Roman plied her with booze, then gave her drugs while she was drunk, then forcibly raped her anally. Then Polanski did not and apparently still does not dispute anything in any substantial way. He is guilty, and none of this relativist crap will fly with me.
