web
counter
 

I Can Now Remain Silent No Longer!

By Cindy Davis | Posted Under Trade News | Comments (61)



roman_polanski4.jpg

Roman Polanski broke his long silence Sunday, with the publishing of a statement by his friend and supporter, Bernard-Henry Lévy. By now the charges against Polanski are well known, and any one of us could likely recite a version of the goings-on between the director and a thirteen-year-old girl. But Mr. Polanski still doesn’t get it. And he still thinks he’s being treated unfairly, despite the fact that unlike most criminals he was able to raise a several million dollar bail and can wait things out in a lovely Swiss chalet.

“I can no longer remain silent because the United States continues to demand my extradition more to serve me on a platter to the media of the world than to pronounce a judgment concerning which an agreement was reached 33 years ago.
I can remain silent no longer because I have been placed under house arrest in Gstaad and bailed in very large sum of money which I have managed to raise only by mortgaging the apartment that has been my home for over 30 years, and because I am far from my family and unable to work.” (Polanski)

Listen Roman, I’m one of the few people at Pajiba who will admit to still supporting you as a film maker — I practically ran out to see The Ghost Writer, and I loved it as I have loved so many of your movies. I have massive amounts of sympathy for some of the events of your life, most especially the horrific murder of your wife and child. I can understand how that might drive a person to go through a horrible period of drinking, perhaps drugs, but I can’t really understand having sex with a young girl. And I can’t understand how you can defend that behavior over and over, or think that because other people treated you wrongly or unfairly, this gives you the right to consider your crime washed away. You don’t get to make that decision. As much as you want this to all go away and as much as the victim has had her fill of having the spotlight shined on her, this case hasn’t been closed. And the only way, Mr. Polanski, that you will ever again have a chance to put this all behind you, is to face the damned music. Step up to the plate and return to the United States willingly and let your expensive attorneys do their thing. You may, in fact, have been treated unfairly by a corrupt judge or a publicity hound District Attorney. Your deal may have been overturned without true cause. And still, your best course of action and the only way your life and reputation will ever be restored is to stand in front of the court as you should have so many years ago. Do yourself a favor and stop making statements designed to elicit pity and start making statements your children can respect.

In other words, cojones used on a young girl = tiny. Cojones used to stand up like a man = not so shriveled.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



"It Was Like a Marriage Breaking Up Suddenly, Violently Quickly" | Conan O'Brien Last Night on "60 Minutes" | Piranhas, Holes, and Joe Dante | A Study in Contrast









Comments

Why address your third paragraph to Polanski? I'm sure he doesn't read Pajiba.

Posted by: Kate the Great at May 3, 2010 11:20 AM

Roman Polanski drugged, raped and sodomized a 13 year old child. I hope they don't put him in jail: I hope they put him under the jail.

May he rot in hell.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 11:29 AM

This is so full of YES that I just have to do a little victory dance to this marvelous song. http://bit.ly/LnkfJ

Posted by: Sofía at May 3, 2010 11:32 AM

It's called a literary device.

Posted by: sansho1 at May 3, 2010 11:33 AM

"Roman Polanski drugged, raped and sodomized a 13 year old child. I hope they don't put him in jail: I hope they put him under the jail."

Isn't that supporting the same philosophy that he uses to justify skipping out on his sentence and flauting the law? He committed a crime. He should pay the price the law prescribes for that crime. No more. No less.

Posted by: PaddyDog at May 3, 2010 11:47 AM

It's called pretentious.

Posted by: Kate the Great at May 3, 2010 11:56 AM

I'm sure he doesn't read Pajiba.

One never knows, Kate.

Posted by: Cindy at May 3, 2010 12:01 PM

Oh my god! Feel some pity you heartless bastards! Poor Roman now has a mortgage! A MORTGAGE! Have you people no soul?

Posted by: admin at May 3, 2010 12:04 PM

He pleaded guilty then fled the country before sentencing. By all accounts his jail time would have been 2-10 yrs or so. This has now been going on for 33 yrs. He would have been out of jail 23 yrs ago, totally free to make movies and earn money.

It's his own doing- the crime, the fleeing, the so-called punishment. Why can't Batman just kidnap him and deliver him to LA City Hall?

Posted by: bananapanda at May 3, 2010 12:08 PM

It was merely a sentencing suggestion. What the courts decide is their business.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 12:09 PM

Polanski makes me sick. I hope he gets what he deserves, in this life and the next.

Posted by: stardust at May 3, 2010 12:48 PM

poor guy... had to mortgage his apartment (probably not the only one he owns) to raise the $4.5 MILLION DOLLARS for his bail for drugging and raping a 13 year old...

*worlds smallest violin plays in the background*

Posted by: marcusarilius at May 3, 2010 12:53 PM

i would like to cut off his dick and slap him in the face with it.

i'd leave it for him... in case he wanted to put it on ice and get it reattached.

but he really needs to be beaten about the head and neck with his own penis.

Posted by: stopthemadness at May 3, 2010 1:25 PM

I have sympathy for Polanski. I understand the attraction to a 13 year old girl. I also understand honesty. (obviously) when you factor in money and all that it brings, drugs, loss of morality, and the sense that one is above reproach, (see Tiger Woods for latest example)
I abhore what he did, but let us not be disingenuine about the core tenants of sexual attraction. I agree he should have stood up and continued fighting and yes served his sentance. Running away is never the answer but it ususally is the first instinct.

Posted by: danr at May 3, 2010 1:35 PM

"let us not be disingenuine [sic] about the core tenants [sic] of sexual attraction"?

what the fuck does that even mean?

that sounds like rape apologism to me.

disgusting.

Posted by: stopthemadness at May 3, 2010 1:42 PM

The Core Tenants of Sexual Attraction sounds like a very sexy Cinemax original series about, I dunno, a group of recovering nymphomaniacs sharing a flat or something.

(Sorry, the tenets/tenants error never stops being funny. Never.)

Posted by: Nat Kittyface at May 3, 2010 1:42 PM

And let us not forget David Tennant, who might be able to carry such a show.

Posted by: Cindy at May 3, 2010 1:49 PM

That's a show I would watch.

Posted by: stopthemadness at May 3, 2010 1:50 PM

@Danr

What the fuck are you talking about?

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 2:55 PM

@danr:
Tiger Woods = consensual.
Polanski and 13-year-old = NOT consensual.

Seriously. Does this need to be explained?

Posted by: KatherineSpins at May 3, 2010 3:13 PM

Polanski doesn't get it. That's why he thinks that he's the victim.

I'm sure his legion of apologists will fight tooth and nail to deny the evil judicial system in America from forcing him back.

Posted by: Fredo at May 3, 2010 3:18 PM

Why do so many people in Hollywood defend this guy? Seriously, I get that he's got some talent as a director, but that has nothing to do with the fact he's a FREAKIN CHILD RAPIST. HE RAPED A CHILD ANALLY.

I'm sure there are talented artists, and musicians, actors, whatever in prison. One trait has nothing to do with the other.

-Frob

Posted by: frobme at May 3, 2010 3:29 PM

So a wealthy white man got screwed over by a corrupt LA judge. Boo freaking hoo, go drive to Compton because nobody down there ever gets screwed over by a corrupt LA judge? And the DA obviously didn't cut a deal just to get better seating at future movie screenings, that couldn't have possibly have happened.

If he had raped a 13-year-old white girl in Alabama, he'd have been killed before the trial began. (Of course if he had raped a 13-year-old black girl in Alabama in those days, the county leaders might have given him the keys to the city.)

So he should take his lucky ass and go back to LA and face the music. No judge would sentence him outside the sentencing guidlines at this point.

Posted by: Confucius Jackson at May 3, 2010 3:34 PM

further, he's a fuckwit for not facing the music then. this was pre-megan's law. the era of free love and fuck children. he probably wouldn't have gotten a harsh sentence to begin with.

and frankly, all the talk about the judge being corrupt is bogus. first, the dude (i can't remember his name) who made those charges in the documentary recanted. and second of all, THAT'S WHAT THE APPEALS PROCESS IS FOR. he could have appealed on the grounds of prosecutorial or judicial misconduct. you don't just peace out to france.

gah! it makes me SO FUCKING ANGRY.

Posted by: stopthemadness at May 3, 2010 3:38 PM

"I understand the attraction to a 13 year old girl. I also understand honesty. (obviously) when you factor in money and all that it brings, drugs, loss of morality, and the sense that one is above reproach, (see Tiger Woods for latest example)"

@danr - I keep coming back to your comment because I am trying to make sense of it and your intentions in posting.

I don't understand the attraction of a 13 year old girl for a 40-something year old man. And I really don't understand acting on it. I realise that some people are born with a sexual identity that must be horrifying and monstrous for them to come to terms with, but that does not excuse morally-reprehensible behavior. Understanding his attraction and acting on it are separate things.

This is not just about celebrity entitlement (which you must admit is a pretty specious argument for this kind of conduct). Polanksi feels victimized by the system in part because he got a special deal that looked like it was going to be turned into a much worse deal when all of this originally came to light.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 3:52 PM

"I have sympathy for Polanski. I understand the attraction to a 13 year old girl."

Um.

Well.

Someone issue an AMBER Alert on this sumbitch, and quickly.

Posted by: The Other Agent Johnson at May 3, 2010 3:53 PM

You see now The Other Agent Johnson, I was trying not be all judgemental and, by extension, stabby with @danr, but ya, what the hell was that?!

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 4:03 PM

Perhaps danr is speaking in the sense that we belong to the animal kingdom, and that sexual attraction is intertwined in our brain chemistry with the ability to procreate. Hence, puberty is the green light for sexual attraction (for either gender).

BUT, in the sense that we've found it generally advantageous to organize into a society with norms, one of which is the extension of childhood beyond the onset of puberty, he's out of bounds. There is a power dynamic overlay to what Polanski did that we generally agree is repulsive.

Posted by: sansho1 at May 3, 2010 4:29 PM

i get stabby first and ask questions later. it's my nature.

Posted by: stopthemadness at May 3, 2010 4:33 PM

@sansho1

"...in the sense that we belong to the animal kingdom...hence, puberty is the
green light for sexual attraction (for either gender)."

Someone fetch me Marlin Perkins while Jim wrestles the anaconda!

Thirteen year old boys get the green light for sexual attraction to thirteen
year old girls. Forty year old men don't. If by onset of puberty you mean menstruation, I get that, but she was still demonstrably a child and that
doesn't that go against the laws of biology. Wouldn't a full compliment of secondary sexual characterisics, cessation of growth and psychological
maturity play into biology somewhere?


Perhaps danr could clarify or is he/she just sitting back and enjoying the shitstorm?

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 4:41 PM

P.S. All of the above is bullshit. I'm floundering in a sea of confusion and total despair, but knock on wood, I still have my health.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 4:46 PM

i'm sure s/he is enjoying the shit storm. anyone who uses the word "disingenuine" must love a good shit storm.

i think i read that in the bible.

Posted by: stopthemadness at May 3, 2010 4:55 PM

I think Lindsay Lohan is a disingenue. Are the words related?

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 5:05 PM

"Wouldn't a full compliment of secondary sexual characterisics, cessation of growth and psychological maturity play into biology somewhere?"

That's a good question -- I don't really know. I don't bring up the difference between biological drives and societal norms in order to dismiss the norms. They're important, and Polanski obviously violated them.

Posted by: sansho1 at May 3, 2010 5:15 PM

It was a good question?

Mrs. Julian out!

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 5:19 PM

Would America have cared if Polanski had brutally violated Linsday Lohan?

Posted by: Confucius Jackson at May 3, 2010 5:33 PM

I'm... wary of Pajiba rape discussions, but just wanted to throw this into the mix re: above mentioning of puberty vs. full secondary sexual characteristics, etc.

Having read the transcripts of the interview with the victim, Polanski began by raping her vaginally, then asked her if she had ever yet had her period. She replied that she had, and after that, he commenced raping her anally. So a) he knew exactly how young she was (as in possibly not old enough to have started menstruation) and b) he knew that what he was doing was wrong, and should he happen to get her pregnant, he'd be in the soup, so to speak.

Posted by: MM at May 3, 2010 6:07 PM

@MM That is the most revolting use of the word "soup" that I have ever heard and that's coming from someone who just spent the day talking about ass to mouth torture porn and anal child rape.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 6:13 PM

Uh... apologies? The phrase "in the soup" merely means "in trouble," as far as I know, rather like "up the creek without a paddle". Is it revolting because it's a little understated? Again, apologies.

Posted by: MM at May 3, 2010 6:17 PM

Or was it that his wee-wee would be in the "period soup" if she was menstruating? 'Cuz that would be a little gross. But not that gross, as lengthy discussions on Pajiba about the soldier getting a little blood on his sword will attest.

For the record, I think Polanski is a vile reprehensible human being and although I don't believe in Hell, if I did believe in it, I'd take comfort in the fact that he's definitely going there and having all his skin ripped off and being roasted over a spit for all eternity.

Posted by: MM at May 3, 2010 6:21 PM

And PS to all grammar, punctuation and syntax police:

I apologize for correctly putting the comma inside the quotes, but then blatantly leaving the period outside the quotes in my 6:17 pm comment. Also, I now realize that Polanski wouldn't be "roasted over a spit," he'd be roasted ON a spit OVER a fire.

Posted by: MM at May 3, 2010 6:24 PM

[One moment while I clutch my pearls]

I thought you were being all clever and punny with your use of "in the soup". You did say "so to speak". And I was being facetious.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 6:52 PM

I watched Conan on tour last week and it was very funny. I can't wait for his new show to come on TBS. It will be the beginning of a new chapter in late night television.

Posted by: Kathy Vanderwerff at May 3, 2010 7:00 PM

I love a good pearl-clutching.

Posted by: MM at May 3, 2010 7:01 PM

You gotta giving me openings like that.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 7:18 PM

You gotta *stop* giving me openings like that.

Stupid fingers!

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at May 3, 2010 8:07 PM

I saw Conan on tour a couple days ago and it was awesome. I can't wait for his new show to come to TBS. It will be the beginning of a new chapter in late night television.

Posted by: bananaplugger at May 3, 2010 9:05 PM

I'm not sure what I find more ironic:
A commenter complaining about the post being pretenious who signs off as 'Kate the Great'
OR
A spambot for Conan signing off as 'bananaplugger' on a post about the sodomisation of a 13 year old.

Either way, it's providing an interesting distraction from a situation that makes my skin crawl.

Posted by: ScienceGeek at May 3, 2010 9:42 PM

I watched Conan on tour last week and it was awesome. I can't wait for his new show to come on TBS. It will be the start of a new chapter in late night TV.

Posted by: bananaplugger at May 3, 2010 9:44 PM

Polanski=danr, see he does read pajiba. Simple thought for this early in the day. Shoot him right in the head (you get to pick which one) and be done with this.

Posted by: clancys_daddy at May 4, 2010 9:51 AM

"but I can’t really understand having sex with a young girl"

you got it wrong. he didnt have sex with a young girl. he RAPED a young girl. language can be used as a tool, lets just be clear on what exactly he did ok?

Posted by: Amy at May 4, 2010 1:50 PM

Danr > he did rape her, he drugged her and forced himself on her, had she been 40, there would be no excuse for what he did.

--

On the other hand, I don't see why people should be ashamed of enjoying his movies. You have to separate the man and the artist, that's true with any form of art. Celine was a brilliant writer and he was an antisemitic scumbag, so what...

Posted by: Candie at May 4, 2010 1:51 PM

What's the big deal about Polanski? Scorsese's cool with what he did. So's Woody Allen, Spielberg, Coppola...

Posted by: Retsyn at May 4, 2010 5:16 PM

Polanski has no defense. To claim that creative people are different and should be judged differently is ridiculous.
But the girl was made up and dressed to look like an adult by her mother who then dropped her off at the director's house. What is her responsibility in all this? A desire to make a star out of one's offspring cannot explain or condone such actions. What did the mother think Polanski was going to do - discuss scripts? What was a 13 year old doing alone in a director's house? Why are the parents not included in this outrage?

Posted by: rohit arya at May 5, 2010 9:40 AM

simply because people choose to express their outrage about roman polanski, the clear wrongdoer, doesn't mean some outrage can't be saved for others.

choosing to address a certain topic doesn't mean one has to address all related topics.

Posted by: stopthemadness at May 7, 2010 7:33 PM

Uhm.. It's a shame what has happened to Tiger however you however have to admire him as a sports man. Just because he is a talented sportsperson doesn't mean you have to like him as a person! There are lots of folks who I have a high regard for for their work but wouldn't want to meet them!

Posted by: berkshire photographer at May 10, 2010 7:20 AM

Well put together posting about this here, thanks for dedicating a post to blog about this. How been writing for a decent time? If this is of interest to you, take a minute to visit my website STAIHARD.com it might of similar content to your visitors.

Posted by: Leisha Shekarchi at May 21, 2010 1:15 AM

Thanks for your visiting this www.watchau.com online store.

Posted by: Swiss Replica Watches at August 22, 2010 9:41 AM

I loved this article

Posted by: talalay latex foam at December 18, 2010 8:24 AM

What would all of us do without the presence of the wonderful ideas you talk about on this site? Who else comes with the fortitude to deal with important topics for the health of common readers like me? My spouse and i and my girlfriends are very fortunate to have your web site among the types we typically visit. It is hoped you know how much we love your hard work! Best wishes from us all.

Posted by: zero friction marketing at February 15, 2011 2:43 AM

I have to express some appreciation to the writer for bailing me out of this crisis. Because of exploring through the the web and getting solutions which are not productive, I thought my life was well over. Living without the presence of strategies to the difficulties you've solved as a result of your article content is a serious case, as well as ones which may have badly damaged my career if I had not noticed the website. Your own personal know-how and kindness in touching every aspect was tremendous. I don't know what I would have done if I hadn't encountered such a solution like this. I can at this point look forward to my future. Thanks for your time very much for this reliable and results-oriented help. I will not think twice to refer your web blog to anybody who needs and wants guidelines about this issue.

Posted by: Geoge Haris at March 13, 2011 7:50 PM