Media Darling Director Polanski Accused of Underage Rape…

| November 10, 2019 | 42 Comments

Again.

As we all know, in March 1977, film director Roman Polanski was arrested and charged in Los Angeles with five offenses against a 13-year-old girl – rape and sodomy by use of drugs, perversion, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance to a minor. At his arraignment, Polanski pleaded not guilty to all charges but later accepted a plea bargain whose terms included dismissal of the five initial charges in exchange for a guilty plea to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse.

Polanski underwent a court-ordered psychiatric evaluation, and a report was submitted to the court recommending probation. However, upon learning that he was likely to face imprisonment and deportation, Polanski skipped to France hours before he was to be formally sentenced. Since then Polanski has mostly lived in France and has avoided visiting countries likely to extradite him to the United States.

There is no statute of limitations governing the case because Polanski had already been charged and pleaded guilty in 1978 to having had unlawful sex with a minor. While some legal experts interviewed in 2009 thought he might at that point face no jail time for unlawful sex with a minor, his failure to appear at sentencing is in itself a crime.

Fast Forward to today.

Film director Roman Polanski is facing a fresh rape accusation from a French woman alleging he violently raped her back in 1975.

Ben Kew

In an interview with Le Parisien, Valentine Monnier accused Polanski of violently raping her at a ski chalet in Gstaad, Switzerland, in 1975.

According to Monnier, Polanski made the attack after dinner one evening where he called her upstairs. When she arrived, a naked Polanski allegedly jumped on her, hitting her and ripping off her clothes before raping her.

Her allegations were later corroborated by other individuals, who confirmed she had informed them of the incident soon after.

Monnier said she felt compelled to come forward ahead release Polanski’s latest film, J’Accuse, which will be released this week. The film recently premiered at the Venice Film Festival where it was awarded the Silver Lion Grand Jury Prize and received mostly positive reviews from critics.

I’d like to see the Grand Jury Prize he’d receive if he’s ever extradited Stateside. The entire article may be viewed here: Breitbart

Category: International Affairs, Legal, Media

Comments (42)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. 11B-Mailclerk says:

    Will a certain Jackass say that this, too, isn’t “rape-rape”?

    Would it not make a cool movie or TV series, a team of veterans of various interesting units, who occasionally bag fugitives for return to the USA for trial, under secret “letters of reprisal”.

    Call it Justiciarii

  2. HMCS(FMF) ret says:

    ome of his “friends” have used the fact that he was married to the late Sharon Tate (and her murder) as an excuse for his behavior.

    Hollywood has turned a blind eye to this shit since day one… and will continue to do so as long as the MSM and their fans worship them as being “the beautiful people”.

    • rgr769 says:

      Anyone else have the sense the #Me,too Movement seems to be quite selective with regard to who is a target of its outrage?

      • Slow Joe says:

        Me too failed when it couldn’t bag President Trump. He was the whole reason for the Me Too “movement”.

        All the other dudes caught in it where small potatoes and collateral damage.

        If Me Too was a real movement to defend women, hiw come Bill Clinton is still walking around?

        • Firebase says:

          The first big target that the “Me Too” movement went after was Harvey Weinstein, and as a direct result he’s currently behind bars for a long prison sentence.

          Polanski has not been a so-called “Media Darling” for many years now. He was kicked out of the Motion Picture Academy, and is even suing them so that they’ll allow him back in (which will never happen).

        • A Proud Infidel®™ says:

          Good call, remember the rumored “Bimbo Squad” during the Clinton Curse (*OOPS!*, Years) and the slander by media they waged against any and every Woman that accused “Blowjob Willie” Clinton?

    • The Other Whitey says:

      He’s also a holocaust survivor, which has been waved as a get-out-of-jail-free card as well. It’s sad to think of how many millions of good & decent people were murdered in those nazi death factories, yet this piece of shit somehow managed to slither our alive.

  3. Slow Joe says:

    About Polanski, there is only one movie of his I have ever watched. It is an old movie called Pirates.
    The then 18 old girl playing the female lead was also raped by Polanski.

    That dude should have been behind bars for the last 40 years, at least.

    • Perry Gaskill says:

      The actress was Charlotte Lewis, and her attorney was Gloria Allred. Lewis’ 2010 case against Polanski was apparently shot down in flames when it was revealed she had given an interview in 1999 with News of the World contradicting her newer claim. In the interview, she said she had a consensual six-month affair with Polanski, when she was 17, which ended when Polanski introduced her to Warren Beatty, who then became her new boyfriend.

    • Cameron Kingsley says:

      The sad part is the Neptune, the 17th-century Spanish galleon replica which was constructed for Pirates was quite beautifully put together.

  4. Ex-PH2 says:

    Crapweasel. Big Time Crapweasel.

  5. 5th/77th FA says:

    This asinine, low life, scum sucking, perverted, piece of sh^t, waste of oxygen, too bad his mama didn’t swallow, should have already died…slowly and very painfully. If it had of been MY Baby Girl back then I would have stalked him, tracked his perverted ass down and very, very, very, slowly…killed him. He wanted to be a big time star/producer? He’d of had a starring role cause I’d have filmed it, admitted to it, and demanded a trial by jury of my peers. I don’t think I would have served a single day in prison. And even if they sent me to prison for the rest of my life, it would have been worth it.

    I don’t give a damn what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own space. You perverted sons of bitches leave the children alone.

    Him getting away with his perversions is probably why the Blow Job Willies and Epsteines of the world were emboldened to get away with their perversions.

    May the Barb Cock of Satan ravage him for all eternity as Satan’s minions consume his worthless soul.

    And BTW…Jeffery Epstein did NOT kill himself.

  6. Perry Gaskill says:

    My own view is that although Polanski should have kept his zipper double-locked and safety wired, there’s a lot more to his case than first meets the eye. The judge who originally handled the case, Laurence J. Rittenband, was removed due to complaints by both the defense and prosecution. Rittenband had apparently violated a prior plea bargain he had agreed to, and decided to give Polanski 50 years.

    At the time, there were those who said Rittenband had his own agenda, and sought to further his own interests. It might be important to keep in mind that this is Planet Hollywood we’re talking about, a place where even the kid who cuts your grass is likely to have a talent agent on speed dial. What’s also routinely evident is that the celebrity press can often celebrate hedonistic depravity one minute, and turn around and get piously sanctimonious the next.

    There’s also an interesting recent interview done with Polanski’s 1977 victim. She has since married and is now living in Hawaii. Her view of Polanski is much different from that typically portrayed by the ocean of ink spilled by the paparazzi. Her and ol’ horn-dog Roman, for example, still exchange e-mail from time to time:

    https://quillette.com/2018/01/31/nobodys-victim-interview-samantha-geimer/

    What’s also true is that any attempt to extradite Polanski at this point is likely a non-starter. In December of 2016, the Polish Supreme Court turned down an appeal by a lower court which would have approved extradition.

    One one hand, I get it that there are sexual predators who prey on children, and should be turned into shark chum. On the other hand, there are probably plenty of groupies willing to drop their knickers for a chance to rub up against fame. I’d venture that if every musician who ever got frisky with an underage female was prosecuted, about half the rock bands in America would probably be in jail.

    • 11B-Mailclerk says:

      Fame is not a get-out-of-jail card for molesting minors.

    • Hack Stone says:

      So, if someone were to hang around an elementary school playground with a bag of candy and concert tickets to the latest music sensation, and found some prepubescent girls to manipulate into a quid pro quo, you would be cool with it?

      • David says:

        I see a significant difference between a tenenybopper willingly dropping her panties for her favorite singer, and coercing/raping the unwilling. Maybe it’s just me.

      • Perry Gaskill says:

        Hack, let’s change the parameters a bit. What if you’re an 18-year-old guitarist at an after-concert party, and a female fan-girl, who claims to also be 18 but is actually 15, decides she wants to wants to spend some quality time. Realistically, are you going to check her ID? And if something happens, should you be given 50 years in prison? Or how about the death penalty? Torture and mutilation?

        My point is that there are a lot of variables. Some pervy asshole driving past a playground in a white van with a “Free Candy” sign on the side is not the same as a couple of teens doing the nasty in the back of a convertible. What’s also apparent is that some young females can look older than their age. With the right hair, make-up and clothes, you’ve got a recipe for instant bimbo. Try checking IDs in a bar sometime if you don’t believe me.

        Know who doesn’t look her age? Greta Thunberg. She looks like she’s 12 but is actually 16.

        And before you launch a sermon about the proper punishment for child molesters, let it be noted that I have two adult daughters who managed to reach their majority without becoming victims. They were both kept on a fairly tight leash, taught to have situational awareness, and to avoid friends who might be a bad influence. One of the problems with raising kids, at least it seems to me, is that if you helicopter their life, it can be just as bad as them letting them run wild. If you don’t allow them to ease into the social construct, they are not prepared for it when suddenly expected to be an adult.

        Roman Polanski is now 86. I’m going to take a wild guess that at his age he’s not spending a lot of time hanging out at public restrooms while wearing only a raincoat. This latest accusation against him, the story originally ran in Le Parisien, is almost certainly fabricated bullshit. The so-called victim said the incident happened 44 years ago, and she never bothered to report it to the police.

        Ask yourself this: What is the downside for all of those who accused Brett Kavanaugh? It seems apparent to me that the #MeToo movement can now wreck the career of any male public figure with almost no risk to themselves. I don’t know about you, but I was raised to have a lot of respect for females. I still open doors for them, for example. But at the same time, I was also taught to be aware there are women around capable of being just as vicious as any male.

        • Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

          Sorry Perry he wasn’t 18 he was 43 and she was under the influence and 13/14 at the time…

          Even so if that 18 year old is that stupid he’s going to have some legal troubles. There’s no excuse for “she didn’t look 14/15/16” that’s just bullshit and you know it…

          Funny thing, I’ve been a fortunate guy during my lifetime when it comes to women…never raped a drunken child by mistake though…didn’t seem that hard a thing to avoid really.

          Roman Polanski got to live his best life after raping a child.
          A 43 year old raping a kid might indeed deserve 50 years in prison, it sure puts a stop to him raping any other kids that gets drunk first…or women…rapists don’t tend to “get better” and cure themselves.

          • Perry Gaskill says:

            VoV, I’m not trying to defend what Polanski did; I’m merely trying to point out that considerations of crime, in general, are subject to mitigation factors in order to arrive at an appropriate punishment. We don’t apply the death penalty, for example, in cases of over-time parking.

            Some of the apparent mitigatory elements in the 1977 Polanski case are these:

            After reading a fair amount on the circumstances, I’ve yet to run across any reference to the fact that Polanski knew that Samantha Geimer was two weeks shy of her 14th birthday.

            Polanski is also a European and the age-of-consent laws are different. Typically 14-16 is the norm compared to California’s 18. There’s no evidence Polanski was aware of the difference.

            If you read the Quillette piece, its also apparent that the element of coercion was fairly thin. Geimer went to a wild Hollywood party and did drugs, then had sex with a famous director. She wasn’t terribly traumatized, and it was only when her mother went ballistic after hearing of the incident that Polanski was arrested. Personally, if Geimer had been my kid, I would have been inclined to remove Polanski’s testicles and feed them to my dog.

            But even though California has some strict age-of-consent laws, I’m guessing castration with rusty pruning shears is not among the range of approved punishments. So, realistically, what is?

            You’re likely to disagree, but I’d also venture that the photo taken one day prior to the incident is relevant:

            https://d24fkeqntp1r7r.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/31113546/a6f1b-thegirl2.jpg

            Does Geimer look like she’s 13? Beats me.

            What also bothers me is how the case was bungled by the presiding judge. The plea deal was for Polanski to be sentenced to time served after undergoing a psychiatric evaluation in prison. All of the parties agreed to this including the judge, who then turned around and told two people involved that he was going for 50 years.

            The judge later denied the 50 year claim, by saying that his main intent was to have Polanski deported. Which amounts to something of a logical fallacy in that the judge also filed for extradition after Polanski had fled.

            My own view is that time served was not an appropriate sentence, but neither was 50 years.

            • Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

              As Polanksi fled we’ll never know if the judge was going to give 50 or going to give the agreement.

              50 years for child molestation seems about right to me.

              As someone who has coached youth premier athletes for 30 years one thing has rung true throughout that time. Pedophiles don’t change their stripes, those that get only 3-5 years tend to re-offend once released. The number of Pedophiles with multiple arrests and convictions in this country alone should make us all question whether or not pedos should ever be released.

              I understand you’re not defending what he did, but you are trying to justify why he fled. He was afraid of paying for the crime he committed with a far larger penalty than what he wanted to pay.

              That makes him no different than other criminal shit bag Perry, we’re not talking about a guy who got caught smoking a joint in the 60s/70s and was sentenced to 10 years we’re talking about a guy who fucked a child. No matter how “sophisticated” that kid is when you talk to a 13 or 14 year old it’s pretty fucking obvious they aren’t 18+. Maybe because I’ve spent almost my entire adult life with working with kids it’s easier for me to recognize that reality.

              I can assure you that long before I became a 43 year old I could tell when someone was younger than 18…

              He was and remains a shit bag. If he is ever extradited to the US I hope he dies miserable and alone in a cell.

              • Perry Gaskill says:

                VoV, as somebody who has written in the past about the Constitution, you should be aware that the law is supposed to be the law. Although there might be some wiggle room due to interpretation, the law is not supposed to be ruled by emotion with wildly random punishments meted out.

                Under California Penal Code Section 261.5, the maximum penalty for statutory rape is four years and a $10,000 fine. This was the penalty Polanski was supposed to be facing at sentencing. For an aging Judge Rittenband to decide 50 years was appropriate in the Polanski case was grandstanding for the news media. Such a decision was also unlikely to pass a sniff check if the case later went to appeal.

                My view is that if Rittenband had wanted to truly do the right thing, he would have accepted Polanski’s original plea of not guilty, and sent the case to a jury with all of the original grand jury charges. He would not have accepted a reduction of those charges to a single count of statutory rape via plea bargain. My guess is that a regular jury, even in Los Angeles, would have likely given Polanski around 10 years based on the relevant penal codes.

                What’s also unclear is why Polanski was allowed to flee. He had been undergoing a psychiatric evaluation at Chino Prison, which found him not to fit the clinical definition of a pedophile or sexual predator. During that same time frame, it was discovered that the victim was what was described as “sexually mature.”

                So, here’s a question: if Polanski was such an incredible threat to society, why did Rittenband release him from Chino so he could flee the country?

    • Valerie says:

      The then 13 y.o. girl who he sodomized may have forgiven him, but the law shouldn’t. A crime is a crime. SOME people may have forgiven the 9-11 mass murderers but that’s a personal issue, not a legal standard.

      • 11B-Mailclerk says:

        Drugged, forcibly raped, forcibly sodomized.

        “Shitbag” is -so- inadequate….

        Would like to see him drugged and delivered to the appropriate authorities stateside. But all too sober when that cell door slides shut at lights out.

        G’night short-eyes.

  7. A Proud Infidel®™ says:

    I’m hoping that Roman Polanski ends up like Epstein who I am convinced DID NOT kill himself. I see him as yet another depraved rich lowlife who will not receive Justice in this life.

  8. Cameron Kingsley says:

    Well Roman Polanski, you just couldn’t help yourself could you?

  9. Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

    Roman Polanksi is indicative, if nothing else, of the rampant hypocrisy amongst the so called Hollywood “elite”.

    They are only too happy to wax poetic for days on end about how everyone should live according to their world view, except for themselves and their colleagues for whom a different set of rules should apply.

    While we’re at it, does anyone else notice a disturbing trend in the “journalistic” reporting of these things? That trend being to call girls “underage women” and rape “unwanted sex”…

    When you engage in unwanted sex with an underage woman what you’re actually doing is a raping a child…as we’ve all decided as a society that 13 is NOT the age at which we trust young people to consent to sexual relations with 43 year olds. We don’t let 13 year olds sign contracts, get married, or consent to anything on their own because society as determined they are not yet capable of determining what is best for them.

    It doesn’t matter if she’s now exchanging emails with a guilty older Polanski, or they are friendly or whatever.

    What matters is at age 43 Roman Polanksi fucked a 13 year old child…a 7th or 8th grader if you place her age according to her grade…what further matters is that he did in fact acknowledge that crime by agreeing to plead guilty to “unlawful sexual intercourse” which is a nice way of saying a 43 year old degenerate drugged and raped a child.

    If you are 43 and are able to be seduced by a 13 year old child there is something massively fucking wrong with how your brain works.

    You are a piece of shit child molester, it doesn’t matter if you make movies or the assholes who appear in movies think you’re fucking Mr. Wonderful you’re nothing more than a pedophile shit bag who deserves some time in jail.

    And every single celebrity, or non-celebrity, dipshit who attempts to lessen, justify, or explain away what happened is also a piece of garbage human for pretending that there is any scenario in which a 43 year old adult male fucks a drugged, drunken child where it’s not “rape-rape” (whatever the fuck that means). Fuck you and everyone who thinks like you.

    Roman Polanski admitted to engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse…with an incapacitated 13 year old…what a guy.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Progressive left/libtard hero.

  11. Just An Old Dog says:

    If only Hollywood and Media Types were treated like Conservatives….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *