IDontLikeYouInThatWay.com: Roman Polanski Is Mad

Roman Polanski Is Mad

114 Comments:

Leave Your Comment

Wow, well said...have to agree.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 04:18:45
Todd,

I agree, but Samantha Geimer has publicly stated that she does not want the trial to go forward and want the MEDIA, to stop talking about it and leave her alone. She got over it and why don't others.

see this http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/09/28/2009-09-28_roman_polanskis_victim_now_45_got_over_it_long_ago.html

It is doing her and her family more harm to drench up this horrible crime.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 04:19:42
Agreed Todd.
Listening to the reactions yesterday from certain people in the 'art world' was shocking and disgusting.
Like Polanski is the victim now. Because he managed to escape punishment for 30 years.
What is wrong with these people?

By Heather, on September 29, 2009 04:20:16
Aaaand this marks my last visit to the site. Thanks for several years of inanity. Peace to the gizzods.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 04:20:22
Agreed Todd.
Listening to the reactions yesterday from certain people in the 'art world' was shocking and disgusting.
Like Polanski is the victim now. Because he managed to escape punishment for 30 years.
What is wrong with these people?

By Heather, on September 29, 2009 04:20:30
how people have worked with this guy since this incident is beyond me.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 04:24:57
He should be stoned to death and so should everyone who works for him and who has supported him including people who voted for him to win an Oscar.
Best post ever Todd, Well said. Thanks for telling it like it IS.

By HungWang, on September 29, 2009 04:29:18
#2, it does not matter if SG wants the trial to go ahead or not now. Once the police have been initially informed of a crime it is their duty to check it out. If the victim refuses to testify or whatever then sure the case won't go far, but they have to take it as far as they can.

To take another example, just say I'm crossing the street and I get hit by a car. I walk away from the accident mostly unhurt, but decide to go to the police for completeness. Once I've made a statement to them, they have a duty to investigate if there was any violation of the law on the part of the car's driver, whether I ask them to press charges or not. How far they take it is another matter.

Polanski has already pleaded guilty to the initial charges so he has to face justice for those anyway. Not to mention he'll probably face additional charges of evading/resisting arrest now.

By 5318008, on September 29, 2009 04:42:13
Oh Todd, you warm the cockles of my heart. Sometimes the commentors here scare me. Thanks for making sense of it for those few. :)

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 04:47:37
Well stated Todd - I'm sorry for SG that this has been drawn out by Polanski for so long but two parties were injured by his actions and one of those (the US legal system) doesn't want to forget. I hope he goes to jail but in any case his life has been disrupted and at least inconvenienced. He deserves so much more for what he did.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 04:58:14
Todd you're blowing this way out of proportion. It's not like he drugged and ass-fucked his adopted daughter, not that there's anything wrong with that either.

By Wood Allen, on September 29, 2009 05:27:14
THANKS YOU!!! WELL SAID!!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 05:54:31
To be fair, in France anal rape is celebrated. They call it "joyous surrender" and as you know, it's more or less their specialty.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 06:04:54
Please don't use the word 'Fag' or 'Faggot' when you're condemning a horrible crime. Those words come from hate. I am in a city where a man was just killed for being a 'fag'. Not cool. Not necessary.

By Darren, on September 29, 2009 06:29:07
I love you, Todd.

By Cubs Fan, on September 29, 2009 06:31:04
F*** yeah France!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 06:36:47
I'm with you Todd.

I don't care if Roman directed the birth of Jesus and God himself gave him an Oscar, then man drugged an raped a child. AND he admitted that he did it! There's a special place in hell set aside for adults who touch children and I hope he enjoys eternity there.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 06:42:20
I think it's worth noting that Polanski would have served his time after trial, had it not been for the media-hungry, ass-wipe of a judge that was presiding over his case. This should have been over 30 years ago, but I can't say I fault Polanski for running. Justice wasn't being served, only the ego of a judge who didn't deserve the bench was.

By FreakyFraser, on September 29, 2009 06:55:53
#4: so long! Fare thee well! TTFN! Toot-a-loo!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 06:56:38
Couldn't have said it better myself. Fuck hollywood for defending this piece of shit.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 07:03:31
Yet another reason not to shell out ridiculous sums of money to view the signers of the petitions' crappy films. About 99% of films are complete crap nowadays, including those of pedaphile Woody Allen. By viewing these pieces of crap, you are supporting child rape.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 07:13:16
Noo David Lynch. :(

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST. This just goes to show you what SHEEP people in the entertainment industry are. While some of those people signed that petition I'm sure others got a memo from their assistant about a petition about Polanski and they said, ok whatever, put my name on there. WHY ARE THEY THINKING THAT THIS IS SOMETHING TO SUPPORT?! Polanski is a dirtbag, piece of shit pedophile that anally raped a 13 year old girl. I don't think it get any clearer on what should be done with him and I hope he get back to the US and they throw his rapist ass in jail and never turn back.

#4 Fuck off you pedo-lover. Good riddance!

#2 Of course Samantha wants everything dropped, she has a life now and she doesn't want to relive this tragedy over and over again. It's because of TIME that she has "gotten over it" which means that essentially had to deal with this shit and realized she would have no justice a long time again because Polanski fucking bolted out of the country. She deserves justice, whether she wants it or not!!!!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 07:22:50
i wanna sign the list.
but im dead.
can someone plz sign me up plzzzz?

By john phillips, on September 29, 2009 07:31:07
#8

Read my post again and then reply. The point was she does not want the media attention.

#22
She deserves justice, whether, she wants it or not.

She now will have the media hounding her for comments, her family will live through the proceedings, BUT hey justice has to be done, ever if it screws up the victim and family's life.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 07:36:19
Wow, so I guess I'll never be able to watch a movie again...

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 07:36:50
if you follow the petition link, then follow the link at the bottom to his IMDB page, there's a lovely discussion about how much America sucks, we're all a bunch of Puritans, blah blah blah. I'm a globally-thinking, Socialist-loving liberal, but you know what? This isn't about AMERICA, this is about a FUCKING CHILD MOLESTER. SO, FUCK YOU Europe and anyone else who has convinced yourself differently. Don't like us? Get your own fucking culture, you hippocritcal pieces of shit.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 07:39:53
horrible blog, horrible post, horrible ignorance, just horrible.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 07:44:39
Wait... So anal with a 7th grader is bad? Shit!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 07:51:31
#24 - You can blame all of that on Polanski. He is the reason why proceedings stopped and now that he's caught it will all resume where it should. He made the choice to leave and HE made the choice for Samantha (and her parents) by essentially forcing her to deal with the rape on her own and without closure.

So yes, OF COURSE Samantha wants all of this dropped because it's been so damn long but that shouldn't affect the punishment that is coming to Polanski. She has said her piece, she can be his #1 supporter who sends him letters and chocolates in prison but that should not sway anyone's decision to throw this fucker in jail. He's a pedophile, plain and simple.

One of the biggest problems I have with all of this, ASIDE FROM THE RAPE, is that people in the entertainment industry feel like they are above the law and I'm so sick of that shit. I don't give a fuck what any of those people on the list think and I think it's retarded that they feel like they could make a difference because of who they are. They can all eat shit and die now for all I care.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 07:56:24
#24, let's be honest. It's not the media coverage of his arrest that screwed up her life and her family's life. It was the drugging, rape and SODOMY that she was the VICTIM of at age 13. She didn't ask for any of that either. She didn't start all this, but laws are laws.

She already lived through the proceedings when she was 13 and survived. She's stronger and tougher now. She shouldn't AHVE to do it again, because he should not have FLED THE COUNTRY years ago. Who gives a shit if they decided three days in jail was not enough after all?

Also, what are the chances that she's the only one since then? The world already knows about that 15-year old Natasha Kinski. Which occurred AFTER he fled. Wow, he's real fucking repentent, huh? Thinking 3 days is a fair penalty? Running away? continuing to fuck little girls? How many UNKNOWNS have their been?

Justice is not just for satisfying a victim. That's retribution. Justice is the physicality of a society protecting its people by standing by the laws enacted. In our country, those laws are enacted by the people FOR the people. Once set in motion, things like this should be followed up. When they are not--as is often the case--THAT'S the travesty.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 07:58:09
Will you PLEASE look up the definition of pedophile before you throw it around? It means sex with a PREPUBESCENT CHILD. She was a teenager who looked to be in her early 20s. He didn't know how old she was and didn't ask. What Polanski did was not child molestation but DATE RAPE an aspiring starlet/model like so many Hollywood men before him. Duh! That's why all those powerful directors are supporting him. Not because he's a great artist or because they love child sex(which it wasn't)but because Polanski was doin' the old casting couch routine done in Hollywood for many,many yrs. The irony is that if she had been over 18(like she looked) the DA wouldn't have touched the case because "she was asking for it". It wasn't until recently that people believed you could be raped by someone you knew who wasn't holding a knife to your throat. Enough with the child molester crap! Try the fact he used & threw away women like most powerful Hollywood men. If anyone should have been in jail, it should have been the girls mom, who partied with that scene and knew what was going to happen.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:05:30
The interesting thing is that he's an icon in Poland so all the Polish leaders immediately reacted with outrage at the attack. Now, they're backtracking frantically after a poll came out showing only 25% support for protecting Polanski, plus - best part - the country just passed a controversial measure legalizing enforced drug treatment ("chemical castration") for convicted pedophiles. There will be backtracking in other European countries too and the movie-making crowd will be left standing all by itself in its embrace of pedophilia.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:11:35
#31 OH MY GOD...ARe you serious?! I mean, seriously serious?! You are aware that girls nowadays hit puberty at 10?! 10 YEARS OLD. So are you telling me that if a grown-ass man has sex with a 10 year old, that he isn't a pedophile. When I think of a pedo I think of a grown man who is attracted to and has sex with very young girls (and boys). When I was 13 I was playing with Barbies and didn't even know how sex worked. Samantha was raped vaginally AND ANALLY at 13!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 30+ years or not, that's still terribly heartbreaking.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:13:29
Also #31, don't be naive - he knew she was underage. Give me a fucking break.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:16:17
#30

Laws are the laws, so please tell me when the American people are going to stand trial for slavery against balck man and destroying the American Indian. Additionally in 60s-now for basically not giving every gay person their right to be US citizen.

I do not care if he dies in jail, but lets ensure that victim does not suffer anymore because we are being self righteous to the point that victim suffers more than the guilty.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:18:50
#31

Does not matter if she looked 40 dumbass, she was 13! he could have asked for her age.

Secondly because every other 'small dick' hollywood director was doing it, it makes it right..you are real dumbass.

If you have a daughter and she got raped (do not wish that on anyone's child) bet you, you would not make such dumbass stupid comments.

There is not fucking IRONY dumbass, she was 13 YEARS OLD!!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:24:18
Really #33? You were playing with Barbies at 13???? Maybe it was different in the 70s but at 13 I was getting high, drinking beer, smoking cigs and having sex. Um, and most 10 yr olds don't look 20, even nowadays. That's a bit of a stretch.Anyway, my point was not he was rubbing his hands together in glee at having sex with a 13 yr old but that he date raped someone. So if she had been 18, it would have been ok because then he wouldn't have been a "pedophile"? The point is, it's not about her age, but about what happened - whether she was 13,23, or 33, if you say no, the man should stop. In the 70s, and even now, a lot of people don't believe that. They think if a woman puts herself in a compromising position, she deserves what she gets. So stop harping on the age angle and start thinking about how women are treated when they try to break into the movie industry. He is not the only famous Hollywood actor, director, producer to treat women this way. He was just the one caught because he was born under an unlucky star, maybe?(parents killed in Auschwitz, raised in post war communist country, wife & baby murdered by serial killer etc. that guy must have done something really wrong in a previous life - bad effing karma!)

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:27:55
#35, Yeah put all Americans on trial because of slavery and pushing out the Native Americans, that's what this is about.

Come on guy. Focus on the conversation at hand. If not, adults are having a conversation here. Go play with your Legos.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:27:59
Well said, hubby, well said.

By Todd's Wifey, on September 29, 2009 08:28:07
#31, rape is rape, and no one deserves it no matter how socially acceptable it is to anyone. I don't give a shit if 'everyone else was doing it at the time', drugging and/or raping people is wrong. I think that is your problem, you don't think women are people, you don't see women as fully human and in charge of their right to deny sex to anyone at any time. It doesn't matter if she was 13 or 31 or 93, she has a right to live her life without rape, you hateful fucking idiot.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:30:19
#38

As much as his comments were far left, your the one that is acting like a child with your name calling. Maybe you should go and play with legos, since at least he had an opinion. What value was your comments.

SCORE = 0

I say let the child rapist get what he deserves and that is a long jail time.

He

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:34:29
#38

As much as his comments were far left, your the one that is acting like a child with your name calling. Maybe you should go and play with legos, since at least he had an opinion. What value was your comments.

SCORE = 0

I say let the child rapist get what he deserves and that is a long jail time.

He

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:34:51
Todd, I notice you allow your wife to make comments, instead of stay at home and cook the bean pie.

Tell that bitch to get housework done and stop wasting time in your blog.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:37:47
# 38 & 41

IT is LEGO..not Legos..you fucking retards!!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:39:46
#36 Try and read more carefully. I didn't say it was ok she was raped. I said the age part wasn't the important part of the story. Why would he ask her age? What does some powerful Hollywood guy care? He's just going to use her & throw her away. She looked the part, he didn't really care to get to know her as a person(what's your sign? Do you like horses? How old are you?) except carnally. The point is HOW WOMEN ARE TREATED IN HOLLYWOOD. He was not snatching 8 yr old girls from bus stops and screwing them. Get a grip and save the pedophilia outrage for those who really deserve it. You cheapen that accusation by throwing it around incorrectly. Everyone has their panties in a wad about her age. Being raped at 18 sucks just as bad. Are you saying if she'd been 18, he shouldn't have been arrested because she was an adult and "knew better"? Look at the bigger picture - you think she was the first young girl at that mansion who'd gotten high and said no to Jack Nicolson, Warren Beatty, Ryan O'Neal etc.? That magical 18th birthday suddenly makes it ok?

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:40:37
#37, you've obviously missed my point. You stated this: "Will you PLEASE look up the definition of pedophile before you throw it around? It means sex with a PREPUBESCENT CHILD." ....

PREPUBESCENT MEANS BEFORE PUBERTY, BEFORE PHYSICAL CHANGES AND BEFORE A GIRL HAS HER PERIOD.

WHICH IS WHY I SAID: girls nowadays hit puberty at 10-years-old (and 11 and 12) so if a grown man has sex with a 10-year-old you wouldn't consider him a pedophile?!

And "stop harping on the age angle" ???? Age is everything here. It's why she couldn't fight back when he was raping her. She said she was afraid to do anything because she was the only one there and he scared her. That's the mind of a 13-year-old folks - age IS A FACTOR. A grown woman would have fought back, screamed...done something. Samantha had no choice but to lie still and hope for it to end quickly because she was not developed enough to know what to do, was too scared and too YOUNG TO FIGHT BACK.

A 13 y.o girl against a 44 y/o man....horrifying.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:44:57
#41 annnnnd #42 (nice double post) Who's name-calling?

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:50:29
#40 - I was making the point date rape IS RAPE. That is what he did. Not that he molested a 6 yr child but that he forced himself on what he thought was an adult who was saying no. Does no one here has a high school diploma!? Can you not comprehend what you read? Jeez. Read #31 more closely, for God's sake.Look at the bigger picture! My point was that rape was so minimized and brushed aside until recently, he wouldn't have even been arrested if she'd been 18, even though the same horrible things happened. This random drawing a line in the sand of what constitutes a "child" obscures the bigger picture of women being forced to do what they don't want to do in order to get that movie role, singing contract, commercial etc. Everyone is acting like a drunken lynch mob over her age rather than what happened to her.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:51:05
I don't know about you guys but posts #41 and #42 totally changed my life. They are so valuable and insightful.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:52:34
#46 - you're saying someone over 18 can't be raped because they will fight back?! Really? Tell that to my friend who was date raped in her 20s and all the other women who have been date raped - that what happened to them is their fault because they didn't fight back. Wow. You can be too scared at any age to fight back.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:55:42
#31, 45 & 46 (same person fucking dumbass)

Shut the fuck up and stop talking, #36 did not mention pedophila did he. you fucking loser.

THE POINT WAS SHE WAS RAPED END OF STORY AND SHE WAS 13 YRS.

Stop you clever fucking opinion twisting shit and just accept that POLANSKI needs to get his balls cut off and sent to jail.

No fucking excuses please!

Yes you did say it was aceptable because other Hollywood directors were doing it.

You tried to make 'intelligent' comment and fucked it up.

NOW GO AND BE GONE!!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 08:57:46
#49

What was your opinion on the subject..sarcasm for #41/42, you are no better!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:00:11
"Duh! That's why all those powerful directors are supporting him. Not because he's a great artist or because they love child sex(which it wasn't)but because Polanski was doin' the old casting couch routine done in Hollywood for many,many yrs." and "Try the fact he used & threw away women like most powerful Hollywood men." and "The point is, it's not about her age, but about what happened - whether she was 13,23, or 33, if you say no, the man should stop. In the 70s, and even now, a lot of people don't believe that. They think if a woman puts herself in a compromising position, she deserves what she gets."and "The point is HOW WOMEN ARE TREATED IN HOLLYWOOD" and "Being raped at 18 sucks just as bad. Are you saying if she'd been 18, he shouldn't have been arrested because she was an adult and "knew better"?" - where am I saying it's ok? I'm saying Hollywood men are supporting him because they do the same thing and the point is she WAS RAPED which is horrible at any age. Everyone is acting like it was her age that was the big problem, not what happened to her.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:07:46
#2, it doesn't matter what she wants. This isn't only about her anymore. A heinous, disgusting, crime was committed and the perpetrator needs to punished accordingly. Just because she doesn't want it in the media or because he paid her off already (they did reach some kind of settlement) doesn't change that. If this was the case, then a billionaire drug dealer could pay off a family for killing their loved one and the police/court wouldn't have a say at all. Basically, rich or powerful criminals could inflict enough pressure on a victim to completely bypass the justice system.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:09:00
Funny how indignant you are while posting pictures of scantily clad women, thus propagating the objectification of women which no doubt contributed to this 13 year old's molestation. Hey, not that I mind the objectification of women. Most of these whores make a damn good living shoving their tits around whatever camera is nearby. But let's not be morally ridiculous when our scruples are less than to be desired.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:11:06
#44

If Roman Polanski bangs a child in the ass while she plays with here LEGO, does anyone hear her scream?

Apparently only a few do.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:12:42
#50 - I'm saying that I believe a 13 y/o is still a child and will be afraid of an adult trying to overpower her/him which is why she probably didn't fight back. Of course ANY woman would be afraid of this but I am talking about a child here. I'm talking about why she probably didn't fight back. Go to the Smoking Gun and read Samantha's account of what happened. Lest we forget that she was also drugged too.

You're confused as I would never say that someone over 18 can't be raped if they fight back. Come on. Anyone at any age can be and ARE raped daily and that's appalling - because women are seen as prey and are expected to NOT fight back. If a woman can't fight back that's not her fault because it's a horrifying situation but in THIS SITUATION...this 13 y/o girl, I feel, was not mentally developed enough to understand the scope of what was going on. I'm basically trying to say that being at a very young age when something like this happens is a factor because others are saying her being young does not matter.

And my best friend was raped in High School, at a party, by one of the star wrestlers at our school. He watched her the entire night as she drank more and more alcohol and then he pounced on her when she was about to pass out and couldn't fight back. The day after it happened she went to the police to press charges and everyone at school shunned her and called her a liar. I was with her through it all and I had to see what she was going through every day at school. So, I would be the last person to say anything negative about rape victims.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:13:41
Todd,rightonthisone.
#17,Ananymous,loved how you saidif he directedthe birth ofChrist and Godgave himan Oscar, factsare facts.

What he did was statutory rape.Why?The victim was a minor.If she were a consenting adult 18 and over,they could still be having fun.
WIAT!!!The girl's mother should have been charged then too.The mother wanted her kid to get screwed by Roman or any rich and famous man.The things people won't do for fame fortune in the fame game. The daughter wanted to have sex too,but being a child of 13 under the law,she did not have that decison.Society is suppose to protect kids for they cannot do so for themselves.
Also, one situation under the can't be rightand wrong forothers.If it isok for Roman and the girl's mother and the girl,then it must be ok for a crackwho re ,the agreeing kid,and pedofile too. NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By Ms. Facts Cooldown, on September 29, 2009 09:24:30
And I'm agreeing with #51 and moving on.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to Quiznos.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:25:20
people twist to the story:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/polanski-has-already-paid-for-his-crime-20090929-gb0c.html

I point to exact paragraph see below:

Polanski, who was then aged 44, pleaded guilty to unlawful sex with a minor, spent 42 days in prison in Chino, California, and was due to be sentenced to time served when it became clear that the deal his lawyers had negotiated with the prosecution was not to be honoured - and he would have had to spend much more time in jail than had been agreed. He fled the United States in 1978 and has never returned.

So actually the US prosecution system decided to screw him and he ran. Do not get me wrong, he deserves the punishment, BUT now taxpayers are paying for US prosecution stupid mistake of managing this case.

He still a rapist, but this case should have be settled long ago.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:33:11
Myo pinion,he doesn't need to be sent back to the U.S.for these charges,but he should never be able to return here.

By Ms. Facts Cooldown, on September 29, 2009 09:35:26
#56

Okay you are a dumbass!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:35:48
Which begs the question when did anal sex become acceptable legal age or not today when it was basically sodomy years ago? Did porn movies made it that popular? My, the times are indeed a'changing.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:41:48
#57 - If she'd been 18 instead of 13, she'd still have been afraid to fight back because of the power imbalance in Hollywood. He was a famous director, she wanted to act. It's difficult to refuse someone more powerful than you, no matter what your age - especially when you want something from them. It's like your friend with the popular jock, the high school version of a Hollywood director, actor. Those in power hold all the cards and people are going to side with them. I'm saying the power imbalance, the smugness of the powerful against the wannabes, should be the rallying cry, not her age. He didn't know her age, only that she was a "nobody" who wouldn't dare make waves. Just imagine how many others this has happened to but because they were slightly older, nothing happened to the men that raped them. It bothers me that if she had been 5 yrs older no charges would have been pressed. People are outraged about the age, not the rape. And that's what bothers me so much. Both she & Polanski have said he didn't know exactly how old she was. To him, he was taking advantage of a woman, not a girl, and that would have been alright for everyone back then. I think that's why he is so confused and bewildered about his arrest. I'm sure he & his friends forced themselves on lots of starlets and never got busted. He was just the unlucky rapist/bigshot who got caught with a minor. As a mother myself, I am horrified her mom let her go up to Jack Nicolson's home alone with someone she knew to be a heavy drug user and womanizer. What is up with that????

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:43:21
I wonder if any of these people would of signed a "Save John Phillips" petition too...just sayin.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:45:16
"Oh mon Dieu, tout j'ai fait étais le viol et la course loin. Pourquoi tout le drame ?" Monsieur Polanski.

By Pepe, on September 29, 2009 09:49:54
# 64, We are totally on the same side but arguing different points - so let's just hold hands and skip through a field of daisies.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 09:57:06
You know what? Polanski IS one of the great directors. And it doesn't matter; nor should it.

The story in this post is how utterly divorced from reality - and the most elementary sort of morality - Hollywood is. Which has been apparent ever since Disney set Victor Salva loose on another set full of teenage boys. (I myself can't even look at the JEEPERS CREEPERS movies, given Salva's background.) I guess we're lucky it was only a girl who got raped - if it were a 13-year-old boy, there'd be a codicil to that document condemning America for "homophobia".

The sickest of all sick jokes is that every name on that list can be otherwise counted on to make high-horse pronouncements on the corruption of societies who pardon the rich while punishing the poor for the same crimes.

By Ragno, on September 29, 2009 09:59:58
You just know that the directors who are supporting Polanski aren't doing it out of artistic love for his films. I'd bet anything that they've all done the same thing, or have at least considered it. Hollywood is a fucking disease.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 10:00:53
#2 Todd explained that. The bottom line is he ran, that in itself is a crime. At this point its more about that. He has lived a reat life after he raped a little kid. What if it was your kid. If it vwas my kid he would be dead by now. You need to get a life, bring this bastard to justice.

By HungWang, on September 29, 2009 10:01:14
#67 - I'm skippin' through the daisies...

#69 Yes, that's what I said. They are supporting him because they've done the same thing. Maybe not with a 13 yr old, but to an 18 yr old...which I find a small difference. It's not the age, people, it's the imbalance of power that caused the date rape.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 10:08:37
So I can get away with whatever the hell I want, as long as I produce something someone somewhere considers a valuable contribution to society? Neat.

By mutterhals, on September 29, 2009 10:23:44
I agree with whoever said the rich/famous feels laws do not apply to them.
If we as a society continue to do this,then we end up with the law letting unrich/unfamous people go too,because they get to plead their defnse.
It is so hard on how to decide Polanski's case since it is the child and mother were consenting.I know the only consenting adults were Polanski and the mother.Polanski and the other needtobe snetneced or remain free with Polanski never returning here.
Other case,here is here and Europe is Europe.Polanski dated Natasia Kinski when she was 15,but it was in Europe and they are Europenas.Bily Wyman-Rollig Stone,dated Mandy Smith,with hernMummy's blessings,when she was 13.He married her when she was18.

By Ms. Facts Cooldown, on September 29, 2009 10:23:47
Yeah, all the Polanski defenders are right. You shouldn't have to go to jail if you rape young girls, that's what they're there for. Also, please send me your daughters and sisters so I can put my penis in their butts kthnx.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 10:26:17
Let's not call it a DATE RAPE. That wasn't a date. If anything, if was plain rape. The fact that she was 13 just adds to it. And the fact that he ran after being convicted. Guy should be banged in the ass in prison right now.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 10:29:53
Date Rape IS rape. It's when someone you know rapes you, rather than a stranger grabbing you off the street. She knew him, not well, but he wasn't a stranger in a dark alley.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 10:37:42
Todd--

RESPECT for the words of honesty. Its about time someone has some fucking balls and calls this piece of shit out for what he is.

Its days like this I said FUCK HOLLYWOOD. May they all burn.

Thanks for the coverage.
--DGDB

By DANNYGLOVERS_DICKBLOOD, on September 29, 2009 10:54:58
Shame on you POLANSKI< 13 years old, the age of my daughter I wouldve cut it out and fed it to my dog.
You pervert, you deserve to be in jail.
Pedophiles, rich and politicians, do exist and they always get away with their henous crime. why?

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 10:57:40
By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 11:01:33
Just saw this on Polanski's IMDB messageboard, which is blowing up...

"I reread an extraordinary interview Polanski gave to the novelist Martin Amis in 1979, the year after Polanski went on the run.

The interview originally appeared in Tatler and is collected in Amis’s excellent book Visiting Mrs Nabokov.

Here’s a section of the first quote it contains from Polanski.

“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”"

Disgusting, disgusting man. Nab him, jail him and throw away the key!!!!!!

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 11:25:13
#78 ~ why the hell are you on this site? Who exactly is the pervert. I'm not defending Polanski but those condemning him here out of high handedness are just a bunch of hypocrites.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 11:32:13
To #45 - It does make a difference that the victim was a child. Rape is a horrible crime no matter the age of the victim, but raping a child makes Polanski especially vile. He deserves to spend the rest of his miserable life rotting in jail. Anyone who supports the bastard should be ashamed of themselves.

By Muffy, on September 29, 2009 12:09:50
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you should've stayed in France, convict.

By BarbadoSlim, on September 29, 2009 12:12:29
Oh and another thing I find it highly amusing how some folks here are all bringing their personal outrage (i.e. baggage) to this discussion. Facts are: she DOESN'T GIVE A SHIT. She and her sicko mom were all about joining in the degenerate Hollywood lifestyle, if she had gotten a role and hit the big time SHE WOULDN'T PISS ON YOU IF YOU WERE ON FIRE, so if she doesn't care, why should I? (or my tax dollars) It's gonna take MILLIONS to bring that douchebag back and here you all are bringing your personal stories into this. Nobody GIVES a shit. They should've honored the plea deal 30 fucking years ago.

By BarbadoSlim, on September 29, 2009 12:40:49
#80 -Maybe Polanski should make a t-shirt with that quote to wear in court."Everyone want to f--- young girls".Wow. Maybe in his circle of friends. Reminds me of Tatum O'Neal's memoir about when she was raped at 15 by her dad's coke dealer. He got really mad at her, worried she'd blown his connection! Ah, Hollywood!Ryan O'Neal and Polanski ran in the same crowd then....I bet John Phillips did too. And Jimmy Page's "girlfriend" for yrs in the 70's was a 13 yr old named Lori. Sadly, Polanski is not an anomaly. Except in the sense he got caught....

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 12:49:40
#2 - That is so beyond relevant that there are no words to explain why.

You sound like that tool Whoopie on the View today, who basically said its not a rape anymore because he plead to a lesser charge.

By Sunny Day, on September 29, 2009 14:02:53
Todd you are the best and funniest blogger with any morals left in the biz.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 14:38:48
1)We know for sure that Polanski won't be raping anyone in the United States anymore, we know he hasn't since he fled to France many decades ago.

2)The girl he raped said she's forgiven him for whatever the hell they did together. For her (and she's the only victim here... we can all agree on thaat, justice WAS already served in a private settlement many years ago)

3) Most of France seems to be on Polanski's side on this one, that or they really hate Americans.

4) In fact, most of Europe seems to embrace Polanski and considers his lifestyle to be pretty harmless, and they would know better since he actually LIVES there and not over here.

I promise his old penis won't pop out of the television to rape you if you watch his movies.

By Stacey, on September 29, 2009 14:53:08
FUKIN WOW. there should be no question or even a fukin second of thought of defending this rapist. HE RAPED A LITTLE GIRL PERIOD. The piece of shit deserves to go to jail for the rest of his life. He'll prob. find out how it feels to be raped in the ass too while hes in there lol. And whoever signed the fukin petition is a fukin scumbag.
Yours Truly, Anonymous

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 15:47:11
yeah righteous indignation!!!

By historys_greatest_pedophile, on September 29, 2009 15:55:18
The point is most European countries (look at how the Dutch protect child-rapists) are covertly permissive of pedophiles and harbored Polanski while he had no fear of being captured. Europeans have a fucked up sense of compassion considering the Libyan PanAm Jetliner bomber was allowed to go back to his home country from Scotland because he had cancer.

Hollywood directors are only defending him because they consider him a friend and colleague. If he was a shitty director, they would have said bring his pedo ass back to the US.

He will fight this as long as he can, and it will be several years before he reaches US soil, if at all. There are still rich and powerful interests on his side, so at the worst he will be confined to his Swedish chalet for the rest of his life.

If there is any justice in this world, this piece of shit will go to the Aryans and bikers at Leavenworth.

By MuckLuck, on September 29, 2009 16:46:40
#60 and #61: you have never been in a criminal courtroom. there's nothing to compel a judge to accept a plea agreement. who cares that a judge would reject a plea agreement. that shit happens all the time. if polanski had to do another 40+ days, trust me, that's a good deal. and as for deportation afterward, you can take that to the bank, not that he would give a shit.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 16:52:42
#70

You need to read people's replies properly before getting your panties in twist. I was giving an opinion from victim point of view, not what you want ..idiot

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 17:03:54
Oops. Meant to say IRRELEVANT in my comment. Most of you probably figured that out, though.

By Sunny Day, on September 29, 2009 17:05:40
#86

Are you stupid or just real stupid. My first sentence was 'TODD, I AGREE', I was providing a point from victim standpoint okay.
Try and read before you start shit, dumbass.

What does ' I agree' mean, since you can't understand the words, it means I agree with Todd's opinion of the rapist.

Have you any other dumbass comments to make or is that your 30 seconds of being a dumbass, please prove me wrong that you are not permanent dumbass.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 17:09:24
91, Swiss chalet, not Swedish, you jackass.

And Polanski deserves to rot.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 17:24:05
A-fucking-MEN, Todd!

By VanessaK, on September 29, 2009 17:42:15
#96 You insufferable pedant, eat my Swedish meatballs and Swiss chocolate log.

By MuckLuck, on September 29, 2009 18:03:31
Hey! Aren't some of those names also listed with NAMBLA.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 18:03:54
#96 You insufferable pedant, eat my Swedish meatballs and Swiss chocolate log.

By MuckLuck, on September 29, 2009 18:10:46
BRAVO Todd!
I Feel sorry for the Victim/Woman having to Re-visit all this Horror after so many years.

By BukkNekkid , on September 29, 2009 18:48:06
"You can justify it or reconcile it however you want to make the case for letting this sexual predator go, but then I'd call you a fag and kick your teeth in."

Wow. I'm done with this site now. Y'all enjoy your circle jerk.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 19:07:59
Wow.... people here are actually defending a man who confessed to child rape. What will celebrities be getting away with next? Murder? Oh right, OJ already did that.

As if the person being rich/famous, or how long ago the event happened, has ANYTHING to do with whether they deserve to be punished. How disgusting.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 19:10:38
[i]I agree, but Samantha Geimer has publicly stated that she does not want the trial to go forward and want the MEDIA, to stop talking about it and leave her alone. She got over it and why don't others.[/i]

Well, mostly because the trial was over in 1978. This isn't a matter of extraditing a suspect - he had his trial and was convicted.

What is it with America and tolerance for celebrity pedophiles?

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 19:54:04
when a grown man 'does it' anally with a sexually active 13 y/o, it will destroy her life forever.

everyone knows that you have to wait for the vagina's magic 18th birthday. sperm from a man over 18 mixes with the innocent under 18 girl juices and completely destroys her, rendering her 'victim'.

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 20:14:54
#98 & 100,

I think we got it, stop posting twice dumbass

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 21:05:19
Couldn't be said better!
As for that support list - you should see what is currently going on here in Poland. I'd say 99% of celebrities speaking out on the topic are in the same 'fighting mood' and supporting him. So far I've only hear 2 of them speak out against him. I'm so shocked! Especially that at the same time 99% of the public are calling him a pedophile and a rapist and demanding that he should be treated like any ordinary person and no be given any privileges based on his fame.

Immediately after the news of his arrest came, two of out governmental ministers (foreign and culture) started all this craze themselves and condmened tghe arrest. Gosh, it was good to see them have to try and take those words back after the prime Minister told them to shut up and treat it as a crime that it is, and not a national or political cause.:P

By anonymous, on September 29, 2009 23:14:27
#103 Oh God, you have no idea. You should've been here for the Michael Jackson nuts.

I was already at "fuck you, Wes Anderson," but that was because I think he's a pretentious douche. This just cements it.

By Craig, on September 30, 2009 05:02:35
# 107: can you kindly call up four of your friends and come over? My light bulb just burned out.

By Ragno, on September 30, 2009 06:06:22
Sorry, sorry. Some men simply can't walk away from a Polish joke.

By Ragno, on September 30, 2009 06:07:33
107, that seems to follow what is happening everywhere else. Majority of celebrities and the higher-ups want him freed, and the general public who always gets fucked in comparison is against it. Same shit, different country. ;-)

By anonymous, on September 30, 2009 06:32:28
@81
Why Im I in this site you ask? excuse me, I pay for my internet services and im entitled to my opinion. you live in a facsist country, your not used to people opposing yours, we agree to disagree, and disagree to disagree. not agree.
shut the fuck up, a 13 years old girl was raped, and your attacking me because he is a pedophile and your his kind or your alike. moron. vous etes malade, certainment.

By anonymous, on September 30, 2009 10:59:21
Someone mentioned Woody is a Kid Toucher.

Not true. Even though Woody did sleep with his adopted daughter, she was of legal age.

Doesn't make it less gross, but let's be correct with the facts

By anonymous, on October 5, 2009 11:51:20
Something to consider. People read the victims testimony and Polanski's plea but why do they ignore the probation report which represents the States position ? That report states that there is evidence that the victim was "mature and willing" Remember that is in a report authored by at least five civil servants who evaluated the victims and Polanski's version of events.

By anonymous, on October 19, 2009 16:20:54

<< Continue Reading IDontLikeYouInThatWay.com

Specify
Name
Web Page
Anonymous