RAPE, RAPE (3)

Immediately after his arrest, 136 Hollywood filmmakers (the list eventually grew to around 400) led by Woody Allen signed the following “Free Roman Polanski” petition demanding his immediate release from a Swiss jail:

“We have learned the astonishing news of Roman Polanski's arrest by the Swiss police on September 26th, upon arrival in Zurich (Switzerland) while on his way to a film festival where he was due to receive an award for his career in filmmaking.

His arrest follows an American arrest warrant dating from 1978 against the filmmaker, in a case of morals.

Filmmakers in France, in Europe, in the United States and around the world are dismayed by this decision. It seems inadmissible to them that an international cultural event, paying homage to one of the greatest contemporary filmmakers, is used by the police to apprehend him.

By their extraterritorial nature, film festivals the world over have always permitted works to be shown and for filmmakers to present them freely and safely, even when certain States opposed this.

The arrest of Roman Polanski in a neutral country, where he assumed he could travel without hindrance, undermines this tradition: it opens the way for actions of which no-one can know the effects.

Roman Polanski is a French citizen, a renown and international artist now facing extradition. This extradition, if it takes place, will be heavy in consequences and will take away his freedom.

Filmmakers, actors, producers and technicians - everyone involved in international filmmaking - want him to know that he has their support and friendship.

On September 16th, 2009, Mr. Charles Rivkin, the US Ambassador to France, received French artists and intellectuals at the embassy. He presented to them the new Minister Counselor for Public Affairs at the embassy, Ms Judith Baroody. In perfect French she lauded the Franco-American friendship and recommended the development of cultural relations between our two countries.

If only in the name of this friendship between our two countries, we demand the immediate release of Roman Polanski.”

A couple of days ago, Polanski’s Hollywood attorneys appeared before a California appeals court seeking dismissal of the sexual misconduct charges against him. Here is how “TalkLeft the politics of crime”, a far-left website which describes itself as “The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news,” described Roman Polanski’s appeal:

CALIFORNIA APPEALS COURT HEARS POLANSKI APPEAL

By Jeralyn
December 10, 2009

An appeals court in California today heard oral arguments in Roman Polanski's case. At issue was Polanski's request to dismiss the charges due to judicial and prosecutorial misconduct. A trial judge last year refused to hear the case because he was a fugitive. The grounds for the dismissal request were the new revelations in the film, Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired".

Associate Justice Laurie Zelon asked the prosecutor why the district attorney's office had not investigated recent allegations of misconduct by a judge and prosecutor during Polanski's 1977 court proceedings.

"Doesn't the district attorney's office have an interest in finding out what happened here?" Zelon asked.

Deputy District Attorney Phyllis Asayama replied, "Yes, we are interested. But I'm not sure we have the proper agency to do this." She didn't elaborate.

[More...]

Presiding Justice Dennis Perluss, acknowledging there was misconduct by the now deceased judge, also questioned Asayama about whether "the district attorney has an obligation to see that justice is served."

The victim's lawyer also argued for dismissal today.

Attorney Lawrence Silver, who represents Polanski's victim Samantha Geimer argued for dismissal on grounds of a recently adopted law allowing victims to have a say in cases. Geimer has repeatedly said she wants the case dismissed, and Silver reiterated that to the justices.

The appeals court could order the trial judge to hold the hearing in Polanski's absence. That judge, while refusing to rule on Polanski's request, found there was substantial misconduct.

The three judge panel took the matter under advisement.

EDITOR’S NOTE: It sure looks like justices Zelon and Perluss are leaning toward dismissal of Polanski’s case.

During a discussion with the district attorney outside a Los Angeles courtroom, the trial judge (now deceased) said he was preparing to sentence Polanski to a long prison term despite his plea deal. Obviously, the judge was moved by the real facts in this case. But does that judicial misconduct merit dismissal of the charges. Hell no, not when the details of what Polansiki did are revealed. Let me once again remind our readers of the real facts in this case, facts that Hollywood and TalkLeft don’t want you to know:

Polanski was 43 at the time he raped his 13-year-old victim.

After plying her with Quaalude and champagne, Roman Polanski instructed his victim to get into a jacuzzi naked, refused to take her home when she begged to go, began kissing her even though she said no and asked him to stop; performed cunnilingus on her as she said no and asked him to stop; put his penis in her vagina as she said no and asked him to stop; asked if he could penetrate her anally, to which she replied, "No," then went ahead and did it anyway, until he had an orgasm.

That's not merely "a case of morals" as the Hollywood petitioners would have us believe. That's not statutory rape. That's not having sex with a minor or an underage girl. That's out and out forcible rape! That’s what it would be if the victim had been 43. The age of the victim in this case merely compounds the crime.

But what are the chances that Polanski will ever pay for his reprehensible crime? Slim to none, I’d say.