Roman Polanski said he'd pay to end victim's lawsuit

As i recall he was charged with forcible rape but pled down to stat - that's a lot worse than doing a 13 year old who looks older, and the only thing that has me thinking he should be let go is that the victim says he should, were it not for that i'd say lock the bastard up.

Apparently he never got round to paying her the settlement money, so at least feminists can't claim she wants him released because she's been "paid off".

----------------------
Rise, Rebel, Resist.

She says the media did more damage to her then him. She says the 42 days he spent in prison was excessive. She says she wants it over.

PEOPLE - LISTEN TO WHAT THE VICTIM SAYS!

She is after all the only one who knows what lasting effect it had on her and what damage was done to her as a person. If she says she's over it, so should everyone else be over it.

@ MichaelClaymore - He did pay her the settlement money though, the article mentions it about two thirds down and other media outlets have also reported seeing the settlement documents.

My opinion - Society should be listening to people not telling them what they should think about their own sexual experiences be they posative or negative. Let people decide for themselves how things effect them as no two people are the same and that night may not have had that much of an effect on that girl where as some one else would have been devastated. Let victims have a voice. Let them have a say. I know feminists don't want that because many many more people would be saying things are not as tragic as feminists portray them. But please, let victims speak up for themselves with their own voice.

on a 13 year old girl that weights 100 lbs.
a real stud there.

she must have been nearly passed out at her age and weight under those conditions.

what a man.

oregon dad

and a penalty is set by law. The guilty party should pay the penalty. Rule of, y'know, law and all that. Possibly the Aristos feel this should not be applied to them, and are getting tired of all this "Equality before the Law" stuff - after all, it doesn't apply to women, why should it apply to Artist Aristos, Sports Aristos, or Politico Aristos, for that matter? If they can get Polanski off, it will be simpler to excuse the next Aristo crime.

Polanski is guilty - he said so himself. There is a minimum sentence, and I have no idea if statute of limitations applies to a fugitive, but if it does not, he needs to serve the same sentence someone with no "special" status would serve, in the same kind of institution. Otherwise, he is being treated in a "One law for the commons, one law for the Aristocrats" mode, and I tend to think in terms of 1789 France when I see that kind of thing.

The victim is free to express whatever opinion she desires - the crime was a violation of the law, and has to be punished as such, as well as a violation of the victim.

I wonder if there is s scale? How famous do I have to be to beat a moving violation? How famous to commit simple assault with impunity? How "important" would I have to be to get away with murder? (Oh, right - Democratic Senator, like Kennedy.) If there is a scale, I think it should be published - I want to start accumulating status points, I have little list of people who will never be missed......

He has admitted rape ,I understand,I don't know whether or not he was aware of the girls age,there may also be some mitigating factors but I sure wouldnt want to be him in an american court but,to be fair thats the way it has to be
and so ,I believe his active life to be over,why should he get away with it just because he owns a few bob?In the circumstances I think she should also have to give the money back or to charity.I dont understand where all these pro rape foreign lawyers are coming from,if he was a pleb there would be calls for the death penalty.To be fair nobody ever gets the full story,there seems to be a reluctance on the part of the media to report anything at all that they disagree with,butif you let people like this get away with rape it is impossible to show a reason to jail false accusers,the law should be seen to be done.

when "equality under the law" has no more meaning.

we have one law for joe blow, a different law for
teachers who have sexual "relationships" w/ children,
and another for the wealthy. very much like france at
the end of the 18th century.

the judiciary has allowed this to happen, even fostered it.
these are the days when making $$ became more important than the
precepts of law handed down by our forefathers.

the Constitution had to be the next to go.

casting pearls before swine as they say.

However I do not believe in minimum sentences for sex crimes. I know that the current model is the only model that is workable in reality, but I do think that sex crimes are different from other forms of crime in that they ways in which they effect individual victims vary by an extremely wide margin, and I believe that the personal effect on the victim should be the number one factor in determining sentence.

I also get that this is a problematic stance to have as an MRA because it would result in the continuation of female rapists receiving small sentences. However, it would also result in many men receiving low sentences because many female victims considered the themselves in a relationship with the perpetrator the same as male victims often do.

I know a system like that would be just as prone to error as the current one - punish all severely in hopes of getting the few that are genuine threats off the street - because it is impossible to tell who is being manipulated to claim either more or less personal harm. Some victims may be pressured by perpetrators to claim less harm then was really done, some may be pressured by family or lawyers to claim more harm.

So don't get me wrong here I know my ideals would only be feasible in a world where no one lied, but I do think the current treatment of sex based offenses is extremely flawed.

Call me old fashioned if you will, but I simply do not think sex is the worst thing in the world, and I disagree that sex crimes are more damaging to victims on average then other forms of crime. Getting punched in the nose can lead to disfigurement, brain damage or death, but chances are you just got a little watery eyed.

We do not sentence people who punched some one in the nose with the thought in our minds that they could have permanently scared or killed the person, but we treat bad dates like the person was planning to kill and eat the victims body.

Yes, of course I agree that factors like age of both parties involved and use of force or drugs/alcohol should most certainly be factors taken into consideration, but at the end of the day because sex is a highly personal thing, the victims feelings on the matter should carry the most weight.

But we must try to avoid projecting current societal views on the facts of a 30+ year old case where the views of people in general we quite different at the time. I mean, at the time he was offered a plea deal for time served (42 days), that is completely unimaginable today. At the time, some 13 year old girls parents let her go off by herself to a party at a celebrities house without ANY supervision. That only happens at R-Kelly's house these days, and even then it was his cousin which is even more gross.

But to sentence Polanski today for a 30 year old crime under today's laws would be as unjust as letting him off completely. This case is difficult for many reasons.

He is a complete pussy!
No self respecting "cocksman" would stoop to using extremely heavy drugs during the course of a "seduction" under any circumstances.
If he can't get in her pants without plying her with intoxicants, he is raping her. PERIOD!

He admitted he raped her.

If it were my daughter, and he had been the perp...I'd be sitting in prison right now for what I would have done to him.

This guy is beyond a sleaze ball. He is the definition of evil. He gave extremely heavy drugs to a "young girl" and any idiot knows that quaaludes and alcohol produce an extremely heavy intoxication if not an outright unconsciousness - particularly to a very light weight and young girl. He knew this when he gave it to her. He knew it would make her helpless.

This guy is a predator who has gotten away with it by fleeing to europe.

Lock him up and throw away the key. He has already lived WAY too much life on the lamb. We don't know how many girls he did this to in europe...and I bet there were several.

oregon dad

13 year olds can be and have been charged and covicted as adults after committing major crimes like murder. Just because a person is under aged does not give them an automatic pass under the law. The exception being if that person is a female then the "pussy pass" comes into play as we all know.

....But now, unless it's a shitty movie starring Jennifer Garner, 13 year olds are considered toddlers who have absolutely no ability to decide for themselves. Unless, again, Hollywood, you're a honest to goodness 12 year old girl (Dakota Fanning) and you are wearing a skin suite to portray nudity in a movie (Hound Dog) rape scene. Then you can decide for your self to portray sexuality on screen.

But, females mature faster don't they? Wonder why keep on raising the age they can make up their own minds at then? Strange.

The victim in this case is kind of a unique glimpse that we rarely get the opportunity to see - a victim of sexual assault 30 years after the fact.

She seems surprisingly normal. Surprisingly happy, and does not seem to suffer from any long term trauma. She has stated many times in interviews, that Polanski simply is nothing to her and not a part of her life at all. She is successful, mentally well adjusted, happily married, and has a beautiful family. The assault she suffered does not seem to have held her back from achieving a very positive and respectful life.

No I am not saying that she is an example that can be applied to all situations and I am firmly of the belief that sexual experiences have very different effects on different people, but I would say in this case, the assault that she suffered did not cause the devastating long term effects that feminists claim sexual assault has on women. You know the ones used to get rapists sentenced to longer periods then murderers in most 'developed' countries these days. The life ruining, unable to ever trust again, soul killing trauma that feminists claim rape is does not seem to be the case here. 30 years down the road, this woman seems as normal, and happy as can be. Weird huh?

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/how-polanskis-probation-officer-saw-his-crime/?hp

This is a very interesting write-up on the Polanski case. Note that the probation report was prepared for Polanski's sentencing hearing, which, of course, never occurred. There are details here I hadn't heard or read before regarding several aspects of the case.

That she has a guilty conscience is very possible. I think that's a resonable conclusion when you look at ALL the documentation that's available and listen to her in past interviews. What she may feel guilty about is the question. Did she exagerate when she gave her report to the police and testify in front of the grand jury? I really have no idea, but I think it's possible that when she (and her mom) found out he was facing 50 years in prison there may have been an "oh shit" moment. This is complete speculation but it's hard not to think of this possibility after you take in all the available public information. In any event, I personally give her 0% of the blame for the incident and I hope she's not feeling one bit of guilt over that. If she exagerated in the beginning and she's been trying to rope it in for the last 30 years then I hope this gets resolved the way she wants so they can both move on.

Polanski admitted from the beginning they had sex so I think a conviction on statutory rape was a foregone conclusion.

I must add something here though. At this point Polanski can withdraw his guilty plea and prepare for trial. Given Ms. Geimer's consistent statements that she does not want him to spend anymore time in prison it seems very unlikely that she would bother with a trial at all. Of course Polanski does not have to testify against himself. Without Geimer it may be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to convict him of anything. I suspect this is why the DA has appeared to drag its feet for so long on this case rather than the oft repeated rantings that he's been receiving special treatment. It just may be that the most recent activity on the part of officials involved with the case is more motivated by politics than any realistic hope of putting him behind bars. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the DA drops the charges and this is all over soon.

Not that I know of. Polanski claims he didn't realize he did something wrong. I know he said to at least one close friend/associate that all he did was have sex (from HBO documentary). Remember that he had a previous public relationship (presumably sexual) with 15 year-old Nastassa Kinski without a problem. He said when he took pictures of Ms. Geimer topless he had no idea it was an issue and this was done all the time in Europe. I tend to believe that he really wasn't aware of the gravity of the situation. I know this seems odd to Americans but most other places have much more relaxed attitudes toward sex. As far as I can tell he freely admitted the affair and never made any effort to deny it.