"It seems inadmissible to them that an international cultural event, payingOh the humanity! This event was used by police to apprehend Polanski because he is a fugitive from justice. If a person is a fugitive from justice, and the police know where he or she is or will be, they are obligated to apprehend him or her. It doesn't matter if the person is attending a wedding, or handing out soup to poor people at a soup kitchen, or watching their kids' little league game, or even being feted at an "international cultural event". Furthermore, his standing as one of the "greatest contemporary film-makers" is utterly, totally irrelevant - something I don't think these people would have trouble seeing were he wanted for drugging and sodomizing one of their children. Polanski is an admitted rapist who has not paid for his crime. Plain and simple. The gall behind this press release is unbelievable - what these people seem to be demanding is nothing less than a different set of rules for themselves, special obeisance from the law for the new, self-appointed creative aristocracy. The lack of commitment to liberal principles of egalatarianism and equality before the law is repugnant, particularly from a group of people who enjoy hectoring the common man with ill-informed left-wing agitprop nearly as much as they enjoy making movies. Generally I think the right's bashing of Hollywood celebrities as self-righteous, pompous, hypocritical, libertine windbags out of touch with mainstream American values is overdone - but I've got to say that in this case such criticisms are dead on. At least it's nice to see that Woody Allen has declared solidarity with his fellow jailbait-craving sniveling dirtbag.
homage to one of the greatest contemporary film-makers, is used by police to
Along the same lines we have this little nugget, courtesy of eminent criminal justice scholar Whoopi Goldberg:
"I know it wasn't rape-rape. It was something else but I don't believe it wasActually Whoopi, yeah, it pretty much was "rape-rape", as you'd know if you'd read the case details. But leaving that aside, what exactly demarcates "rape-rape" from "rape" from what Polanski did in your mind? If I were to ply a thirteen year old relative of yours with Qualudes and champagne, and then proceed to force her to have oral and vaginal sex despite her repeated protests, and finally sodomize her, again against her will, would you consider that "rape-rape", or just plain old "rape"? How about if I used champagne but no Qualudes, and left out the anal sex? Maybe that's just "ra-rape", or "rap-rape" at the worst. If I did to your putatitive relative what Polanski did to his victim, how many years in jail would I deserve? If I feared the sentence would be too lengthy for my liking, and I jetted off to Europe before it could be handed down, would that be okay by you?
rape-rape. He went to jail and and when they let him out he was like, 'You know
what, this guy's going to give me a hundred years in jail. I'm not staying.' So
that's why he left."
I hope that the Swiss authorities don't cave, and at this point I half-want to see Polanski dragged back to the U.S. in chains, just so I can enjoy a bit of well-deserved schaudenfreude at the expense of these people.