Celebrities, diplomats unite behind convicted child-raping degenerate

posted at 8:50 pm on September 28, 2009 by Allahpundit

Note well: No matter what the LA Times would have you believe, he’s not an “accused” child-rapist. He pled guilty. The conviction’s on the books. All that’s left to settle is the sentence.

But Hollywood knows a good cause when it sees it.

The surprise detention of Roman Polanski has been met with indignation in Hollywood and sparked a flurry of media speculation over the real reason behind Saturday night’s arrest in Zurich.

Film mogul Harvey Weinstein has got behind a campaign by French film-makers calling on US authorities not to extradite the Oscar-winning Polish director in connection with a charge of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor dating back more than three decades…

“We’re calling on every film-maker we can to help fix this terrible situation,” Weinstein said, reviving a theme he adopted earlier in the year after he bought international distribution rights at Sundance to the HBO documentary Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired.

The film uncovered flaws in the legal case against the director, prompting Weinstein to allude to a possible campaign to get the charges against Polanski dropped. At a hearing this year a Los Angeles superior court judge agreed there was “substantial misconduct” in the original hearing.

If there was substantial misconduct, why not come back to LA and litigate the matter at an appellate level? Answer: Because Polanski and his cretinous supporters don’t care if he’s guilty or not. They want him to walk free, in the name of “art,” without another word spoken on the subject. More at the Daily Mail:

French culture minister Frederic Mitterand said he was ‘deeply shocked’ by the sudden arrest, and had already discussed the matter with President Nicolas Sarkozy.

In a statement, Mr Mitterand, a nephew of former President Francois Mitterand, said he learned of the arrest ‘with astonishment’ and that he regretted ‘in the strongest way that a new ordeal has been inflicted on someone who has already gone through so much’.

Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said the arrest was a ‘bit sinister’

The Zurich Film Festival jury accused Switzerland of ‘philistine collusion’.

‘The case is three decades old and is all but dead but for minor technicalities. We stand by and wait for his release and his next masterwork,’ said jury president Debra Winger.

Other members of the film industry, including Italian actress Monica Bellucci, French actress Fanny Ardant, president of the Cannes film festival Gilles Jacob and Hong Kong director Wong Kar Wai issued a petition demanding his immediate release.

Again: Convicted child-rapist and fugitive from justice. Magically transformed, by Hollywood libertinism and douchebaggery, into an honest-to-goodness victim who’s being persecuted by the evil empire for, um, forcibly sodomizing a 13-year-old and then skipping bail. I can’t do any better than this righteous Salon piece. Go ye and read, right now.

Update: Needless to say, this reminds me of the left’s umbrage at conservatives daring to bring up Chappaquiddick after Teddy died. Yeah, he left a woman to drown and then made jokes about it afterwards; he was for universal health care, though, wasn’t he? Same with Polanski: Dare we deny the man who made “Chinatown” an occasional drugging and raping of a child? Sure, a kid gets traumatized for life, but on the other side of the scale: “Rosemary’s Baby.” It’d be sweet if the left could come up with some sort of mathematical formula by which we could tell whether an artist or liberal politician has exceeded his quotient of moral indulgence. I’m assuming “Chinatown” wasn’t so awesome that Polanski would be excused for shooting a kid in the head at point-blank range, so evidently the film’s “worth” less than that but more than a child-rape. Let’s figure out just how much of a liberal hero you have to be to get away with certain crimes.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Oops, O’bama-mas.

Del Dolemonte on September 29, 2009 at 12:21 AM

mr_B on September 28, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Polanski is a good film maker, huh? Maybe he could make some films in juvinile hall. There they have got a lot of young chicks.

Johan Klaus on September 29, 2009 at 12:21 AM

pleaseandthankyou on September 29, 2009 at 12:16 AM

Do you EVER accuse me of being in agreement with you. Your words told all about you, and I don’t ever want to think the same way you do.

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 12:23 AM

My God, someone equated Polanski with Scooter Libby? That ought to win some sick award.

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 12:24 AM

So you see some form of moral equivalence between obstruction of justice and rape? Nice.

Erich66 on September 29, 2009 at 12:16 AM

The common denominator here is that both cases resulted in convictions by a court of law, which is supposedly the point of contention for most of Polanski’s detractors in this thread: that he must receive and bear his sentence in order for the rule of law to be satisfied.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:26 AM

My God, someone equated Polanski with Scooter Libby? That ought to win some sick award.

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 12:24 AM

You’re right, there’s a huge difference here: unlike Polanski, Libby didn’t even have to skip town to get off “scoot free” (pun intended).

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:28 AM

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:26 AM

Note, too, Libby didn’t run

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 12:30 AM

Polanski is a good film maker, huh? Maybe he could make some films in juvinile hall. There they have got a lot of young chicks.

Johan Klaus on September 29, 2009 at 12:21 AM

Caged Heat 3: The Next Generation

My God, someone equated Polanski with Scooter Libby? That ought to win some sick award.

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 12:24 AM

Agreed. Libby is a POS bastard!

Norman Blizter on September 29, 2009 at 12:30 AM

Sick sick sick. I can’t even believe that. A man ruins a child’s life and it is the equivilent to a conviction in the left’s wet dream of getting the Bush Administration?
Wow, Mr. B, you are one sick human.

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 12:30 AM

Polanski raped a child and never paid a price. That’s the part that is ok with you animals, do I have that right?

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 12:31 AM

Do you EVER accuse me of being in agreement with you. Your words told all about you, and I don’t ever want to think the same way you do.

Easy does it Liam. Try to settle down enough to type the “n” and the “t”. We both think Polanski should do his time, so unfortunately for you, we are in agreement. I understand that nuance is a tough intellectual hurdle for those of you who think in “binary”. So take a little break. Maybe up your dosage a little.

pleaseandthankyou on September 29, 2009 at 12:32 AM

For one thing, “contributions to cinema” is a nebulous term that cannot be quantified. Attempting to use it as some mythical universal salve that alleviates the impact of his crimes is pathetic and misguided.

He drugged, fed alcohol to and then raped and sodomized a thirteen year old girl.

Should we somehow amend sentencing guidelines to reflect peoples’ supposed artistic contributions? Direct some trifle of a film that a few very silly people feel is some sort of cultural landmark and you get a Mulligan on a child rape? Two “great” films perhaps?

Just how have so many people gotten so inflated with this overblown estimation of the significance of entertainment? Chinatown or Rosemary’s Baby may be entertaining films but come on – who outside of Hollywood actually things such a thing rises to the level of import that it actually counters not only rape, but evading law enforcement and skipping bail?

I guess that question answers itself; we are not talking about people who respect laws. At least not when they are applied others “like them”.

Violate one of THEIR children or break into their home and suddenly the law becomes very important.

The flap over this is idiotic. He committed the crime, he plead guilty and fled prior to sentencing. If he is in fact sent back he should face sentencing and also be prosecuted for his flight. Living in “exile” while continuing to direct and living a life of luxury is not punishment.

RDuke on September 29, 2009 at 12:32 AM

Sick sick sick. I can’t even believe that. A man ruins a child’s life and it is the equivilent to a conviction in the left’s wet dream of getting the Bush Administration?
Wow, Mr. B, you are one sick human.

“Ruins a child’s life”? Isn’t that a little drastic? The girl didn’t throw herself off a bridge. She picked up the pieces and moved on with her life and today is a productive member of society.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:32 AM

so rape is OK with you as long as the child doesn’t jump off a bridge?

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 12:33 AM

What, EXACTLY, is it about Roman Polanski that makes him any different than a priest punished 30 years after the fact?

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 12:36 AM

The common denominator here is that both cases resulted in convictions by a court of law, which is supposedly the point of contention for most of Polanski’s detractors in this thread: that he must receive and bear his sentence in order for the rule of law to be satisfied.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:26 AM

Yes, it’s called justice, a foreign concept to you I guess.

Erich66 on September 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM

pleaseandthankyou on September 29, 2009 at 12:32 AM

You feel better now with your attempted ploy? I imagine you do. You see, I went by your own words, which you are hoping is so far back in the thread no one will remember and/or notice.

You think he should be let off the hook a little, as you aimed earlier. So I guess Manson should be too, though he is complicit in the killings of Sharon Tate and her/Roman’s unborn baby.

Just going by your own debate in all this.

Did I spell everything properly enough for you this time?

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM

so rape is OK with you as long as the child doesn’t jump off a bridge?

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 12:33 AM

AND he makes some really good movies and evades punishment.
This isn’t for janitors or anything like that.

Rocks on September 29, 2009 at 12:38 AM

Besides, speaking as a film buff, I think the man who directed classics like Chinatown and Rosemary’s Baby can contribute a lot more to society as a free man than a prisoner serving a sentence for a crime whose victim has already come to terms with and forgiven.

mr_B on September 28, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Ok, I’m going to ask a question AP has asked in passing on occasion.

Consider an ER surgeon, saved dozens, maybe hundreds of lives. What severity of crime do we allow them to get away with without punishment in return for their actions?

How many rapes are they allowed before they’ve evened out the tally? Does it matter if they were children? Are they allowed to buy them and keep them in their basement for a decade?

Seriously, is there a guideline somewhere of the severity of crimes vs. the “social good” of various jobs so we can know what crimes you’ll think we should be allowed to commit without penalty?

I’ll admit I don’t spend a lot of time volunteering… how much time/money do I have to donate to get a free murder?

Seriously, is there a chart or checklist somewhere that I can look at to figure out what crimes I’m allowed now, and what I can work toward?

gekkobear on September 29, 2009 at 12:39 AM

Yes, it’s called justice, a foreign concept to you I guess.

Erich66 on September 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM

So then why are so many conservatives here so gung-ho to see Polanski receive “justice” as prescribed by the law but wanted Libby to walk free? And I’m supposedly Mr. Double Standard around here.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:39 AM

I do believe Mr. B rapist may be gone.

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 12:39 AM

“Ruins a child’s life”? Isn’t that a little drastic? The girl didn’t throw herself off a bridge. She picked up the pieces and moved on with her life and today is a productive member of society.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:32 AM

You truly need help. Immediate help.

Erich66 on September 29, 2009 at 12:40 AM

“Ruins a child’s life”? Isn’t that a little drastic? The girl didn’t throw herself off a bridge. She picked up the pieces and moved on with her life and today is a productive member of society.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:32 AM

So you’re saying for certain the pain is all gone from that woman? Have you read any interviews with her? I read one.

How many victims of rape and child molestation have you met?

Just because a victim doesn’t kill herself doesn’t mean she’s not over any assaults she’s suffered.

You show an amazing grasp of the human condition./sarc

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 12:40 AM

Oops, spoke too soon.

You, the rapist in name only (I hope), are the only one talking about Libby.

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 12:41 AM

You think he should be let off the hook a little, as you aimed earlier.

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM

I absolutely never said this. I do not believe it, categorically. I said the case represents an interesting paradox.

pleaseandthankyou on September 29, 2009 at 12:42 AM

Consider an ER surgeon, saved dozens, maybe hundreds of lives. What severity of crime do we allow them to get away with without punishment in return for their actions?

Here’s a better question: is society’s interests furthered by incarcerating such a person as if a common, talentless thug, or could this speculative ER surgeon better repay his debt to society by having his unique, valuable talents put to good use? I’m not advocating a “get out of jail free” card here, but let’s be pragmatic. Some people are simply more valuable than others.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM

Some people are simply more valuable than others.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM

Interesting. As I recall, the Third Reich had a similar concept. Keep digging dude.

Erich66 on September 29, 2009 at 12:46 AM

So you’re saying for certain the pain is all gone from that woman? Have you read any interviews with her? I read one.

I never said that. What I said was that suggesting her life was completely ruined is an exercise in hyperbole.

How many victims of rape and child molestation have you met?

Several. One of my good friends was in fact molested as a child. I do believe I have some measure of insight into the mind of the sexual assault victim. Most people don’t, and they get a lot of things wrong when they start making assumptions about this stuff.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:49 AM

Interesting. As I recall, the Third Reich had a similar concept. Keep digging dude.

Erich66 on September 29, 2009 at 12:46 AM

The Third Reich also adhered to a doctrine of preemptive military strikes as a mechanism of national defense. I guess that means pro-war conservatives are guilty of harboring Nazi ideals as well.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:51 AM

…BUT, if there ever was a film that would begin balance the scales of his sins, it would be the Pianist. This makes the whole episode a true tragedy.

pleaseandthankyou on September 28, 2009 at 11:48 PM

This is where I found issue, that the notion a film could begin to ‘balance’ raping a child just doesn’t rate anywhere in the matter of Polanski going to prison at long last.

Even rotten people love their friends and families. But it doesn’t absolve them of the evils they do. From your own statement, you appeared to let him off the hook, give him an out or at least some reason for leniency.

At least you didn’t fully try aiming for just letting bygones be bygones, so to speak.

Are we on the same page, I hope?

Regards,
Liam

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 12:54 AM

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:49 AM

I know several also, including my ex wife.

You can call it hyperbole if you like, about ruination of a woman’s life. Since you can’t know the finer points of the damage, and neither can anyone else, really, I leave you the last word on the matter.

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 12:59 AM

I never said that. What I said was that suggesting her life was completely ruined is an exercise in hyperbole.
mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:49 AM

And, what if he raped you?

Johan Klaus on September 29, 2009 at 1:02 AM

The Third Reich also adhered to a doctrine of preemptive military strikes as a mechanism of national defense. I guess that means pro-war conservatives are guilty of harboring Nazi ideals as well.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:51 AM

You have NO idea how ludicrous you sound with that comment, do you?

Thank God for TV…

Some of these people are just too much! Well, really, not enough in most cases.

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 1:05 AM

The Third Reich also adhered to a doctrine of preemptive military strikes as a mechanism of national defense. I guess that means pro-war conservatives are guilty of harboring Nazi ideals as well.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:51 AM

Invading a dozen countries is called preemption? You didn’t do too well in history I gather. Oh and one of their main reasons? They felt a need to weed out those who, in their own judgment, lacked value. Sound familiar?

BTW love how you keep changing the subject the more ridiculous you sound.

Erich66 on September 29, 2009 at 1:09 AM

http://www.veteranoutrage.com

why am i surprised that
LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities dont want justice served
LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities want to help him get away
LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities like this monster
LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities help the rapists
LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities help the child molesters
LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities like what he did
LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities also are child molesters
LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities will help this monster
before helping police nab this creep

Why do all the LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities
act this way?

Because ALL LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities are
Drug addicts
Sex crazed perverts
child molesters
psychopaths

And these are their ONLY GOOD QUALITIES

Hollywood and beverly hills and all of these liberal bastions need to be wiped off the face of this earth..
to use the words of the LEFTISTS and Hollywood celebrities
FAVORITE Anti-semite abina WACK JOB..

http://www.veteranoutrage.com

veteranoutrage on September 29, 2009 at 1:11 AM

The Third Reich also adhered to a doctrine of preemptive military strikes as a mechanism of national defense. I guess that means pro-war conservatives are guilty of harboring Nazi ideals as well.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:51 AM

Haben Polanski einen präventiven Streik verwendet?

Johan Klaus on September 29, 2009 at 1:11 AM

You can call it hyperbole if you like, about ruination of a woman’s life. Since you can’t know the finer points of the damage, and neither can anyone else, really, I leave you the last word on the matter.

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 12:59 AM

I think B is too cold to have much insight into anyone, except maybe in the way that Temple Grandin does. He mistook my malice toward Hollywood leftists as simple partisanship. He conflated the cases of a self-confessed child-f*cker and a man whom Americans of the Right consider innocent and persecuted. And he did it soullessly, on the grounds that judicial process = judicial process. He’s grinding out his arguments as if he’s completely unaware he’s just reinforcing the hatred and contempt most readers here feel toward left-”liberals” and the Hollywood left, especially. He seems to be an emotional flatliner.

Kralizec on September 29, 2009 at 1:22 AM

He seems to be an emotional flatliner.

Kralizec on September 29, 2009 at 1:22 AM

Most libs seem to be, as I have seen. They tend to be on the wrong side of society, the law, and history every time.

They’ll fight tooth and nail to stop the execution of a convicted serial killer yet they remained silent for decades about the Soviet gulags.

They say nothing when a terrorist blows up an Israeli school bus but bitch like mad when the IDF pops a bomb factory.

You’re right–liberals have no real emotions as mentally healthy people have them. And nothing can get through to them. Their only defense is to split hairs, for they need to be justified no matter how demented their arguments. And anything will do.

It’s too sick for me to fathom. May I never become so ‘enlightened’.

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 1:34 AM

He seems to be an emotional flatliner.

Kralizec on September 29, 2009 at 1:22 AM

Most libs seem to be, as I have seen. They tend to be on the wrong side of society, the law, and history every time.

They’ll fight tooth and nail to stop the execution of a convicted serial killer yet they remained silent for decades about the Soviet gulags.

They say nothing when a terrorist blows up an Israeli school bus but go nuts when the IDF pops a bomb factory.

You’re right–liberals have no real emotions as mentally healthy people have them. And nothing can get through to them. Their only defense is to split hairs, for they need to be justified no matter how demented their arguments. And anything will do.

It’s too sick for me to fathom. May I never become so ‘enlightened’.

Liam on September 29, 2009 at 1:35 AM

Here’s a better question: is society’s interests furthered by incarcerating such a person as if a common, talentless thug, or could this speculative ER surgeon better repay his debt to society by having his unique, valuable talents put to good use? I’m not advocating a “get out of jail free” card here, but let’s be pragmatic. Some people are simply more valuable than others.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM

Let me answer this question you posit Mr_B.

My answer is YES. And here’s why:

It was the belief of those who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution that all people were equal under the law. Everyone has the same rights and the same responsibilities. Everyone is also subjected to the same requirements under the laws they have chosen to break.

To allow ANYONE regardless of talent, rank, or accomplishment–be it past or present–to escape from this portion is a blow to the republic itself.

This man drugged and raped a 13 year old young woman and has suffered harm. The law demands a punishment. This man has been convicted justly under the law yet he has not served his sentence. He has escaped serving that sentence by fleeing into the presence of scofflaws. These are HIS crimes.

Would you have him serve the full term if he was a ‘talentless thug’. Would you have him serve full term (or worse if you could inflict it legally) if it were your own daughter?

Then would you have him serve his full term now? Despite the fact that he’s a ‘celebrated’ director and ‘artist’?

Answer me this Mr_B and I may yet find merit to your argument.

Chaz706 on September 29, 2009 at 1:39 AM

Some people are simply more valuable than others.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM

How about OJ and Castro and Stalin and Mao and Che and………….

Johan Klaus on September 29, 2009 at 1:48 AM

Here’s a better question: is society’s interests furthered by incarcerating such a person as if a common, talentless thug

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM

I wholeheartedly agree.

Execute him.

Shy Guy on September 29, 2009 at 1:50 AM

Fry Mumia

GunRunner on September 29, 2009 at 1:52 AM

I am not saying she was asking for it, that would be rude.

But what was she doing taking drugs and getting naked with some old man unsupervised?

Anders on September 29, 2009 at 1:56 AM

You want to seriously decrease the number of sex crimes? Castration for rapes with 100 certainty of the offender. Second offense = death penalty.

All child sex crimes should be life in prison with the option of the death penalty.

And, legalize prostitution. Clean it up, tax the hell out of it. What’s the difference between a fat ugly bastard paying a woman for sex in a hotel room (illegal) and the same guy doing the same thing but with a camera on? (legal, called porn)

cannonball on September 29, 2009 at 2:01 AM

So, a football player shoots HIMSELF and gets 2 years in jail, but a sick f*** can sodomize a 13yr-old and be loved by hollywood?

cannonball on September 29, 2009 at 2:02 AM

Roman Polanski a good film maker? Why then do I not remember a single film he made?

The man drug raped a young girl and then fled town. To this day he believes he did nothing wrong…

Rape is the most egregious crime in my book. Hang him without a drop, let him strangle.

Holger on September 29, 2009 at 2:15 AM

Rape is the most egregious crime in my book. Hang him without a drop, let him strangle.

Holger on September 29, 2009 at 2:15 AM

Assuming this was a real rape, where was the parent / guardian?

I have a friend who shoots minors in photo shoots. One or both parents are always present. He doesn’t even have to ask them, they know they should be there.

I blame the parents.

Anders on September 29, 2009 at 2:33 AM

Does this mean it’s open season on young French girls and boys?

I guarantee you that if you went to Paris and slapped one of these kids trying to pick your pocket upside their head you’d be in a hell of a lot of trouble, and there would be no dearth of outrage.

But, if you commit a more horrendous crime, as long as it’s in America…no biggee.

It’s more their Socialist-brain washed mentality than anything. It’s an ongoing propaganda war against the U.S. and all things Capitalist, etc.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 29, 2009 at 3:02 AM

mr_B on September 28, 2009 at 11:53 PM

Although others have pretty well torn your “arguments” to shreds, I’d like to point out that this is not an “ancient case,” it is an open case.

DrMagnolias on September 29, 2009 at 5:20 AM

Roman Polanski

Haiku Guy on September 29, 2009 at 5:36 AM

Roman Polanski
Is a Person Who Matters.
The rules don’t apply.

Haiku Guy on September 29, 2009 at 5:37 AM

I read somewhere the the case involves “… a photo shoot which led to Quaaludes and Champagne. I’ve been an amateur photographer for 20 years and no shoot has ever led me to anything like drugs, alcohol and child rape. Maybe I need a new camera??

Filecchio on September 29, 2009 at 5:53 AM

Rape is the most egregious crime in my book. Hang him without a drop, let him strangle.

Holger on September 29, 2009 at 2:15 AM

Assuming this was a real rape, where was the parent / guardian?

I have a friend who shoots minors in photo shoots. One or both parents are always present. He doesn’t even have to ask them, they know they should be there.

I blame the parents.

Anders on September 29, 2009 at 2:33 AM

While the parents are not blameless, this in no way reduces Polanski’s guilt. If a naked 13 year old girl tries to seduce a man, he is required to keep his pecker in his pocket, or he is guilty of rape.

There is no justification for Polanski’s crimes. He needs to serve the full punishment for his crimes.

darktood on September 29, 2009 at 6:04 AM

Today’s morning chuckle

MR B equating Scooter LIbby to Polanski

Mr B you are sick. And don’t even try to play the” I know someone who was molested” BS. IF you did you would want the guy locked up. HE CAN make movies in jail….there ya go. Talent used and not wasted. Seek help you have lost your humanity.

CWforFreedom on September 29, 2009 at 6:37 AM

“Cellmates”
-
A new reality TV show starring,
-
Roman Polanski
-
Charles Manson
-
Phil Spector
-
Three men enter, none leave.

esblowfeld on September 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM

I blame the parents.

Anders on September 29, 2009 at 2:33 AM

Yep they drugged and raped her /s

Blame Polanski

Seek help . you are an enabler

CWforFreedom on September 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM

Oh, there’s a couple of TROLLS on this page. For a minute I thought serious people were trying to defend the lowest of the low lying scum. It was Micheal Jackson & Ted Kennedy all over again.

Jeff from WI on September 29, 2009 at 7:06 AM

Sorry I don’t have time to see if this was already said.

What did we expect from the crowd that loves the executioner of Officer Daniel Faulkner?

TugboatPhil on September 29, 2009 at 7:11 AM

These people have no shame.

Terrye on September 29, 2009 at 7:23 AM

Let’s figure out just how much of a liberal hero you have to be to get away with certain crimes.

Liberal heroes can get away with ANY crime except becoming a conservative.

csdeven on September 29, 2009 at 7:34 AM

It’s fairly obvious to most normal people with some moral fiber that this scumbag MUST be punished.What bothers me are the supposedly “normal” people walking among us that are of such deviant personality, that they could defend the rapist of a 13 year old.

Jeff from WI on September 29, 2009 at 7:55 AM

‘The case is three decades old and is all but dead but for minor technicalities. We stand by and wait for his release and his next masterwork,’ said jury president Debra Winger.

I’ve always liked Debra Winger’s work in film. She’s a fine actress. Apparently she’s also an imbecile apologist for child rape. But hey, you know that the little girl was asking for it, right? The saucy little minx must have said yes… okay, she definitively said no, but she must have been willing… okay, so he drugged her, it’s not like he forced her against the side of a hot tub and raped her in the anus… okay, so it’s just like that, but it’s not like the case was ever adjudicated and Polanski pled guilty or anything… okay, so he did plead guilty but c’mon, it’s Chinatown.

I don’t understand these people. Confessed cop murderers? Check. Drunken vehicular murderers? Check. Guy who drugs and then anally rapes a young girl? Double-check. Crikey, what’s next on this list? Do I have to wait for some human sacrifice apologists?

Physics Geek on September 29, 2009 at 7:57 AM

Physics Geek on September 29, 2009 at 7:57 AM

One MUST remember that in most cases, actors and actresses live in a fantasy world. That’s why it’s so comical when one of these idiots spouts off about something like this or something political.

Jeff from WI on September 29, 2009 at 8:06 AM

Update: Needless to say, this reminds me of the left’s umbrage at conservatives daring to bring up Chappaquiddick after Teddy died.

Another similarity you don’t figure into the equation is the shared tragic history. Like Ted who had recently suffered the assasination of his brothers before Chappaquiddick, Polansky had recently suffered the murder of his wife Sharon Tate by the Manson family. My recollection of the Hollywood mood in 1978 was that many felt “he has suffered enough”. The faulty reasoning of a skewed moral compass for sure, but I think that played as much a part in the indifference to his crime as his talent.

Disturb the Universe on September 29, 2009 at 8:23 AM

It wasn’t his fault. She was a hottie and seduced him by being alive. Why do celeb’s always support the scumbags of the world?

faol on September 29, 2009 at 8:27 AM

The only good thing resulting from Polanski, it exposes his supporters as the sick individuals they are. Rape of a child is never excusable. Period.

volsense on September 29, 2009 at 8:30 AM

when people become celebrities, the ego that drove them to express their talent becomes inwardly focused. They start believing they are “all that” and truly believe they are above and exempt from the rules that govern “ordinary people”. Just like this Adminstration and Congress.

kingsjester on September 29, 2009 at 8:32 AM

Kinda puts Barky in a tough place, doesn’t it? A pardon should help cement Independent revulsion with BHO, while no pardon will incense his celebrity pals. Lookin forward to how this plays out.

Filecchio on September 29, 2009 at 8:38 AM

Mumia and Polanski; two more reasons added to the long list of why I could never ever ever never ever be a liberal.

Bishop on September 29, 2009 at 8:38 AM

Hasn’t Obama weighed in yet? Or at least Gibbs?

I mock the French Minister of CULTURE. To hell with Polansky and his pervert friends.

Polansky was CONVICTED OF CHILD RAPE. Not simply charged so that charges can be dropped; given the best defense, he confessed and was convicted.

To let him go without serving time is to say let all our prisoners out of prison. Then, to be FAIR, reward the prisoners who’ve at least served some time. And then, quit having trials at all. What’s the point?

maverick muse on September 29, 2009 at 8:40 AM

The case is three decades old and is all but dead but for minor technicalities.

GUILTY CONVICTION, fleeing from justice, unrepentant criminal who just finished saying, “I don’t see anything wrong with what I did; no one was hurt”.

maverick muse on September 29, 2009 at 8:44 AM

The Libs are all trying to make people think the Guilty Conviction never happened. Revisionist History strikes again!

kingsjester on September 29, 2009 at 8:49 AM

I find the defense of Polanski beyond sick and preverted. However, Who ever said it is right. As a mature (44) adult male Polanski is required to keep his dick in his pants around underage girls. Most adult, human males can comprehend that. ANY male who can’t deserves prison and hopefully the other inmates will teach the bastard why he needs to pay a price. I don’t care if Polanski is 100 years old when he get s prison.
And libs. Good grief, your hypocrisy is truly a wonder of the world. If this were a priest, or a poor man he would get his prison time. But for an illegal alien or a Hollywood type, hey, they are worth more.
AND Obama will not get involved because Polanski is not black but the fact that it must be a question for him, is humorous.

ORconservative on September 29, 2009 at 8:50 AM

It will be interesting to watch Polanski’s supporters tie themselves into knots (and sully their own reputations) trying to mimimize the crime of raping of a 13-year-old girl in their efforts to free him.

zoyclem on September 29, 2009 at 8:59 AM

Look at that picture. I’d like to see his cellmate, Killer, show him up front and close what he did to that 13 year old and wipe that smug smile off his liberal elitist face.

Jeff from WI on September 29, 2009 at 9:09 AM

Let’s figure out just how much of a liberal hero you have to be to get away with certain crimes.

Why, Osama ordered the execution of 3000 office workers.

And he’s their hero.

Niko on September 29, 2009 at 9:10 AM

I repeat…put him in general population. Pond scum will find it’s own level and humanity will have one less child rapist.

SKYFOX on September 29, 2009 at 9:24 AM

Allah, why does no one think the timing is strange in light of a new movie that is about to be released next week? This movie, called ” An Education” has been touted as a wonderful movie. It is about a 16 year old (note the reviews say “almost seventeen year old – even though the kid is 16) who has a sexual relationship with a man twice her age. What is the difference here? Yet this movie got rave reviews at Sundance. The 16 year old is “awakened” by this perverted sexual relationship, or so the makers claim. In reality it really is about a perverted, dirty old man who preys upon a young girl for sexual purposes. But, Americans will go see this and pay good money for it.

bloggless on September 29, 2009 at 9:27 AM

Some people are simply more valuable than others.

mr_B on September 29, 2009 at 12:44 AM

Ah yes…we finally get to the crux of your point. Who is the enlightened one that will set the value of one person vs. another?

I’m sure that it will have to be someone like you, is that correct?

belad on September 29, 2009 at 9:28 AM

No kidding? Did you think I meant otherwise? Try employing some more brain cells in your simplistic analysis.

I and others believed that you meant what you wrote. Try writing better, ahole.

OK, maybe it would help you if I used the word “paradox”. I mean to say that in his life he has committed an act of unquestionable immorality, and he’s made a film that is unquestionably moral. I just think it’s interesting to point that out. Again, I’m not excusing his crime.

pleaseandthankyou on September 29, 2009 at 12:12 AM

Maybe, you should read what I and others have posted: The fact that he made a film about the holocaust, which I thought sucked, is not a pass, not a conundrum, not a paradox, and not interesting.

Blake on September 29, 2009 at 9:44 AM

there is no defense none nada nothing that you can say to defend his actions unless you are a rapist yourself.any questions.dont matter no defense.wrong is wrong I know this is news to the left so listen up NO DEFENSE period.

lees on September 29, 2009 at 9:46 AM

I just can’t get over how weird it is to listen to these people defend a child rapist. Can you imagine a conservative doing this and the reaction to it?
They do it and have no fear at all of the media. This is just depraved really.
I wonder how working class democrats feel about this.

kangjie on September 29, 2009 at 9:55 AM

OK, maybe it would help you if I used the word “paradox”. I mean to say that in his life he has committed an act of unquestionable immorality, and he’s made a film that is unquestionably moral. I just think it’s interesting to point that out. Again, I’m not excusing his crime.

pleaseandthankyou on September 29, 2009 at 12:12 AM

Actually, as a matter of fact, whenever a European filmmaker’s career is in trouble, they make a movie about the Holocaust.

Go figure.

Niko on September 29, 2009 at 10:02 AM

By the way, I agree with the other commenter that The Pianist sucked, mainly because it turned history upside down and cast German Nazis to victims (just following orders), and Polish Jews to perpetrators (betraying and executing former Jewish neighbors while pretending they are atheists).

Come to think of it, one can easily see why Polanski shot it that way.

Niko on September 29, 2009 at 10:05 AM

They are banning people on Lefty blogs who think Polanski should serve his time. It’s amazing how tolerant the “progressives” are.

Guardian on September 29, 2009 at 10:14 AM

I wonder how working class democrats feel about this.

kangjie on September 29, 2009 at 9:55 AM

They close their ears…they just block it out.
It is so painful, that they just ignore these things.
I have tried to talk about this, and they just “shut down” won’t even discuss it.
They know a discussion would be they would have to admit…so they just stick their head in the sand and pretend it doesn’t exist.
Try to bring it up and they say “Oh, that is so minor, always bringing up something from 30 years ago”…

right2bright on September 29, 2009 at 10:14 AM

It’s not much different than the loons that came in here to defend Michael Jackson when he died.

Jeff from WI on September 29, 2009 at 10:14 AM

Ok, I’m going to ask a question AP has asked in passing on occasion.

Consider an ER surgeon, saved dozens, maybe hundreds of lives. What severity of crime do we allow them to get away with without punishment in return for their actions?

How many rapes are they allowed before they’ve evened out the tally? Does it matter if they were children? Are they allowed to buy them and keep them in their basement for a decade?

Seriously, is there a guideline somewhere of the severity of crimes vs. the “social good” of various jobs so we can know what crimes you’ll think we should be allowed to commit without penalty?

I’ll admit I don’t spend a lot of time volunteering… how much time/money do I have to donate to get a free murder?

Seriously, is there a chart or checklist somewhere that I can look at to figure out what crimes I’m allowed now, and what I can work toward?

All great questions, and yes, there will be a chart or checklist, which is being constructed by the Obamunistas for implementation in the Messiah’s 3rd term (the one that will have no termination date).

In this Utopian existence, there will be no details of your life that will not be regulated and controlled by The State. Ultimately, we’ll all work for the glorious Won, and we’ll never have to think about anything. It will all be done for us by the omnipotent Ruling Class of the New World Order.

Lenin lives!!!

Sweet_Thang on September 29, 2009 at 10:19 AM

Interesting how apologists are citing the wishes of the victim who is now 45 as a reason to vacate Mr. Polanski’s vonuntary guilty plea. Applying the same logic, maybe Roe v. Wade ought to be vacated since the real life ‘Jane Roe’ now disavows abortion on demand. Just askin.

clorensen on September 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM

Unbelievable! It’s like we’re living in a parallel universe. I agree with the journalist in a story posted on another blog – it makes my head spin to think how these same idiots would be howling for his head (and other parts) if it had been a Catholic priest. And for a priest, it only has to be insinuated and that’s enough. This guy is a pervert in every meaning of the word. So his past life sounds like it was a nightmare to begin with, but then again probably so have other rapist murderers’ lives. What’s the difference?

mozalf on September 29, 2009 at 10:24 AM

Okay, I don’t make movies, but I’m a generally a pretty good guy.
Mr._B, as long as I skip out after sentencing, what crimes to you suppose I should be able to get away with? Please list them in order, or perhaps you could just rank them along with social status or occupation, that would be the most helpful.
tool

JusDreamin on September 29, 2009 at 10:38 AM

Interesting how apologists are citing the wishes of the victim who is now 45 as a reason to vacate Mr. Polanski’s vonuntary guilty plea. Applying the same logic, maybe Roe v. Wade ought to be vacated since the real life ‘Jane Roe’ now disavows abortion on demand. Just askin.

clorensen on September 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM

+100

JusDreamin on September 29, 2009 at 10:41 AM

Forget it, man – it’s Hollywood.

mojo on September 29, 2009 at 10:50 AM

I hadn’t checked Hot Air in a few days and came back to see at least 3 posts about Polanski. This was the first time in the past few years that I’ve ever been surprised – unpleasantly so – at the attention / coverage paid by Hot Air to an “issue”. Is this reaction simply an equal & opposite response to the liberal media’s reaction? The time, energy & level of outrage spent on this by Hot Air reminds me of LGF’s inane attacks on Obama Derangement Syndrome that signaled the point that Charles started to go off his rocker. I think there surely are far more salient issues with which to deal. Nobody is condoning child rape, but by the same token, the Polanski situation at present isn’t equivalent to, say, ACORN staffers advising how to import and exploit young women. Please, please, please, please, PLEASE LET’S NOT HAVE HOT AIR DESCEND INTO ANOTHER LITTLE GREEN FOOTBALLS!!!!

moonbatattack on September 29, 2009 at 11:00 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5