Posted on 10/02/2009 6:07:15 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
I am delighted by the Roman Polanski controversy. Don’t get me wrong: I am horrified and disgusted by what the acclaimed director did — and admitted to — but there is an upside.
Just to recap, Polanski drugged a child put in his care for the purposes of a photo shoot. He tried to bully her into sex. She said no. He raped her anyway. He pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse but fled the country before sentencing, allegedly for fear the judge wouldn’t keep his end of the plea bargain. He spent the subsequent three decades living the life of a revered celebrity in Europe. He never returned to America because there was a warrant for his arrest. In a bit of ironic justice, he was apprehended en route to Zurich to receive a lifetime-achievement award. That ceremony will apparently go on without him.
So what do I like about the controversy? Well, for starters, that there is one at all. I think it is fascinating beyond words that this is open to “debate.”
If Roman Polanksi were the name of the world’s greatest plumber or accountant, or even the director of Weekend at Bernie’s II, there would be no argument. Indeed, Polanski would have already paid his debt to society and would be a free man by now. No serious person can dispute this.
Now of course, reasonable people can disagree about all sorts of stuff. What sort of punishment does Polanski deserve? If he’s sent back to the U.S., should the 76-year-old spend the rest of his life in jail? Does the fact that the understandably exhausted victim has forgiven him mitigate issues? How should we score allegations of judicial misconduct or the time Polanski already served in jail? All of these things are open to good-faith disagreement.
But there are also a few things, by my lights, no reasonable person can dispute. The first is that child rape is a very bad thing and no amount of blame-shifting to the 13-year-old or her mother can absolve Polanski of his culpability.
Giving a grown woman a “roofie” and having sex with her is a crime. How on earth can plying a 13-year-old with champagne and a Quaalude be seen as less heinous?
A second point beyond dispute is that whatever your crime, be it tax fraud or tearing the tags off your mattress, our system of justice cannot tolerate anyone pleading guilty only to buy time to flee the jurisdiction. Even if Polanski were wholly innocent of the charges, it would be necessary for us to seek extradition.
That brings us to the even more refreshing aspect of this controversy: It is not a Left-Right issue. I’m not normally one to celebrate bipartisan unity, but it’s nice to know there are some things political or ideological opponents can agree on. Some of the most ardent and clear voices on the Polanski issue have been on the Left.
Go into a bar or union hall and ask whether fat-cat directors should get special treatment when they rape 13-year-old girls and you’ll discover that on this issue, the differences between “blue America” and “red America” are vanishingly small.
And yet, there is a controversy. Many of the international community’s leading lights are rallying to the Free Polanski movement. A petition is circulating with such names as Harvey Weinstein, Martin Scorsese, and Woody Allen on it. (No surprise that Woody’s on board, given that he married his adopted daughter.) The arguments in Polanski’s defense range from lawyerly red herrings to intellectual piffle to horrendous affronts to human decency. Whoopi Goldberg (no relation) dismissed the allegations because she was sure whatever Polanski did, it didn’t amount to “rape rape.”
It all boils down to the fact that Polanski is famous and talented and an Olympian artist, living above the world of mortals. Indeed, if he didn’t rape that girl — and he did — Polanski would still be considered a pig in most normal communities. This is the man who, after all, started dating Nastassja Kinski when she was only 15 and he was in his 40s. His taste for teenage girls is an established fact.
His defenders don’t care. They are above and beyond bourgeois notions of morality, even legality.
And that’s the main reason I am grateful for this controversy. It is a dye marker, “lighting up” a whole archipelago of morally wretched people. With their time, their money, and their craft, these very people routinely lecture America about what is right and wrong. It’s good to know that at the most fundamental level, they have no idea what they’re talking about.
I'm a little disappointed Jonah fell for this canard: (He) fled the country before sentencing, allegedly for fear the judge wouldn’t keep his end of the plea bargain.
Judges are not technically a party to a plea bargain. The bargain is between the prosecution and the defense attorneys.
If the judge believes the bargain is inappropriate, he is perfectly free to ignore it and issue sentence otherwise.
The defense then has the option of rescinding the guilty plea and going to trial. IOW, if the judge ignores the plea bargain, the defendant is no worse off than before the bargain was made.
I think he's been polluted by too much association with Hollywood.
His line was the "wasting scarce resources". Idiot. Resources are never better spent than when making sure that the rich and influential don't buy or influence their way out of trouble.
I do not advocate life in jail for him but give him 40 years without parole and let him out when he is 116 years old, if he makes it, even a 13 year old girl will be able to fight him off.
Where’s the rally for the rapist of Elizabeth Smart?
Wow, these are ugly people.
I like Jonah’s general thesis. It has almost daily applications. Every time I am directly or indirectly called a racist because I disagree with administration policy, it offends. Now, for certain, the offense does not peel me away from the obamanation, cuz he lost me at “typical white person” in his famous racial emancipation speech. But imagine how many folks who voted for him are being peeled away.
Yes, Virginia, there is hope for change.
Good go, Jonah. Again.
“How on earth can plying a 13-year-old with champagne and a Quaalude be seen as less heinous?”
....the Polanski defenders don’t surprise me a bit...a while back the academic left was all ga-ga over the “Vagina Monologues” ....in that play an adult lesbian uses alcohol to seduce a minor female and perform oral sex on her...Liberal Arts departments across the country thought it was just great.
I’m not sure that the defendant is totally open to rescinding the guilty plea. I think that at the time that the deal is struck, the prosecution has to tell the defendant - hey - this is not binding on the judge. I’ll make the recommendation but he can do what he wants within the statutory guidelines. But I could be wrong. Any criminal defense lawyers out there?
Attention all pedophiles: NEW STRATEGY
Flee your sentencing!! It’ll be considered time served and you’ll get off scott free.
Thanks Roman, you pig. Hang him high.
It is amazing that the far left has decided to include this in their moral/legal exemption. Sure they want laws and rules for everyone but themselves, always have. But child rape? wow. Thats even too much for some of them.
The prosecution does indeed have to tell the defendant the judge is not bound. The transcript of a hearing where Polanski agreed to all this is online.
I might be wrong about whether a defendant can rescind his guilty plea and go to trial. I read it online posted by someone claiming to be an attorney.
Here’s the main reason you want to get him. Does anyone think this girl was his last vicitim? Even at 76, he can probably still rape 13 year olds. Let’s protect all 13 years olds now from this scumbag.
He had a choice of spending a few yeas in jail as a young man and being free at the end of his life. He made his choice by fleeing. Let him end his life in jail, since he so chose.
Really? I have to go along with Goldberg here. This is forever morally disqualifying. It would be like listening to Ahmadinejad give interesting Bible commentary.
ML/NJ
Wouldn't surprise me at all.
You don't have to scratch Medved very deeply to discover that he is by no means conservative.
Hadn’t heard that about Michael. Sad to her it.
The relevant issue for all these people seems to be that artists shouldn’t be expected to adhere to the same standard of conduct as the rest of us. Since they generally consider themselves to be artists, or at least great appreciators of art, they obviously view themselves as ubermensch not subject to the same rules as the rest of us.
BTW, this was Nietzsche’s primary argument. Superior human beings, among whom he included artists, cannot be bound by “slave” morality. All the Nazis did was transfer this freedom from morality to a race.
What's a "roofie"? A Quaalude?
This is illegal on many levels
1. Giving a child booze
2. Giving a child Ludes
3. Nude photos of a child
4. Rape of a child
5. Sodomy of a child.
6. Kidnapping
All illegal
I heard Medved say that. I listen to him only once in a while. He said that Polanski should be allowed to continue his “pathetic life.”
Of course Medved didn’t say whether he would feel the same way if it was his daughter that was raped.
It’s getting so I can’t listen to him anymore.
Rohypnol.
A sedative with amnesiatic effects.
Girl goes under, doesn’t remember a thing.
A very convenient drug for rapists.
I don’t know the details in other states, I assume they are substantially similar, but here in Washington it works like this:
When presented with a plea agreement between the parties (the judge is not a party to the agreement), the judge considers whether the agreement is in the interest of justice and prosecutorial standards.
If the judge determines that the deal meets these standards, the defendant enters his/her plea. Although the judge has accepted the deal, the plea paperwork makes it clear that the judge does not have to follow anyone’s recommendations as to the sentence. So there is always this risk in every plea deal.
A defendant can’t withdraw his plea simply because the judge does not follow the sentencing recommendations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.