Director Roman Polanski’s infamous past caught up with him this weekend. Again.
The usual suspects are up in arms that Polanski, 76, was arrested in Switzerland on 31-year-old charges of child rape.
The argument that his victim has long since forgiven him holds little merit. Plenty of crime victims forgive their assailants – some directly after the attack, other years or decades later. That shouldn’t matter when deciding if a person should be punished.
From most reports the trial itself was a few shades better than farce, and there’s little to be applauded when the justice system doesn’t fire on all cylinders. The recent documentary, “Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired,” did an imperfect job of getting us up to speed on the historic case.
Naturally, many in Hollywood are shocked, shocked by the recent news.
Artists too often are able to look past their peers’ flaws – witness the unabated love for Woody Allen despite his atrocious behavior in the Mia Farrow-Soon Yi affair.
A film scribe over at The Huffington Post argues Polanski’s horrific past – involving watching his parents hauled off to a concentration camp and the famous murder of his wife, Sharon Tate – means we should cut the director some slack.
The bottom line for me is simple. Polanksi never paid for his heinous act. And even though he’s a great artist and a senior citizen, it’s about time for him to do so.
Where do you stand?
UPDATE: In today’s Daily News: French Culture Minister Frederic Mitterand told reporters, “In the same way that there is a generous America that we like, there is also a scary America that has just shown its face.”
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
I thought the left was all about equal justice for the poor and the rich. Apparently in Hollywood it’s actually equal justice for the poor and the unconnected unartistic rich.
So “we” are scary for wanting someone who drugs and rapes a child to pay for his crimes? I think that staement says volumes more about France (at least Mr. Mitterand) than it does about us and I am more than comfortable where “we” come out in this equation. I think being against child rape put you on the winning side every time.
Perhaps such events would be acceptable if they happened to someone in Mr. Mitterand’s family, as long as the perpetrator had the proper “artistic” value and contributions. Words cannot express my disgust for Polanski’s actions and defenders.
But…but…but…he directed “Rosemary’s Baby”!!!!!
and “Frantic!”
Any mitigating circumstances such as the Holocaust or the Manson murders could only be considered during sentencing. They have nothing to do with his guilt.
And I have no idea how those things have anything to do with drugging and anally raping a teenaged girl.
I liked Dennis Miller’s take on this from yesterdy’s show – extradite Polanski or settle it in a Swiss court and have him admit guilt. Then he should pay a seven figure sum to a trust or charity that rescues or protects under-age gals from exploitation. It combines a penalty with the moral clarity of a judgement on child-rape.
Polanski has already plead quilty to the charges. He fled before sentencing.
It seems strange that they couldn’t have set this up many, many years ago. On the other hand, I’m not sure how much sympathy I can conjure for a man who sodomized a 13-year-old girl. “Hey, he had a bad life” some nitwit says, but just how does that justify comitting a horiffic act on a child?
Oh, and “Repulsion” kinda sucked. Just sayin’.
He is a GIFTED artist- and a pedophile who never paid his debt to society for DRUGGING AND RAPING A CHILD.
Neither being artistically gifted nor a celebrity should have any bearing on a case at law. What he did was criminal. He fled justice. Justice has caught up with him. Fade picture and sound.