here is a summary of the victims testimony, I do agree Roman is guilty, of sexual intercourse with a minor. I do believe what the victim said recentlythat the judge was more concerned with making an example of him.
I think many people miss the point and grossly exagerrate the events of what actually happened the night he commited the crime.
mind you, i did summarize but i'm no spin doctor.http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskib1.html
the victims mother did not object to a 40 year old man taking pictures of her daughter. Her mother was not present at the photoshoots even though one was just up the hill from the victims house. The victim went to a second photoshoot with Polanski despite her posing topless for him during the first shoot. She did not tell anyone he made her pose topless the first shoot either, not even her mother. When polanski was at Nocholsons house with the girl,a lady let them in, Polanski pulled out a bottle of chamage, asked "should I open it" to the victim who responded "i don't care" he then asked the same lady if it was alright, and she said yes. the maide, did not stop him and even drank a glass herself.
Polanski goes inside, calls the girls mother, the girl talks to her mother, her mother asks if she is alright, victim says YES, mother asks if she wants to be picked up, victim said NO.
Polanski takes out a container, fully of pills asks the girl "is this a qualude?" and she says "Yes". (she later admits to have taken qualudes before she met polanski, of her own free will and to also getting drunk of her own free will.)
He then takes on himself, offers her one, then she declines, he says "Oh" she then CHANGES HER MIND and takes one, of her own free will.
yes he did some shady things like ask her to take off her underwear and she did those things, she did not refuse to. she kept drinking champagne, it wasn't forced on her.
after describing in detail what he did to her (i'm not going to sum it up for the sake of decency, it gets pretty detailed) but she says things like "i kept saying, no stop, infrequently.
she also says "i can barely remember anything that happened'
"I wasn't really fighting because no one was there and i had no place to go".
she had sex twice before the Polanski icnident, so the news networks saying it was "destroying a childs innocence and virginity" (i jsut saw a lady say that a moment ago) are wrong. Is she really innocent? having been on drugs and drunk and have had sex before?
someone came home to Nicholsons house, knocked on the room they were in, he opened the door and addressed her, THE VICTIM HAD PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY TO SCREAM or atlert the woman of what was happening but didn't
after the sex, she went in the bathroom, got dressed, COMBED HER HAIR, passed the woman who was there. said hello to the woman. and went and sat in the car. i emphasize her combing her hair because, whould a rape victim really think about coming her hair immediatly afterwards? then pass up the opportunity to tell someone what happened? she then waits in the car for polanski instead of running away, he stays in the house andtalks to the woman.
i'm not defending polanski because he is "an amazing director" i don't like his films aside from Repulsion, The Tennant and The Pianist. I'm defending him because I believe this is a miss carriage of justice. Where were the angry people calling for his arrest these past few decades? the fuss about the case now isn't about the crime. it's about the conditions of his arrest and that is the point of the petition.
not to mention this case should have been thrown out, the moment the VICTIM moved for a dismissall AND HAD ACCEPTED A SETTLEMENT FROM POLANSKI.
with all this sudden drama, i don't think i will be using this site anymore. it should be about Wes films, the ART the man creates not his personal life and decision to sign the petition that has many of you upset and angry at him.