>Why Roman Polanksi should not get off the hook

>Excuse me as I show my feminist (oh no, bad word) side of my personality. Roman Polanski is a rapist who should stand trail for the charges he drugged and sodomized a 13-year-old girl in 1977.

I have been troubled by Hollywood’s amnesia as to Polanski’s actions. The most notable (and troubling) celebrity to come to the director’s defense is Whoopi Goldberg. As we all know, Goldberg defended his actions by saying it wasn’t “rape rape.” I will address that a little later.
Goldberg was soon put on the defensive about her, well, defense for the fugitive director. Here is an NBC today show “clarification” for what she said:
A petition for roughly 100 Hollywood actors and directors have circulated. Some of Tinseltown’s biggest names have appeared on the list, including Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese, Pedro Almodóvar, John Landis, Jonathan Demme and David Lynch.

This rally-around-Polanski act some Hollywood (washed up) stars are doing is not only troubling, but it’s also sickening. Sure, Polanski has made great movies: Rosemary’s Baby, The Pianists, etc. Sure, the victim, who is now in her 40s, said she would like the case to be dismissed. But, one should ask: what does that matter. Sure, the crime happened 30+ years ago. But, let’s take a step back and ask: why does that matter?

Let’s remember that 40-something Polanski drugged 13-year-old Samantha Geimer (who is now married and has children) with Quaalude and champagne, took her to a hot tub and sodomized her in the home of Jack Nicholson (who has been conspicuously silent).

This selective memory many have employed in this case troubles me for two reasons:

People should be reminded this man is a fugitive. He’s been hiding out in European countries that do not have extradition agreements with the U.S. He’s obviously aware of his crime and continues to snub those who have long wanted justice in this case.

A crime has been committed. To Whoopi who thinks it wasn’t “rape rape”: it was rape, plain and simple. A 13-year-old child has no right to consent to sex with an adult. Sure, you can hide behind the vagueness of California’s sexual consent laws at the time, but let’s be realistic. It was rape, Whoopi.

There is not gray area when it comes to sexual assault. Your reasoning reminds me of this country’s frat-boy mentality when it comes to sex crimes and the excuses people like to give when it comes to rape: what a woman wears, her previous willingness, etc. Haven’t we all learned this does not give anyone the right to violate anyone sexually? Whoopi, anyone has the right to say no–no matter what the situation is. And if a person’s no’s are not heeded, then it is rape.

If this were a Catholic priest, would we even consider this matter for discussion? If this were some pervert whose done this to numerous children, would this even been an issue. If this victim was a relative, would you want to dismiss the charges because it’s been so long?

Finally, let’s think about the precedent such actions could set down the road. Think about what this would do to many victims who are still reluctant to come forward with their own ordeals. What would this outpouring of support (and possible dismissal) of Polanski and his predatory past say about our criminal justice system?

Many of Polanski’s supporter like to point to his directorial brilliance in the reason why this criminal should not be brought to justice. Many of these Hollywood types like to hide behind their fame and fortune and like to disconnect themselves with the realities of the world. Sure, in movies you are able to write your own script and create endings you believe are just.

But your fame and fortune won’t allow you to create your own ending in the real world.