Seems that facing the music in a courtroom will most probably not be happening for Roman Polanski. From his house arrest in his Swiss chalet Polanski had his lawyers ask that he be sentenced in absentia. This looks a serious option and I’m betting he won’t get any more jail time. This is all based on the ruling from the state appellate division who laid out the potential options to get the case resolved.
Lawyers are going to submit briefs and a hearing on the potential sentencing in absentia will be argued on January 22.
If he is sentenced and gets no further jail time he will be allowed to return to the US unfettered.
Bet they’ll have a big welcome home party for him. This whole thing is such bullshit.
Polanski asks to be sentenced in absentia (Variety)
Polanski asks to be sentenced in absentia in 1977 sex case (LA Times)
{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }
Roman needs to come back and face the music. I respect his artisitic ability, can empathize for him in terms of what happened to Sharon Tate, but this is ridiculous. This case needs to end and rape is rape. Being a famous director and your wife being brutally murdered is no excuse. And he fled before sentencing. Christ almighty, it’s way way overdue.
When it comes to the law, I really dislike Hollywood with a passion. Maybe I have a limited perspective, but many of these folks spew equality and justice until it comes to themselves. Get caught purchasing drugs. I have a drug problem and need rehab. In any other place in this country, jailtime, in Hollyood, rehab. And don’t get me started on Charlie Sheen. Off my soapbox now.
I mean, it’s like a horrible thing to be forced to do something you don’t want to do. You tell them you don’t want to….you tell them no, yet it is soooo unseemly that someone would ask you to do something against your will…I mean…come on. What is that like? A man of his status having to bend over for someone, how unseemly! He’s the right kind of people, not the wrong kind!
Polanski is a rich celebrity, so of course he’ll get away with it. If he was an average Joe Schmoe, the judge would have sentenced him to 50 years back in the seventies.
I bet Harvey Weinstein and Woody Allen and Debra Winger and all the other rape apologists will throw a Welcome Back to America party for Polanski when all is said and done.
“Rape is rape” says a reader but rape is not rape, murder is not murder. One rape does not equal another rape and one rapist does not equal another rapist, etc., etc. It never has and never will. We are not dealing with robots in the courtroom- one could also say that one judge or lawyer does not equal another
judge or lawyer. But when Polanski is seen as not being treated like another accused criminal, people go wild. A case can be made for Polanski having more lenient treatment than others. Of course, too many readers, not all, see defenders of Polanski as just rape apologists- end of discussion for them.
Or I can say that we are not seeing celebrity justice here but rather celebrity injustice.
Or I can say how about laying off Polanski as a woman hating rapist when you know both his wife was murdered
and mutlitlated by the Manson gang and his mother was murdered by the Nazi gang. Should a person who has survived such atrocities be treated like any other person? Or really getting into the absurd should Polanski be treated like any other person whose wife and
mother was murdered?
Bottom line just for Polanski- justice for Polanski is letting him go now. Justice for Ms. Gemier is to late him go now.
Enough is enough. Polanski and been punished and punished and punished for most of his life.
http://dankprofessor.wordpress.com
You know what? Elie Wiesel was a Holocaust survivor who went through some horrible experiences (just read Night) and guess what? He has never raped anybody!! Just because you went through some tragedy in your life does not mean the rape of a young girl is just water under the bridge!
Would you think it was no big deal if that had been YOUR 13 year old daughter/niece/granddaughter/sister who had been drugged, raped, and sodomized by a middle aged man?
Barry when does accountability for ones actions come into play. Someone steals who is poor yet there are no exceptios made. While I do have empathy for what happened with Sharon Tate and his family during the Holocaust, such circumstances don’t absolve others so why him. If these were extenuating circumstances that were effecting how he was living and dealing with his life at the time, then his legal teem should have brought up such circumstances, The fact that he fled and has chosen to stay out of the US for so long, tells me he knows what he did was wrong. Freedom allows us certain priviledges but it also requires accountability and personal responsibility. It’s time for Mr. Polanski to be held accountable.
Katie:
There was no evidence in the form of medical or forensic testing that showed Polanski did anything to Geimer. She also has said repeatedly, though no one wants to hear her, “It wasn’t rape.” There was no tearing, no scratches, no bruising and no fluids if what she said he did to her was true. She claimed he ‘raped’ her twice (sodomy), yet there was no proof he did it. For someone who has anal sex for what is supposed to be the first time, there was no blood, no nothing to ‘show’ what he’d done. Also, she claimed he ejaculated on her back twice, yet there were no fluids present on her clothes, none on her skin and she never said she bathed or took a shower. Her statements don’t mesh with the lack of evidence against Polanski.
Accountability does mean something, however, when there’s no proof in the form of DNA nor fluids where she says there should be, it leaves a lot to be believed. To me, she’s not believeable and her ‘story’ makes a mockery of other rape victims.
The main reason he fled, was not because he knew he did something wrong, but because the judge was acting inappropriately regarding the sentence he was going to give Polanski. It was excessive and punitive beyond what others at that time got for the same plea. Polanski was being treated apallingly. There were many incidents where Rittenband committed judicial misconduct. So much so, the prosecutor Roger Gunson was going to give Douglas Dalton (Polanski’s attorney) an affidavit to be filed in order to get Rittenband thrown off the case due to his behaviour.
Samskara,
As she was underage, this is statuatory rape as I understand the definition. I am not going to argue the misconduct issue. I think many know the judge behaved unethically. It doesn’t excuse the behavior. Since the victim now claims no foul, come back and face a trial. Bottom line is Polanski had sex with a minor. Consentual or not does not matter. IMO he’s not the victim here, she is rape or not.
Best movie I have seen in a while is Avatar hands down. That movie was well done and extremely entertaining. For any of you that have yet to see it, go watch it while it’s in theaters. You will not be disappointed.
SCUM!
Viewing the discussion here, when comparing Samskara and Barry Dank against the popular notion of “rape is rape” and “time to face the music” – I’m sorry, it just feels like human inquiry going against robotic concretist black/white thinking. Of course, in our information age, the robots usually win, so I’m not optimistic for Polanski.
Nevertheless, particularly in light of the wonderful new Polanski picture, “The Ghost Writer”, which is completely pertinent to this discussion, I have to say that I have a lot more respect for a man who has erred and then spends years of his artistic energy in contemplating his own dark side and questions of morality (as Polanski has in “Tess”, “Bitter Moon”, “Death and the Maiden”, and “The Ghost Writer”) than a Good Citizen who refuses to see an individual’s movies on principal.
Seriously, if we’re to be so robotic about Polanski, as suggested by Professor Dank, we might as well throw Dostoyevsky, Freud, Nietzsche, Shakespeare, and Ibsen out of all school curriculum.
Which is not to say that Polanski is blameless – but context counts for a lot, and the many layers of the case point out that Polanski’s original sentence in 1977, approved by the victim and her parents (who actually never wanted him to serve jail time), the probation board, the prosecuting attorney (though, to be fair, not the DA Office), and psychiatrists who examined Polanski, was perfectly fair and adequate. The way that the media and blogosphere has exploited the case on the psychology of the public (who see the words “Child Rapist” applied to the personage of “Roman Polanski” – and cannot help but make a negative cognitive judgment) has resulted in a mob mentality that wants blood.
In conclusion, Polanski has always been quite candid about his sexuality, which many might view as aberrant (personally, half your age + 7 as a minimum is the way I go). But I don’t feel it’s unnatural or dangerous (though I’d say “scummy” is an adjective that works); I’ve always actually been more uncomfortable with the guys who lash out at guys like Polanski and deny any kind of identification to that dark side. I’d be more comfortable with Roman Polanski watching my kids than “that” guy. Too often I’ve been right about such persons.
“Nevertheless, particularly in light of the wonderful new Polanski picture, “The Ghost Writer”, which is completely pertinent to this discussion . . .”
I haven’t seen it, but doesn’t it turn out that the villain of the piece is really a nice man who was set up by a woman? If so, very pertinent.
FUCK ROMAN POLANSKI UP THE ASS HE IS A PEDOFILE AND SHOULD BE DEALT WITH AS A CHILD RAPIST JUST BECAUSE HE HAS MONEY AND MAKE MOVIES DOES NOT MAKE HIM ANY BETTER THAN ANY OF US NORMAL PEOPLE AND HELL YES HE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN 50YRS IN PRISON FOR RAPE..IF HE WOULD HAVE RAPED MY DAUGHTER THERE WOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN A TRIAL.I WOULD HAVE PUT A BULLET IN HIS JEWISH FUCKEN HEAD..AND YES I FEEL BAD FOR WHAT HAPPEN TO HIS WIFE AND HIS MOTHER THAT SHOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPEN TO THEM..LOOK AT CHARLIE MANSON HE NEVER KILLED ANYONE AND HE IS SPENDING THE REST OF HIS NASTY ASS LIFE IN PRISON YOU FIGURE IT OUT..
{ 1 trackback }