C'mon Jake, Its Chinatown!

some food for thought that otherwise we wouldn't have had a chance to consider. I've never lived in Los Angelas or been involved in the movie business and know little to nothing of what goes on there, day by day, in any of the player's lives. I usually try to remember that I'm hearing only one side of any story. This is an excellent reminder that that is a pretty good idea. There's always at least two sides to every event. Thanks for stating the other side as you see it.

We're still friends, by the way. (:-

I'm glad we're still friends!

I just disagree with you.

And you are entirely correct, there are always two sides to a story.

I guess I just believe in personal responsibility too much. Roman was an adult. He knew the girl was 13. If she had been 17 or older, I would be better able to see a possible way to say he was innocent. No matter how "stupid" her parents were.

And, as I said to you before, yours and my "frame of reference" is so totally different that it is amazing to me (sometimes) that we see things so much alike.

Keep stating your opinion skep. Not only will I continue reading them; but I will defend your "right" to express them.

But that's your right.
The issue for me isn't what someone else did or didn't do, but what Polanski did.
Feel like hanging the mother too? OK, I'm good with that.
Robert Blake before being accused also, used to say
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime"

While the atmosphere of pedophilia may have been prevalent in the industry, That was not at trial, but Polanski was. It's the action of pedophila which was found to be a reality for which Polanski was found guilty.

If a snuff movie director were to plead the same defense thirty + years later, would your rationale be the same?

and the mother’s irresponsible behavior are no excuse. He was 44, she 13. There is no justification for this criminal and immoral act; nor should there be.

Unfortunately, the rationale is fed by moral relativity, of which I'm no fan. NONE of the issues you raise are acceptable reasons to allow Polanski to continue on in the role of scofflaw.
While it's deplorable that Mrs. Geimer pimped out her daughter (speculative), and Polanski's wife and unborn child were killed in one of the worst murders of the century (relevance?), the fact remains that he knew before-hand she was underage (I've read that there were discussions about waivers due to her age, etc), and for him to have given her incapacitating pharmaceuticals with the sole intent of committing rape and sodomy is beyond the pale. At the very least, he needs to serve his original sentence. The moral preening of others is irrelevant. This is a matter of the rule of law, and sending the appropriate message to society. Any "civilian" caught up in a similar circumstance would be locked up post haste. There is no room for a double standard here.

BTW, Skep, you are a fantastic writer. Somewhere deep in my subconscious I believe you are playing devil's advocate here...at least I hope so. Regardless, I look forward to your next post.
Provacateur...

EVERYONE is tempted. Polanski was TEMPTED and made a choice. He said YES when he should've said NO!

Still a buddy!

But polanski shouldn't get off scott-free.

If I recall correctly he was sentenced to less than 6 months, yet he decided he couldn't give up his cushy lifestyle to pay for his crime.

I disagree with those that say he should get life, or what ever, but he should serve out his original sentence.

If you or I were in that position, we wouldn't have the hollyweird types standing up for us, we'd have to serve the sentence.

Just because he made a bunch of movies people liked doesn't mean he should get away with raping a 13 year old girl.

If he couldn't handle spending a few months in jail, he should have kept it in his pants.

to think about--I believe he should face justice. I just wonder when hollyword demands his reliese-where is the demand in hollywood for the release of 3 innocent Americans in Iran?

I can't go with you on this one.

In fact, you may have backed into one of the biggest problems facing society today. That problem has a lot of it's roots in Hollyweird but the sense of entitlement has certainly spread to the rest of the country.

It's the death of our legal justice system. People in high office, wealthy, or celebrated think they are different before the law than the rest of the great unwashed.

Oddly enough, I recently had a long time acquaintance, and a person I thought above reproach, sentenced to 3 years, 6 1/2 was recommended, in prison on a possession of child pornography charge.

Here's a link so you can see what I mean:

http://vigilant-antis.blogspot.com/2009/09/raymond-highsmit h-former-leader-of.html

Personally, I thought he should have gotten the whole sentence but we must all be equal before the law or we might as well do away with them.

Have no fear, we're still buds! LOL! Maybe next time out we'll be on the same page again.

If you knew me between 1966 and 1976 you would be calling for the death penalty or at least a life sentence. If we're being judged for what we did in the sixties and seventies I cant claim to be morally superior to Roman Polanski at all. But I'm not the person that I was then. Meanwhile he has done the greatest film of any Shakespeare play ever made (MacBeth), Chinatown, a masterpiece about sex and power, the best 'satan' movie ever made (Rosemary's Baby)the movie which possibly encouraged deranged devil-worshiper Manson to murder his family. I wont write an essay about it but he is one of my favorite directors. I live in the 'Hollywood Film Community'. Its not a vague political phrase to me, its where I live. Its a small tight-knit community of people who love film. The people in the film community who are boomers, who lived through the sixties and seventies in LA and San Francisco and New York City all have things in their past similar to that incident. We all took LSD in the sixties and ludes and coke in the seventies. We all did things that are so strange and out of touch with the current times that sometimes its hard to remember whether it was even the same person as we are now. Some of us recovered our sanity but it is impossible to sit still while a senseless thirty year old charge is brought up against the director who took the Palme D'or at the Cannes Film festival, a man we respect and admire. He was exiled from the US, he couldnt even pick up the Oscar he won for 'The Pianist' and was living happily in Europe with no reputation at all for chasing young girls.

Think of a person you admire, a leader of your community arrested and humiliated with a thirty year old charge. Think of when the Clinton's were dumping everybody's FBI files into the pages of the NY Times. The victim does not want this case. She doesnt want to testify against him. She knows people will never forgive her if she's a party to this travesty. There is no reason to do this to a 76 year old man. Its ancient history and its not who he is now.

Well done, as usual, Skep. Far too many domineering mothers have sold their daughters out in Hollywood and beyond ....

In these difficult economic times, it is easy to imagine many mommies telling their own little girls to just let Uncle George fondle you and touch you in special places. Then we all will eat, the baby will get dry Pampers and you can sacrifice for us again tomorrow night when Uncle Bob comes over.

There is no excuse for child molestation, it is a despicable act, an abomination of humanity that goes all the way back to the beginning of time. Sick.

When you find yourself in a hole, you should stop digging.

Your reply basically asserts that because he has directed some great movies in the meantime, we should excuse him. I guess we should give politicians and athletes and musicians the same wide berth when it comes to their transgressions?

You can make that case if they have served their time. Polanski, on the other hand, skipped the country after he plead guilty. I hardly consider his time spent jet-setting around Europe as a fitting penalty. And the contention that the victim doesn't want this could be a consideration, but not the only or over-riding issue.

At this point, IMHO, he should be imprisoned for skipping the country along with whatever his initial sentence was. It's important for the rule of law to be upheld in these fractious times. Failure to do so sends a terrible message.

And one question...where is NOW and other women's groups? I would've thought the hue and cry would be overwhelming.

You're right, of course. But let me ask you this. During the Clinton Impeachment they destroyed Henry Hyde by revealing that he had fathered a secret child. Is it unimportant that he was one of the strongest voices for our country and everything we believe in? That he wrote the Hyde Amendment? That's how I think of him, not that he cheated on his wife thirty years ago.

The prosecutors took that plea deal in the Polanski case because there was something wrong with their case. They were not confident of getting a conviction if they were going to let him walk with two months time served. Pleading guilty in a plea bargain is different than being convicted. You admit guilt to make the whole business go away. There was some aspect of this that kept the DA from wanting to go for a trial. I think I know what it is but I wont say it. I know what my defense would be if I was an attorney and the victim knows it too.
Polanski's lawyers will get the plea bargain deal thrown out and they will have to retry him. They will never convict him in this town. So, is he guilty?

Roman Polanski pled guilty to the crime before he decided to flee the country. That is to say, he legally admitted to wrongdoing worthy of punishment and then fled before facing the consequences of his actions.

Statutory rape is a strict liability crime. A child under the legal age of consent can not consent to sex. The girl was 13, and Roman admitted that he had sex with her. Those are the only facts that matter, and the background of the victim certainly does not matter no matter what age she is.

It also doesn't matter that the victim now forgives him. Criminal cases are not set up as victim v. defendant; they are the state v. defendant. It goes down to the basic John Locke concept of a social contract: to be members of society, we accept that there are certain rules we must follow. One of the rules of our society is that grown men can't have sex with children. Roman Polanski broke that rule, and he owes a debt to society, not just his victim.

I give up.

I told you it was a bad idea to educate them! HaHaHa!

Well stated, Katy!

This country started going to hell in a handbasket once the 19th Amendment got passed and the Fifth Commandment got ignored. Although some would find it odd to cite the Constitution and the Bible to defend Roman Polanski but extreme situations call for extreme measures.

I understand that it was the '70s in Hollywood, etc. I also understand that it is wrong to judge the morality of yesterday with the morality of today. Different times have different values.

However. He skipped out AFTER his conviction, rather than facing the consequences of what he had done. He may be an Oscar winning director, world-famous with celebrity support, but in my book, failing to take responsibilty for his actions makes him a sad, sorry little man.

And, if what I hear is true, his sentence was all of 90 days. If that IS true, he's likely the biggest idiot in a sea of idiots.