If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hot Air)   The LA Times refers to Roman Polanski drugging and raping a 13-year-old girl as "the notorious night that changed both of their lives"   (hotair.com) divider line 319
    More: Sick, L.A. Times, Roman Polanski, statutory rape  
•       •       •

3356 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 28 Jul 2013 at 7:52 PM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



319 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-28 03:31:47 PM
burns the skin from ur eyes, eh subby
 
2013-07-28 03:39:58 PM
Let anyone who has not thought about drugging and raping a 13 tear old girl throw the first stone.
 
2013-07-28 03:45:46 PM
That's because the LA Times, like many other groups are concern trolls when it comes to violence against women.
 
2013-07-28 03:52:24 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Let anyone who has not thought about drugging and raping a 13 tear old girl throw the first stone.


*pitches a fastball brick into the side of Polanski's head*
 
2013-07-28 03:52:30 PM
B-b-b-but The Pianist.  Sharon Tate!  The Holocaust!
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-07-28 03:53:45 PM
Please pardon him, Governor Brown, so we can stop hearing about this case.
 
2013-07-28 03:55:15 PM

ZAZ: Please pardon him, Governor Brown, so we can stop hearing about this case.


Why does an admitted child rapist and fugitive from justice deserve to be pardoned?
 
2013-07-28 04:03:02 PM
Well, they're not wrong... For a certain point of view.
 
2013-07-28 04:10:21 PM

Fark It: ZAZ: Please pardon him, Governor Brown, so we can stop hearing about this case.

Why does an admitted child rapist and fugitive from justice deserve to be pardoned?


i know.  he could have just apologized to the damned girl and that be that.  but he has to shine light in her eyes telling her that she's the farking problem.
 
2013-07-28 04:23:13 PM
I don't think Fark is quite getting the irony.

The Hollywood elite liberal leftists, who criticize corporations as evil for making millions along with criminal politicians, makes millions along with a criminal director.

Hollywood is better though cause they do it for art.
 
2013-07-28 05:18:01 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Let anyone who has not thought about drugging and raping a 13 tear old girl throw the first stone.


Thinking about it, and acting on such a thought, are very different things.
 
2013-07-28 05:18:13 PM

Loose_Cannon: I don't think Fark is quite getting the irony.

The Hollywood elite liberal leftists, who criticize corporations as evil for making millions along with criminal politicians, makes millions along with a criminal director.

Hollywood is better though cause they do it for art.


The LA Times is owned by conservatives. I'm sure it's still libs fault somehow
 
2013-07-28 05:29:35 PM

Peter von Nostrand: Loose_Cannon: I don't think Fark is quite getting the irony.

The Hollywood elite liberal leftists, who criticize corporations as evil for making millions along with criminal politicians, makes millions along with a criminal director.

Hollywood is better though cause they do it for art.

The LA Times is owned by conservatives. I'm sure it's still libs fault somehow


Would he be free and making movies without them?
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-07-28 05:31:35 PM
It was 35 years ago. It was taken as seriously as a misdemeanor by the parties at the time.
 
2013-07-28 05:35:59 PM

ZAZ: It was 35 years ago. It was taken as seriously as a misdemeanor by the parties at the time.


And yet, here's a rape victim who's never seen justice.
 
2013-07-28 05:39:26 PM

Peter von Nostrand: The LA Times is owned by conservatives. I'm sure it's still libs fault somehow


You need a support group. And by that, I mean one that can talk you back to reality and away from delusional thinking.

ZAZ: It was 35 years ago. It was taken as seriously as a misdemeanor by the parties at the time.


Raping children is a misdemeanor... no words available as that speaks volumes.
 
2013-07-28 05:40:58 PM

Loose_Cannon: The Hollywood elite liberal leftists, who criticize corporations as evil for making millions along with criminal politicians, makes millions along with a criminal director.


The few idiots who still choose to work with him hardly represent all of Hollywood. The evil corporations however....

nice try though
 
2013-07-28 05:47:55 PM

Mrbogey: Peter von Nostrand: The LA Times is owned by conservatives. I'm sure it's still libs fault somehow

You need a support group. And by that, I mean one that can talk you back to reality and away from delusional thinking.

ZAZ: It was 35 years ago. It was taken as seriously as a misdemeanor by the parties at the time.

Raping children is a misdemeanor... no words available as that speaks volumes.


You've got the market cornered on delusional thinking. I don't think you have any room to talk
 
2013-07-28 05:50:00 PM

Loose_Cannon: Peter von Nostrand: Loose_Cannon: I don't think Fark is quite getting the irony.

The Hollywood elite liberal leftists, who criticize corporations as evil for making millions along with criminal politicians, makes millions along with a criminal director.

Hollywood is better though cause they do it for art.

The LA Times is owned by conservatives. I'm sure it's still libs fault somehow

Would he be free and making movies without them?


Uh huh, what does that have to do with the LA Times writing what they wrote?
 
2013-07-28 06:41:09 PM
It did change both of their lives. That's nothing to get upset about.  He's spent a few decades avoiding justice because of it.
Be upset that they wrote "the woman Roman Polanski was convicted of having sex with when she was 13" instead of drugged and raped.  He wasn't convicted of sex.
Getting upset at something legitimate, then throwing in a bunch of other things that are jarring when you're upset is ruining discussion.
 
2013-07-28 06:46:50 PM
I wonder how many people who just yesterday were criticizing the Simon Wiesenthal Center, et al. for still tracking down Nazis (now in their 90s) will come to this thread ti say Polanski is a monster and should never be forgiven.  I'm certainly going to be on the lookout for a few FARKers.

Here's the thread.  Let's keep track, shall we?
 
2013-07-28 07:08:58 PM
I'm not standing up for the guy.  If he didn't fark him.  But his major crime is he rand and didn't defend himself.  I've seen plenty of cases where the person being tried in absentia is portrayed as the devil.  I just remember a article from years ago where the girl admitted she was lying about her age and that she had voluntarily taken drugs. That doesn't make him a saint but it doesn't make her innocent either.
 
2013-07-28 07:16:50 PM

Revek: I'm not standing up for the guy.  If he didn't fark him.  But his major crime is he rand and didn't defend himself.  I've seen plenty of cases where the person being tried in absentia is portrayed as the devil.  I just remember a article from years ago where the girl admitted she was lying about her age and that she had voluntarily taken drugs. That doesn't make him a saint but it doesn't make her innocent either.


That's not what happened.  You may want to read up on the case.

He had a plea agreement with the judge, prosecution, etc...that if he pled guilty, he'd have no jail time.  The prosecution and judged reneged on the offer and Polanski fled (after he pled guilty and before sentencing).  The entire thing stinks from Polanski's actions to those of the judge and prosecution.  Now you could cast aspersion on the prosecution for making such a deal (for a guy that non-violently raped and sodomized a 13 year-old girl) and then reneging on the agreement AFTER Polanski pled guilty.
 
2013-07-28 07:18:52 PM

Revek: No doubt why he ran but I refuse to accept that giving a girl champagne is drugging them.   He is not any more guilty than the mother who let her go with him.


He didn't just give her champaign. He doped her up on Quaaludes.

He ran because the State of California made him an incredibly shiatty plea bargan, which he accepted, and then reneged on it when the judge and prosecution realized just how light he was getting off.
 
2013-07-28 07:30:56 PM

hardinparamedic: Revek: No doubt why he ran but I refuse to accept that giving a girl champagne is drugging them.   He is not any more guilty than the mother who let her go with him.

He didn't just give her champaign. He doped her up on Quaaludes.

He ran because the State of California made him an incredibly shiatty plea bargan, which he accepted, and then reneged on it when the judge and prosecution realized just how light he was getting off.


There has never been a shred of evidence other than what the girl says that that happened but she did admit to drinking champagne.
 
2013-07-28 07:35:47 PM
for any interested parties who haven't read it yet, here is the 37-page 1977 Grand Jury Transcript.

/deslidefied from The Smoking Gun
 
2013-07-28 07:38:43 PM

calbert: here is the 37-page 1977 Grand Jury Transcript.


It's okay everyone, it's double spaced.
 
2013-07-28 07:40:58 PM

staplermofo: calbert: here is the 37-page 1977 Grand Jury Transcript.

It's okay everyone, it's double spaced.


dammit! and the delidefy didn't take, let's try that again:

Deslidefied (maybe)
 
2013-07-28 07:42:57 PM
Huh, she posed topless beforehand.
THE STRUMPET!
 
2013-07-28 07:43:02 PM

hardinparamedic: He didn't just give her champaign. He doped her up on Quaaludes.


There were pics of her somewhere at one point from when she was 13. Anyone who would believe she looked 18 is a liar.

Also, Polanski was accused of raping other girls. In 1974 he gave a 21 yr old woman ecstacy and alcohol then raped her. Some years after fleeing America he drugged and molested a 16 year old girl. It's his MO. He drugs women and then has sex with them. Young women specifically. If that's "not bad" then they're essentially arguing that date rape doesn't exist.
 
2013-07-28 07:56:36 PM
Liberals refuse to speak ill of him. Especially Hollywood Liberals.  Raping is ok as long as they are a lib.
 
2013-07-28 08:00:43 PM

Revek: There has never been a shred of evidence other than what the girl says that that happened but she did admit to drinking champagne.


Maybe he shouldn't have agreed to plead guilty to drugging and raping a 13-year-old if he didn't do it.  Especially if the case against him was as weak as you want us to believe it was.
 
2013-07-28 08:01:15 PM

Nemo's Brother: Liberals refuse to speak ill of him. Especially Hollywood Liberals.  Raping is ok as long as they are a lib.


I'm a lib.  Raping is not OK, and I will speak ill of him: he's a creep and a criminal and should be arrested if he steps onto American soil.

But he makes great movies.  Which in no way changes the fact the is a criminal, nor does it change my opinion that he is a creep.  Satisfied?
 
2013-07-28 08:01:42 PM

Fark It: ZAZ: Please pardon him, Governor Brown, so we can stop hearing about this case.

Why does an admitted child rapist and fugitive from justice deserve to be pardoned?


Talent.  See Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Charlie Chapman, Woody Allen, Ted Nugent and probably Michael Jackson. And those are just the ones where it is a matter of record.

Besides, "rape" is so harsh.  How about "sex, pending consent?"
 
2013-07-28 08:01:45 PM
Quick question, not referring to this case since she was 13, but why is the man considered a rapist if both parties are drunk? Why is a drunk woman (even if she says yes) someone not in control of her actions but a drunk man is a raping monster?
 
2013-07-28 08:04:12 PM

Nemo's Brother: Liberals refuse to speak ill of him. Especially Hollywood Liberals.  Raping is ok as long as they are a lib.


0/10. That couldn't be more phoned in if it had a cord attached to it.
 
2013-07-28 08:07:30 PM

Old Man Winter: Fark It: ZAZ: Please pardon him, Governor Brown, so we can stop hearing about this case.

Why does an admitted child rapist and fugitive from justice deserve to be pardoned?

Talent.  See Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Charlie Chapman, Woody Allen, Ted Nugent and probably Michael Jackson. And those are just the ones where it is a matter of record.

Besides, "rape" is so harsh.  How about "sex, pending consent?"


This is also another pet peeve of mine. The word "rape" elicits an emotional response based on the imagery of violent forcible sexual penetration against the will of the victim when in reality it may not happen that way. We need another word to better describe situations where there's no violence and no refusal.

Just like we do with manslaughter, murder, etc.

Otherwise we will keep condemning guys on emotional responses rather than on the actual facts.
 
2013-07-28 08:09:23 PM
In the transcript she refers to oral sex as "performing cuddliness".  If anyone needs me I'll be watching old lobotomy videos to learn how to inject bleach into my brain.
 
2013-07-28 08:09:27 PM

rocky_howard: Quick question, not referring to this case since she was 13, but why is the man considered a rapist if both parties are drunk? Why is a drunk woman (even if she says yes) someone not in control of her actions but a drunk man is a raping monster?


I've always wondered this as well.
 
2013-07-28 08:09:41 PM

Mrbogey: In 1974 he gave a 21 yr old woman ecstacy


Did that even exist in '74?

I'll let someone else cover the citation needed for all the other stuff you said.
 
2013-07-28 08:09:45 PM

stoli n coke: Nemo's Brother: Liberals refuse to speak ill of him. Especially Hollywood Liberals.  Raping is ok as long as they are a lib.

0/10. That couldn't be more phoned in if it had a cord attached to it.


But a DUI and Vehicular Homicide by driving off a bridge gets you reelected to the Senate
 
2013-07-28 08:11:36 PM

Barfmaker: Mrbogey: In 1974 he gave a 21 yr old woman ecstacy

Did that even exist in '74?

I'll let someone else cover the citation needed for all the other stuff you said.


Dude, MDMA is over 100 years old.
 
2013-07-28 08:13:34 PM

Barfmaker: Mrbogey: In 1974 he gave a 21 yr old woman ecstacy

Did that even exist in '74?

I'll let someone else cover the citation needed for all the other stuff you said.


It's possible: according to this, MDMA was first synthesized in 1912, and was used recreationally in the 1970's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDMA#History
 
2013-07-28 08:13:57 PM

Loose_Cannon: Peter von Nostrand: Loose_Cannon: I don't think Fark is quite getting the irony.

The Hollywood elite liberal leftists, who criticize corporations as evil for making millions along with criminal politicians, makes millions along with a criminal director.

Hollywood is better though cause they do it for art.

The LA Times is owned by conservatives. I'm sure it's still libs fault somehow

Would he be free and making movies without them?


Yes. In case you haven't noticed, he hasn't had a movie financed by a Hollywood studio since Chinatown. Every project he does is foreign-financed.

He'd also be free regardless of what Hollywood thought. That's an issue with extradition laws. Hell, it took the U.S. 30 years to bring back an American citizen from France who was wanted for murder.
 
2013-07-28 08:18:13 PM

Boojum2k: Marcus Aurelius: Let anyone who has not thought about drugging and raping a 13 tear old girl throw the first stone.

*pitches a fastball brick into the side of Polanski's head*


Polanski slides into home...And...He...Is....OUT!!!
 
2013-07-28 08:22:42 PM

jake_lex: It's possible: according to this, MDMA was first synthesized in 1912, and was used recreationally in the 1970's.


Didn't read the wiki you posted, but apparently it was really big in Dallas (both the city itself and the 1970s cast). Larry Hagman was a big proponent of it as well as psychedelics.
 
2013-07-28 08:27:55 PM

ZAZ: It was 35 years ago. It was taken as seriously as a misdemeanor by the parties at the time.


Paula Deen using the N-word 27 years ago is no biggie either, or is the threshold for bad things to be "nothing serious" 30 years?  I can't really tell.
 
2013-07-28 08:30:20 PM

Mrbogey: hardinparamedic: He didn't just give her champaign. He doped her up on Quaaludes.

There were pics of her somewhere at one point from when she was 13. Anyone who would believe she looked 18 is a liar.

Also, Polanski was accused of raping other girls. In 1974 he gave a 21 yr old woman ecstacy and alcohol then raped her. Some years after fleeing America he drugged and molested a 16 year old girl. It's his MO. He drugs women and then has sex with them. Young women specifically. If that's "not bad" then they're essentially arguing that date rape doesn't exist.


I didn't know about those other cases. How is that scumbag not in jail?
 
2013-07-28 08:32:00 PM

lokis_mentor: stoli n coke: Nemo's Brother: Liberals refuse to speak ill of him. Especially Hollywood Liberals.  Raping is ok as long as they are a lib.

0/10. That couldn't be more phoned in if it had a cord attached to it.

But a DUI and Vehicular Homicide by driving off a bridge gets you reelected to the Senate


More notably, the Republican Party couldn't field a candidate that could beat a person with a DUI and Vehicular homicide charge. How much suck is that?
 
2013-07-28 08:41:52 PM
I was having sex as a teenager too. Teens do dumb things. I had friends who were having sex at 13 too. If she didn't want to have sex, she had enough sense to tell Polanski she didn't want to have sex. It's statutory rape, and the guy is a scumbag. But it's not like she was unwilling. I say the same thing about drunk college girls who regret having sex while drunk and cry 'rape' as a result. This borders on the ultra-crazy feminists who give the rest of us a bad name by saying that there is no such thing as consent period (for whatever batshiat crazy ideology they follow).

The girl in question didn't mind and Roman Polanski paid her off out-of-court, they both have an amiable relationship and neither thinks the other should have their reputation ruined as a result.

This has nothing to do with him being in Hollywood, or the films he made, this has to do with what was considered a misdemeanor at the time and a Hollywood judge wanting the prestige of throwing the book at Polanski and increasing his own fame as a result (supposedly), and Polanski ditching the country and avoiding extradition. A crime, yeah. But he's no Glenn Beck circa 1990.
 
Displayed 50 of 319 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report