Day of Blogs

This piece on Roman Polanski is one of the most disgusting things I’ve read in some time.

Sorting out the Roman Polanski saga is not easy. His rape case is not only 31 years old, it is rife with sordid exaggerations, rumour-mongering, intrigue and complex moral issues that can, and do, cloud the facts.

The writer then goes on to say that well yeah, Polanski totally did ply a young girl with alcohol and drugs and “have sex” with her. So what exactly is clouded, exaggerated and whatever the fuck else he wants to call it, I’m not sure. The only thing I can conclude is that while the writer totally doesn’t condone rape, oh no he certainly does not, he just doesn’t think it’s fair to treat Polanski like the convicted rapist that he is.

The film contains many vintage clips of him being interviewed. In fresh interviews, others speak on his behalf, or at least about the case.

Besides key lawyers in the case, as well as friends in the filmmaking community, that roster includes Samantha (Gailey) Geimer, the rape victim. She makes it clear she believes that both she and Polanski got a life sentence for what happened between them.

The film never excuses Polanski’s shameful behaviour. Always intrigued by young women, he did have sex with an under-age girl, taking his fascination to illegal extremes. Samantha Gailey, then a child, should never have been drugged and seduced by an adult Polanski.

The film, however, also reveals astonishing facts about the apparent miscarriage of justice perpetrated by the celebrity judge in the case, the late Laurence J. Rittenband. Obsessed with gaining publicity for himself, Rittenband manipulated hearings, the plea bargain and the subsequent punishment cycle. He turned Polanski into a victim, even in the eyes of the prosecuting attorney.

“What happened between them?” The film never excuses Polanski’s behavior, so the writer feels the need to take it upon himself apparently. “Intrigued by young women?” “Sex with an under-age girl?” “Fascination?” The child was “drugged and seduced?”

Who the fuck decided that it was right for this man to be able to have a single drop of ink published on the subject of sexual assault?

When someone rapes you, that’s not an event that happens between the two of you — that is an act of violence that is enacted on your body. Polanski was not “intrigued by young women” — he was a rapist asshole who drugged and assaulted a young teenage girl. He didn’t have sex with her — he raped her, which is why his ass went to jail. The victim said that she said no. And in any case, it doesn’t matter because she was drugged and 13. You cannot “seduce” a 13-year-old girl, you sick fuck, let alone one whom you have drugged and who explicitly said “no.”

But nah, Polanski shouldn’t be treated like some horrid criminal, even though he raped a young woman and then willfully became a fugitive. After all, it’s not like he committed a real crime.  Sure he shouldn’t have done it, but I guess that he just took advantage of the situation, right?