Full Police Transcript Of The Case Against Roman Polanski
ROMAN Polanksi is arrested for raping 13-year-old Samantha Geimer (then Samantha Gailey) at Jack Nicholson’s Mulholland Canyon house in March 1977. Polanksi was 43.
The media wonders if the Swiss can be blamed - and finds that they can be - and Anorak’s Man in LA looks back over the case.
Yes, sometimes justice does seem to move in strange ways. Two days after the death of the woman who forty years ago slaughtered his wife and her unborn child, Roman Polanski is arrested in Switzerland on a 31-year-old arrest warrant for raping a thirteen-year-old girl at Jack Nicholson’s house.
Sure, Polanski’s a great artist and he survived the Holocaust and a recent documentary showered him with great sympathy and the victim has given him her forgiveness, but before you start feeling too sorry for the sonofabitch read the case against him…
Posted: 28th, September 2009 | In: Celebrities, Gallery, Key Posts Comments (10) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- Emily on Miley Cyrus Says Twilight Is A Bad Cult And Zac Effron Is Hot
- susan jones on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- The Real Stig on The Great Cathay Pacific Blocked Toilet Mystery
- SoDak-GhostDog on Interview With Survior Of James Arthur Ray’s Sedona Sweat Lodge
- Katie Norman on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
October 2nd, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Dewey, thank for your reply. I am only worried that, as comparative creatures (we say that a holiday was better or worse than last years, a TV show better or worse than another similar offering - it is how we learn and grow) we may become inured to ‘ordinary’ rape, violent physical abuse and other lesser (look, even I’m doing it. Not one of us is immune to comparative analysis) offences against others. Very few sexual assaults on women are pursued to a satisfactory end.
I may be alone (or in a minority) in thinking that justice should serve the victim first, society next and any other interested parties - the meeja; Swiss nomes protecting their wealthy clients and their economy in a callous deal; those who thrive on a diet of outrage - way down the list after that. In Polanski’s case, it’s not that I think him innocent, persecuted or badly done by - in fact not one of those - but that Hollywood is a powerful clique that will always protect its own; lest their own peccadilloes and trespasses come to light and that they provide enough cash to their economies to be worth protecting, sometimes at all costs; and also that this is a cynical move for cynical reasons, and devoured whole by a cynical press. The only time I think Hollywood was ‘hard done by’ was the McCarthy era, and even then those who persecuted and prosecuted had their own agenda that had nothing to do with justice or protecting the populace.
Fortunately, the Polanskis and the Nursery Threes and the Bradys and the Ian Whatshisface - Soham guy - are in a very, very, very small minority of the population everywhere, but if we fear them unreasonably and inflate these monsters to gigantic proportions then we lose who we are. We, in fact, lose not only ourselves, but our communities, our trust, our societies, our civilisations. Fear makes us stupid - and stupid people will swallow any old tripe you feed them, even to their detriment. The abyss swallows us whole, and everything, everything is lost in it.
Polanski will pay, but for the wrong reasons, and at the wrong time.
(My viewpoint will differ from those who have themselves been abused, I assume. In my childhood, formative years and adulthood I was only touched inappropriately by that most grown-up of grown-ups. Death. Maybe that’s why I can step back, and wonder not who has lost here, but who has benefitted.)
October 2nd, 2009 at 3:16 pm
magnetite …
I can see your point. And to a certain degree, I can agree with you. Any rational person should deduce from the word “rape” that this child was brutalized.
And yet. the number of Hollywood stars who want “poor old Roman” to be exonerated of this really sickens me. Not one of these “stars” came to the defense of this poor girl — not even when it happened in 1977.
Polanski has not served one day in jail for this evil rape. Not one day in prison.
He needs to pay for his crime. Period.
The only reason I said people should read this transcript is because people are referring to the plea-bargined crime of statutory rape, which is akin to an ill-advised affair. But this was not statutory rape, this was outright rape. Anyone who can read this transcript and still think that Polanski is just a great man who should be exonerated, well, they must of a really warped sense of justice.
October 2nd, 2009 at 12:54 am
No, Dewey, I don’t think anyone needs to read this - save jurors and law enforcement officals/judiciary and I pity them that task. I even think that police officers involved in investigating these matters should be rotated off these duties after a while. In my (admittedly pop-psychology) opinion it is akin the Nietchzean abyss concept. One at least risks desensitisation - and who wants to be desensitised to revulsion?
Nietchze was a dick (to put it bluntly) and here he spoke of nihilism; but one can imagine the terror of a victim when reading the word ‘rape’ without vicariously re-living it; without being tele-martyred on another’s saltire, even in the name of empathy; without knowing, both intellectually and viscerally, that the perpetrator should be brought to book.
The abyss has better eyesight than we possess, and we are short-sighted for a reason. Our psyches are fragile things beneath the veneer of the conscious.
(also, if it were transcribed - instead of in image form as here, work and home firewalls and content filters would prevent its unwitting propagation to those who would empathise with the wrong party. Now that’s abyssal.)
October 1st, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Actually, I think that many people DO need to read the transcript of the 13-year-old girl’s testimony.
The newspapers keep referring to this horrific crime as “statutory rape,” as if it were an “innappropriate affair.” It was neither! It was a brutal, vicious rape of a child. Not a “young woman” — a little girl.
This man has NOT “gone through enough,” as many claim. He has not served one day in prison.
The tragic slaying of his wife by the Manson gang is an entirely different case. Many seem to think that since it has been such a long time, since he has been “forced” to live away from Hollywood (in luxury, I might add) and since his own family met with such violent death — that Polanski should somehow just be left alone.
Why? Why should a brutal pedophile not serve any prison time? Why? Because he is “the great Roman Polanski”??
Well, I hope he rots in jail. He SHOULD get jail — YES, even after “all these years.”
The poor victim in this case has only asked that he be left alone because she wants this all to end. Everytime the Polanski case comes to light, she has to relive the nightmare all over again.
I can understand her frustration and her deep desire to have this just go away.
But it will never be over, it will never go away, until Polanski is behind bars and serves a suitable sentence for this heinous attack on a child.
What sickens me more is all of the Hollywood stars who, teary-eyed, are holding press conferences and speaking in his defense, pleading for his release.
They are about as soulless as Anjelica Huston, Jack Nicholson’s girlfriend at the time, who was at the crime scene shortly after the rape and saw the little girl and noticed nothing wrong. A little girl is raped and she notices nothing wrong in her demeanor???
Then, Hollywood puts the girl though hell all over again as they tried to put the blame for the rape on the child and rush to the defense of Polanski.
I hold ALL of those sick stars responsible for what happened to this girl’s life. I can’t imagine what it is like for this little woman to see all of Hollywood rushing too Polanski’s side — and know that not one of those so-called stars cares about her at all.
And those of you who think Polanski should just be forgiven — YOU SHOULD READ THIS TRANSCRIPT. Every word! And THEN try to convince yourself that Polanski should be left alone, that he should serve no time for this crime.
September 28th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
1 coolandcalm says:
September 28th, 2009 at 9:07 am
None of us need to be told what the rape of a 13 year old involves. WE KNOW.
Gratuitous Anorak. Absolutely gratuitous. Shame on you
—————————————————————————————————————–
Concerning this I am in total agreement with you coolandcalm!
September 28th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
I agree with you there, it is horrible that she has been thrust into the thick of it after all this time, but so many commentaries seem to think he should be left alone just because he is such a “great director” with a nice smily face, the case as to why he is being held to account after all this time really does need to be explained.
..it’s not pleasant, but then paedophilia and rape are not pleasant subjects at any time, whether it be now or 30yrs ago…
September 28th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
No different…. but I hate that the girl (woman now) is being forced back into the limelight where she has firmly stated she doesn’t want to be.
Do we need to read the intimate details of her abuse all these years later on a website/forum?
We can all imagine what happened, To reproduce a transcript is tittilation IMO and cruel to the victim and her family.
And actually I said the same about Jaycee Dugard when there was so much speculation about how her children were conceived. We don’t need to know the details of that either.
September 28th, 2009 at 10:29 am
Disagree there, C&C, given the amount of wailing and outrage at the final arrest of this paedophile - would the same flexibility and excuses be there for somebody unknown….? no, of course not - there would be calls for the return of capital punishment….
the reports I have seen so far have tried to paint the whole thing as “OK” because a) Polanski is famous and b) because it happened 30 years ago - I would like to know how that suddenly makes everything “OK”….?
people curled their lips in disgust when it was revealed that Philip Garrido had had sex with the then underage Jaycee Dugard…. kidnapping apart, how is Polanski any different…?
September 28th, 2009 at 10:24 am
I disagree - there is much talk about Polanksi getting off - so why not see what he is supposed to have done?
September 28th, 2009 at 9:07 am
None of us need to be told what the rape of a 13 year old involves. WE KNOW.
Gratuitous Anorak. Absolutely gratuitous. Shame on you.