In case you haven't heard, film director Roman Polanski was arrested in Switzerland and may be extradited to face sentencing for a 1977 child rape case. Since I have been studying violence against women, the anti-rape movement, and high profile rape trials (including this one), I feel compelled to comment on the case.
Here are the facts: In 1977, Roman Polanski lured a 13 year old girl to Jack Nicholson's home while the actor was away. The girl, an aspiring model, thought she was there for a photo shoot. Instead, Polanski drugged, raped, and sodomized her. He was 44 years old. Polanski was convicted on rape and drug charges, and faced with a possible 50 year sentence, he fled to France, where as a French citizen he found protection against extradition.
The revival of this case has fueled an intense debate. Some argue that Polanski , now 76, has paid the price for his crime, and it is not worth pursuing a 32 year old case. Others argue that justice must be served. I bet I don't have to tell you which I side I'm on.
In yesterday's issue of the LA Times, columnist Patrick Goldstein argues that the district attorney's efforts to apprehend Polanski are misguided, especially considering that the prison budget has been cut and prisons are overcrowded.
Below is my letter to the editor (it's short since I'm allotted only 150 words):
I completely disagree with your seeming assessment that Polanski's 32 year old case is not worth pursuing.
You seem to think that the DA’s office could better spend its resources on more worthy causes and more pressing issues. However, most rapes go unreported and unresolved, and allowing Polanski to continue to go free sends the message that violence against women and children are crimes that are not worth prosecuting. Rape is rooted in power disparities and gender inequalities, and this high profile trial illustrates the obvious disparities of power and authority. This is a case of an adult taking advantage of a child, a man victimizing a young woman, and a film director coercing a burgeoning model. Even though the case has been settled in a civil suit and the victim has publicly forgiven Polanski, it does not negate the fact that he committed a crime and justice must be served. To ignore this fact perpetuates the notion that violence against women and children is a lesser crime and not to be taken seriously.
You also write that Polanski has already “paid a horrible, soul-wrenching price for the infamy surrounding his actions.” You even goes so far as to compare Polanski’s case with that of Jean Valjean. Polanski has suffered tragedies including his escape from the Krakow ghetto, the death of his mother in the gas chambers, and the brutal murder of his pregnant wife, Sharon Tate. However, each one of these events preceded the 1977 rape. Polanski has hardly paid a price for this crime. Instead, he has spent the last thirty years living in France and making movies. He went on to marry and have two children. He travels throughout Europe and owns a chalet in a Swiss ski resort. You claim that Polanski’s career has “clearly suffered from his inability to work in Hollywood,” but I would hardly consider his Academy Award for best director in 2002 to be suffering.
By the way, Valjean was convicted for stealing a loaf of bread. Polanski drugged and raped a young girl. These two crimes are obviously incomparable and of completely different magnitudes.
So there it is. I'll keep you posted and let you know if my letter to the editor gets published.
Here are the facts: In 1977, Roman Polanski lured a 13 year old girl to Jack Nicholson's home while the actor was away. The girl, an aspiring model, thought she was there for a photo shoot. Instead, Polanski drugged, raped, and sodomized her. He was 44 years old. Polanski was convicted on rape and drug charges, and faced with a possible 50 year sentence, he fled to France, where as a French citizen he found protection against extradition.
The revival of this case has fueled an intense debate. Some argue that Polanski , now 76, has paid the price for his crime, and it is not worth pursuing a 32 year old case. Others argue that justice must be served. I bet I don't have to tell you which I side I'm on.
In yesterday's issue of the LA Times, columnist Patrick Goldstein argues that the district attorney's efforts to apprehend Polanski are misguided, especially considering that the prison budget has been cut and prisons are overcrowded.
Below is my letter to the editor (it's short since I'm allotted only 150 words):
Contrary to Goldstein’s article, Polanski has hardly paid the price for his crime. Since 1977, he lived in
Most rapes go unreported and unresolved, and not prosecuting Polanski sends the message that violence against women and children is not worth pursuing. Rape is rooted in power disparities and gender inequalities, and this is a case of an adult taking advantage of a child, a man victimizing a young woman, and a film director coercing a burgeoning model. The case has been settled and Polanski has been publicly forgiven, but it does not negate the fact that he committed a crime and justice must be served. To ignore this fact perpetuates the notion that violence against women and children is a lesser crime and not to be taken seriously.
I completely disagree with your seeming assessment that Polanski's 32 year old case is not worth pursuing.
You seem to think that the DA’s office could better spend its resources on more worthy causes and more pressing issues. However, most rapes go unreported and unresolved, and allowing Polanski to continue to go free sends the message that violence against women and children are crimes that are not worth prosecuting. Rape is rooted in power disparities and gender inequalities, and this high profile trial illustrates the obvious disparities of power and authority. This is a case of an adult taking advantage of a child, a man victimizing a young woman, and a film director coercing a burgeoning model. Even though the case has been settled in a civil suit and the victim has publicly forgiven Polanski, it does not negate the fact that he committed a crime and justice must be served. To ignore this fact perpetuates the notion that violence against women and children is a lesser crime and not to be taken seriously.
You also write that Polanski has already “paid a horrible, soul-wrenching price for the infamy surrounding his actions.” You even goes so far as to compare Polanski’s case with that of Jean Valjean. Polanski has suffered tragedies including his escape from the Krakow ghetto, the death of his mother in the gas chambers, and the brutal murder of his pregnant wife, Sharon Tate. However, each one of these events preceded the 1977 rape. Polanski has hardly paid a price for this crime. Instead, he has spent the last thirty years living in France and making movies. He went on to marry and have two children. He travels throughout Europe and owns a chalet in a Swiss ski resort. You claim that Polanski’s career has “clearly suffered from his inability to work in Hollywood,” but I would hardly consider his Academy Award for best director in 2002 to be suffering.
By the way, Valjean was convicted for stealing a loaf of bread. Polanski drugged and raped a young girl. These two crimes are obviously incomparable and of completely different magnitudes.
So there it is. I'll keep you posted and let you know if my letter to the editor gets published.
6 comments:
This issue with Roman Polanski has also created a firestorm in France as certain politicians and artists have denounced his arrest because of his artistic prowess and this has angered many French citizens (rightfully so). There is a good article in Le Monde (that if I had time, I'd translate for all to understand) which, is an interview with a lawyer in Paris who declares that there is no sound legal argument against his arrest and there cannot be two justice systems; one for us and the other for talented and successful people.
I have been completely ignorant of this case until I took a look at your post. Very interesting. Looking forward to reading along as things happen.
It may have been rape, but according to Whoopi Goldberg it wasn't RAPE-rape so it's okay.
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1320151605?bctid=42458619001
And about once every 2 or 3 years, Bill Donohue says something that makes sense.
http://catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1681
i completely agree with you.
i am very happy to see that Polanski has finally been arrested.
we can only hope that he will be sentenced, sent to jail and that this will send a message to those who might consider raping someone.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez30-2009sep30,0,1671827,full.column
Steve Lopez has a column with the incredibly creepy details of the rape provided by the victim.
Polanski is a very talented artist, possibly even a genius, and he's certainly weathered some horrific events throughout his life.
He's also a child rapist who fled like a coward and continued to live an extravagant life without any remorse. I think that says more about his true worth as a person than any of his shining accomplishments.
While I don't have much faith in the system bringing this rich, successful, white male to justice, something still needs to be done. This case really brings out the mind-boggling idiocy of his fawning fans and I'd like to see it wrapped up soon.
Post a Comment