Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Free Roman Polanski??

I am not a movie buff. Though I like movies, I can't say I know who directed what - when the credits go up, I leave the theater. I have seen some of Polanski's films. Rosemary's Baby is cool. But it seems (I'll admit to not knowing all the details) he pled guilty to committing a crime. And there seems to be no doubt that the crime was actually committed. By him. And it's not a little crime either - not jaywalking or speeding or talking on the phone while driving or DUI or skipping out on a restaurant bill or even shoplifting from Bloomingdale's. We're talking about sexual assault of a minor.

Now, the erstwhile minor and he have come to some agreement, and she's fine with him going free. But that's the civil side of things, not the criminal side.

And there may be grey areas in the whole statutory rape thing - fifteen year olds may look like sixteen year olds, etc, you've heard it before. But that's no excuse. Especially not when we hear that drugs and alcohol were used. That suggests she needed some prepping before the act. That is, she was otherwise unwilling.

So there are a lot of ideas floating around, simmering, a lot of questions I'd like answered.

And maybe there were procedural improprieties in the original handling of the case.

But to be outraged that he was arrested goes far, no? Martin Scorsese demands the immediate release of Polanski? I don't get it. Why shouldn't Polanski face Justice? Why should he get a free ride? That's what stumps me. The French government thinks Polanski should go free, too. Why? Because he makes good movies? (The Pianist was great.) Because he's old? If Hitler were found to be hiding in Argentina, I'd drag his ass to jail even though he turned 120.

I get Polanski fighting extradition. That makes sense. No one wants to go to jail even after they admit to raping a child.

But Hollywood is behind him? I don't get it. Not that he deserves jail - I'm willing to hear more about the case before deciding (though it seems open and shut)- but to demand his release like nothing happened 32 years ago and like he hasn't been on the lam for all this time seems ridiculous. Maybe Marty knows something?

People. Help me understand.


Blogger Graham Powell said...

One small detail - he had written permission from the girl's mother for a photo shoot, so he definitely knew she was a minor.

After all this time, and what with his settlement with the victim, I'm not sure he should go to jail, but he should DEFINITELY come back to face what he's done. As many, many others have said, if he was Roman the Plumber, he'd be under the jail by now.

September 29, 2009 5:28 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home