Culture Roman Polanski Slams #MeToo

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/09/roman-polanski-me-too-collective-hysteria-total-hypocrisy/

Roman Polanski Calls ‘MeToo’ Movement ‘Collective Hysteria’ And ‘Total Hypocrisy’

By CHRIS WHITE

Hollywood filmmaker and accused sex offender Roman Polanski called the “#MeToo” movement an example of mass hysteria that sometimes catches fire in society.

The movement is a type of “collective hysteria of the kind that sometimes happens in the society,” he told a Polish edition of Newsweek before the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences pulled his membership.

Polanski fled the U.S. in 1977 while after being convicted of having sex with a minor. He also compared the film industry’s response to the wave of recent sexual misconduct allegations to the way North Korea treats dead leaders.

“To me, this is total hypocrisy,” he said. “Everyone is trying to sign up, chiefly out of fear.” The Academy yanked the membership positions of both Polanski and comedian Bill Cosby, who was convicted May 3 of aggravated indecent assault.

Polanski, for his part, remained in good standing with the Academy for four decades despite fleeing to avoid prison time after pleading guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old girl. He was nominated for five awards and even won Best Director for 2003’s “The Pianist” — an award he will not be required to surrender.
 
This is inaccurate because:
1) Roman was not convicted of anything, he fled prior to sentencing
2) he pled guilty to 'unlawful sex' not 'rape', the terms have distinct meanings in California law, as they should
3) Geimer was legally a minor but physically not a child, obviously physically mature enough to be fucking her boyfriend which her mom didn't object to because there was no money in it.

Judge was clearly acting in bad faith, can't blame him for flight when California refuses to acknowledge the proof of that.

So he ran from punishment, tried to use a Bill Clinton style technicality to water down his guilt, and had sex with an underage person.
 
He was given a plea deal, flew to Europe to do filming, then voluntarily returned to the US and turned himself into Chino State Prison for up to 90 days, docs released him early after 42, so in his mind he served the sentence he owed according to his plea bargain. Doesn't sound like running from punishment to me, as he could have easily stayed in Europe instead of voluntarily returning to the U.S. after his stay-of-punishment had expired.

Clinton's technicality was that blowjobs aren't technically sexual intercourse, which is true. Polanski's technicality is that California has separate charges for raping minors and having illegal sex with them. It's not like he wrote that distinction.
 
He was given a plea deal, flew to Europe to do filming, then voluntarily returned to the US and turned himself into Chino State Prison for up to 90 days, docs released him early after 42, so in his mind he served the sentence he owed according to his plea bargain. Doesn't sound like running from punishment to me, as he could have easily stayed in Europe instead of voluntarily returning to the U.S. after his stay-of-punishment had expired.

Clinton's technicality was that blowjobs aren't technically sexual intercourse, which is true. Polanski's technicality is that California has separate charges for raping minors and having illegal sex with them. It's not like he wrote that distinction.

If you wish to defend pedophiles, that is your business, but don't expect me to agree with you.
 
So he ran from punishment, tried to use a Bill Clinton style technicality to water down his guilt, and had sex with an underage person.

This actually even understates things. He doped up a 13 year old on ludes before sodomizing her...

It's not even close to being an edge case as far as sex crimes go.
 
This actually even understates things. He doped up a 13 year old on ludes before sodomizing her...

Yeah. And IIRC she was crying and saying "no" the entire time. He didn't "have sex with a mature looking 13 year old" or any such horseshit, he drugged and anally raped her.
 
Agreed, but even the whitewashed version makes Polanski look like a sick fuck.

Yeah, I just found it baffling that that person was arguing with even your very charitable description of Polanski's crimes.
 
He really did nothing wrong. It was a time when things were different. Its fucking hypocritical to ban him from everywhere. He made some of the best movies ever also!
Doug_post.jpg
 
The psychiatrist who evaluated Polanski in Chino Prison did not classify him as a pedophile.
58b604177f30e724507bb532487321c3.jpg

She did not look prepubescent. Kenneth Fare's probation report signed by Irwin Gold: " the victim was not only physically mature, but willing"

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/movies/11polanski.html

>The probation officers quoted a pair of psychiatrists as saying that Mr. Polanski was not “a pedophile” or a “sexual deviate.”

If you read Samantha Gailey's testimony it's pretty suspect: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/roman-polanski-grand-jury-transcript?page=18 because he's taking Jack Nicholson's Qaaludes and merely asks if she wants one and she flips from No>Okay while alluding to him having said something but not actually quoting him.

Cato when you say he "doped her up" it makes it sound like he snuck it into her drink without her knowing. Same bullshit that people do with Cosby. If you read http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/roman-polanski-grand-jury-transcript?page=20 she mentions he gave it to her but that she was aware of what it was, and it was less than half a tablet.

Polanski says he didn't drug her at all, though I don't know if that's merely a denial or drink-spiking or a denial that he stole Jack Nicholsoon's Qaalude pill to begin with. Apparently his bio Roman by Polanski (haven't read it, only seen excerpts) only talks about drinking wine together.
 
The psychiatrist who evaluated Polanski in Chino Prison did not classify him as a pedophile.
58b604177f30e724507bb532487321c3.jpg

She did not look prepubescent.

If you read Samantha Gailey's testimony it's pretty suspect: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/roman-polanski-grand-jury-transcript?page=18 because he's taking Jack Nicholson's Qaaludes and merely asks if she wants one and she flips from No>Okay while alluding to him having said something but not actually quoting him.

Cato when you say he "doped her up" it makes it sound like he snuck it into her drink without her knowing. Same bullshit that people do with Cosby. If you read http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/roman-polanski-grand-jury-transcript?page=20 she mentions he gave it to her but that she was aware of what it was, and it was less than half a tablet.

Polanski says he didn't drug her at all, though I don't know if that's merely a denial or drink-spiking or a denial that he stole Jack Nicholsoon's Qaalude pill to begin with. Apparently his bio Roman by Polanski (haven't read it, only seen excerpts) only talks about drinking wine together.
Holy shit please stop.
 
Cato when you say he "doped her up" it makes it sound like he snuck it into her drink without her knowing. Same bullshit that people do with Cosby. If you read http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/roman-polanski-grand-jury-transcript?page=20 she mentions he gave it to her but that she was aware of what it was, and it was less than half a tablet.

Oh, right. If a child consents to consuming drugs you supply them with before you sodomize them, that makes it okay. My apologies.
 
The psychiatrist who evaluated Polanski in Chino Prison did not classify him as a pedophile.
58b604177f30e724507bb532487321c3.jpg

She did not look prepubescent. Kenneth Fare's probation report signed by Irwin Gold: " the victim was not only physically mature, but willing"

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/movies/11polanski.html

>The probation officers quoted a pair of psychiatrists as saying that Mr. Polanski was not “a pedophile” or a “sexual deviate.”

If you read Samantha Gailey's testimony it's pretty suspect: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/roman-polanski-grand-jury-transcript?page=18 because he's taking Jack Nicholson's Qaaludes and merely asks if she wants one and she flips from No>Okay while alluding to him having said something but not actually quoting him.

Cato when you say he "doped her up" it makes it sound like he snuck it into her drink without her knowing. Same bullshit that people do with Cosby. If you read http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/roman-polanski-grand-jury-transcript?page=20 she mentions he gave it to her but that she was aware of what it was, and it was less than half a tablet.

Polanski says he didn't drug her at all, though I don't know if that's merely a denial or drink-spiking or a denial that he stole Jack Nicholsoon's Qaalude pill to begin with. Apparently his bio Roman by Polanski (haven't read it, only seen excerpts) only talks about drinking wine together.
I smell halal. Seriously why are you defending Polanski and Kricfalusi? That kid actually does look pretty damn young.
Anyways, back on topic. How many more confirmed Hollywood creeps are going to call out #metoo? I thought that whole craze died out months ago.
 
Oh, right. If a child consents to consuming drugs you supply them with before you sodomize them, that makes it okay. My apologies.
Like it's obvious that @Rokko is just fucking with us, but I don't think that this guy is.

And I would love it if we can have one page about a pedo who may have made something notable without someone white knighting them. Every damn day, with you people.
 
This is inaccurate because:
1) Roman was not convicted of anything, he fled prior to sentencing
2) he pled guilty to 'unlawful sex' not 'rape', the terms have distinct meanings in California law, as they should
3) Geimer was legally a minor but physically not a child, obviously physically mature enough to be fucking her boyfriend which her mom didn't object to because there was no money in it.

Judge was clearly acting in bad faith, can't blame him for flight when California refuses to acknowledge the proof of that.
Forgive me for not dealing with specificity when discussing a case where-in a 43 year-old man jammed his dick into a 13 year-old child, but I'm not particularly interested in the technicalities.

You can paint that any which way you please, but Roman Polanski was a middle-aged man who had sex with a girl who had just barely entered their teenage years. I could not give a rat's goddamned ass if it was consensual or not, or how much California would love to try and paint oral sex as "not technically sexual intercourse." He was a goddamned middle-aged man, and she was a child. There is absolutely no legitimate excuse for him to have whipped his dick out and shoved it in a kid's face, and if his behaviour was so egregious that he had to flee the rulings from a Californian Judge, then there's some serious fucking problems.

I also do not care that she didn't "look prepubescent", because that's entirely besides the point. Polanski got a kid drunk, probably gave her drugs, stuck his dick in her, fled the U.S., then came back to serve barely half of his 90-day sentence. Please, continue to try and rationalize the ethical technicalities of putting your cock in a child's mouth.
 
Back
Top Bottom