creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
diane dimond
Diane Dimond
18 Feb 2012
Teacher-Student Sex Crimes

This is not a column you want your children to read unless you are prepared to have a very important and … Read More.

11 Feb 2012
One Priest's Mission

In a day when the words "Catholic" and "priest" often conjure up negative thoughts, I … Read More.

4 Feb 2012
A Super-sized Blunder

I wonder if the National Football Commissioner Roger Goodell knows the information I'm about to tell you. If not,… Read More.

Polanski Punishment Should Fit the Crime -- Period

Share Comment

Don't be distracted by the recent debate over whether fugitive movie director Roman Polanski should return to America and do time for sex crimes.

Don't let ill-informed daytime talk show hostesses convince you it wasn't really a crime.

Don't get distracted by Hollywood types who claim the deed was done more than 30 years ago and poor Polanski has been through enough in his life. After all, they argue, Polanski lost family in the Holocaust and his pregnant wife, Sharon Tate, was brutally murdered by Charlie Manson's gang.

Don't let the media convince you that angry prosecutors, stung by an HBO documentary on the case, suddenly sprang to life to go after a case they'd abandoned.

All that is beside the point. This case boils down to a few simple questions.

Is rape OK if the perpetrator is famous? Is it okay for a 44-year-old man to feed drugs and drink to a 13-year-old girl and have sex with her? Should all be forgiven if the man involved has won accolades, like, say, an Academy Award?

How about NO, NO and NO!

So why are so many people — from TV gabber Whoopi Goldberg, who said it wasn't "rape rape" since Polanski pleaded guilty to only "unlawful sex with a minor," to tainted actor Woody Allen and on to movie mega-producer Harvey Weinstein, who said he's "calling on every filmmaker we can to help fix this terrible situation" — all about forgiving and forgetting what Polanski did?

I can't imagine why.

What if it were their 13-year-old child drugged and demeaned by a 44-year-old man? Would a sexual attack on their youngster be excused if the attacker were a famous creative type? For those who would ask, "Well why did her mother let her go alone to actor Jack Nicholson's home (the scene of the crime) for a solo photo shoot?" — don't give it a second thought, that's just more obfuscation. Do I think her mother was smart about it? I do not, but that's not the point.

Some facts you may not have known: The 1977 "photo session" was not a spur of the moment event during which Polanski simply lost his head. This was the second time Polanski requested to photograph this particular 13-year-old girl.

The first time, he convinced her to go topless, so he asked her back again to arouse himself and see what else he could get her to do.

This second meeting was premeditated, done with criminal intent in my book. Polanski lured this child again, and when she complained of having an asthma attack from the steam in the hot tub he'd cajoled her into and asked to be taken home, his answer was to give her booze and a Quaalude and direct her to a nearby bedroom, where he anally raped her.

For goodness sakes, don't buy that distracting argument that the girl somehow consented to the sex because a 13-year-old cannot give informed consent, and it doesn't matter that the victim, now a 40-something mother of three, desires the case be dropped. It isn't up to the victim. This case was filed on behalf of the people of the State of California vs. Roman Polanski, and it is the state that calls the shots.

The only outstanding question right now should be why Roman Polanski fled the United States 32 years ago and denied justice for the child in the first place. He'd pleaded guilty to the crime and ran away like a coward.

I don't care how many of Polanski's peers come forward to discuss how dismayed they are by the decision to finally pluck Polanski from his cushy life and put him behind bars. HE RAPED A CHILD.

No one gets a pass on a crime like this. Not the guy next door and not the guy who just happened to direct movies like "Rosemary's Baby," "Chinatown" or "The Pianist."

I saw an old video clip on the CBS Early Show this week in which a young-looking Roman Polanski demurely shrugged his shoulders and, with a crooked smile, admitted, "Well, I like young girls ... I suppose most men do."

Yes, Roman, I suppose you're right — but most adult men realize it is a crime to interact sexually with them! Your cavalier attitude when asked about the crime makes me wonder how many other unsuspecting girls you despoiled in your smarmy career.

As the mother of a daughter, I'm outraged that what Polanski did doesn't matter to some people. I'm aghast that once again a celebrity is thought to deserve a pass. I'm disgusted that some actors and Polanski's fellow film industry luminaries are circulating a petition for his immediate release from prison. Shame on them.

Visit Diane Dimond's official website at www.dianedimond.com for investigative reporting, polls and more. To find out more about Diane Dimond and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM


Comments

3 Comments | Post Comment
I agree 100%. The rumor has it that "it" only counts when you're caught with a dead girl or a live boy. Live girls don't count, apparently. Roman Polanski's escape from just punishment reinforces these views. I would appreciate seeing him, Woody Allen and R. Kelly sharing a wing in prison.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Debora Beverly
Sat Oct 3, 2009 7:46 AM
I am tired of the legal system coddling these sex offenders. It has reached epidemic proportions and for those that feel sympathic for them is most appalling.
Comment: #2
Posted by: John C. Davidson
Sat Oct 3, 2009 8:32 AM
it's about time this demon starts talking about a real guilty man
she's only talking about him now because her bread and butter is now dead she's been attacking Michael Jackson an innocent man for something like 17-20 years and he's innocent it's about time she starts talking about a guilty one
like I said if Michael Jackson was still alive she wouldn't be talking about Roman Polanski
she likes lying about an innocent man and writing a lying ass rag about M.J.
Comment: #3
Posted by: mjlover4life
Sat Dec 4, 2010 11:30 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Diane Dimond
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 27 Feb 2012
Deb Saunders
Debra J. SaundersUpdated 19 Feb 2012
Mark Levy
Mark LevyUpdated 18 Feb 2012

12 Jun 2010 Glorifying the Criminal

12 Aug 2011 Praying Is Not against the Law

30 Oct 2010 A Mexican Savior or a Sitting Duck?