The Idiot’s Guide To Roman Polanski Case
Opinion/Editorial By The Colonel
I remember a scene from Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 in which Moore interviews a couple of people in a small town about the possibility of a terrorist attack on their town. A middle age frightened woman tells him: ‘We have a Wal-Mart store here, if they’re going to attack us, probably Wal-Mart would be their target.’
This is a laughable, yet upsetting example of American mentality in the 21st century. It’s quite easy to excite, scare and infuriate Americans: throw around a bunch of words like terror, rape and Socialism and watch how they go crazy and tear themselves apart without even bothering to make an attempt to investigate, observe and exam the facts before coming to radical conclusions. Americans: extremely sensitive, highly opinionated and poorly educated. No wonder we’re losing our grasp on today’s world realities and have become a global foul joke.
When the Polish director Roman Polanski was arrested in Swiss over a decades long case on September 26, everybody had an opinion, those who were familiar with this ludicrous case supported Polanski, while the others who barely knew who Roman Polanski is, let alone being familiar with the circumstances and particulars of the case against him, demanded Polanski’s head on a platter and called his supporters every name in the book. Hollywood is rallying behind the genius director. Top filmmakers including Harvey Weinstein, Martin Scorsese, David Lynch, Ethan and Joel Coen and Pedro Almodóvar among many others are signing a pro-Polanski petition. Whoopi Goldberg says: ‘The director didn’t commit rape’; and Debra Winger complains: ‘The whole art world suffers in such arrests.’ In Paris, Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand said he was shocked by Polanski’s arrest, adding that he strongly regrets that a new ordeal is being inflicted on someone who has already experienced so many of them. Those comments referred to the fact that Polanski escaped Krakow’s Jewish ghetto as a child during World War II and lived off the charity of strangers. His mother died at the Nazis’ Auschwitz death camp. Mitterrand’s office said that he was in contact with French President Nicolas Sarkozy who is following the case with great attention and shares the minister’s hope that the situation will be resolved. Furthermore, Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner spoke to his Swiss counterpart, Micheline Calmy-Rey, to urge that Polanski’s rights be fully respected and that the case would result in a favorable outcome.
In the United States, the objection against Polanski mainly comes from the feminist groups, radical right wingers and religious nut jobs whose ideas and misinterpretations of this specific case are as biased, prejudiced and shallow as their knowledge and opinions about almost every other issue.
When I addressed this case in my previous article ‘Heavy Shades of Grey’ on LukeIsBack.com, it became clear that unfortunately some people have little or no knowledge about this case, they’re not familiar with it at all, and yet it doesn’t stop them from expressing baseless opinions. So I decided to prepare this idiot’s guide to Roman Polanski case. I have listed a handful of sources I used to conduct this guide. If you feel so strongly, make yourself familiar with this case and examine and study the sources before making comments. In the end, everybody is entitled to their opinions and any conclusion they draw.
1. The Storm: It started when in March 1977, Mrs. Gailey introduced her then 13 year old daughter Samantha to 44 year old Roman Polanski, one of the most influential and powerful directors in Hollywood. Mrs. Gailey asked Polanski to help her daughter to pursue a career in acting and modeling. Polanski agreed to photograph the girl for the French edition of Vogue Magazine. Gailey’s mother arranged two private photo shoots for her daughter with Polanski. The second session took place on March 10, 1977 at the home of Jack Nicholson in the Mulholland area of Los Angeles. At the time, Nicholson was not home, but Polanski was accompanied by his actress friend Angelica Huston who was downstairs while Polanski was taking photos from Samantha on the 2nd floor. Here is where the story takes an unexpected turn, and there are different versions of what truly happened between Roman Polanski and Samantha Gailey. According to Samantha’s first official testimony, Polanski gave her a combination of champagne and quaaludes, a sedative drug, and performed oral sex, intercourse and sodomy on her; while according to Polanski, at the time he had no knowledge of Samantha’s age, during the photo shoot she took her clothes off in front of him, got in the Jacuzzi and invited him to join her to party with her. Later in an interview with Diane Sawyer, Polanski said: ‘I didn’t know how old Samantha was at the time and I had no intention to have sex with her, there was no planning, no premeditation of any kind. It was all spontaneous and she was willing. We partied, drank champagne, did drugs and eventually had sex; but I didn’t force anything on her, and it was clear she had drunk and used drugs before. She was no stranger to those things.’ Angelica Huston who was there at the time said: ‘The teenager didn’t appear to be distressed, she seemed sullen which I thought was a little rude.’ Asked about the girl’s age, Huston replied: ‘She appeared to be one of those kinds of little chicks between, could be between any ages up to 25. She did not look like a 13 year old little scared thing.’ Huston also added: ‘I highly doubt that Polanski would forcibly rape and sodomize an unwilling girl.’ Especially if you consider the circumstances, being in someone else’s house, it’s very unlikely that Polanski would have gone out of his way to rape a teenage girl while his friend Angelica Huston was downstairs. If Polanski had such intentions, he could have taken the girl to his own house. So in that sense, I tend to believe Polanski’s version of events.
After that night, Gailey’s mother contacted Polanski and threatened him by taking lawful action against him, unless he settles the matters with her and her family in private. Polanski didn’t comply with her demands, and therefore she reported the incident to Los Angeles Police Department and Polanski was arrested on sex charges on March 13, 1977. On her first official testimony, Samantha described the graphic details of the incident for the police. That testimony was kept confidential and was not released to public until recently. One noticeable thing about that testimony is that Samantha’s mother prepared that testimony for her when she was 13 years old. 11 Years later, when 24 year old Samantha Gailey filed her civil law suit in 1988 (more on that law suit later), she did not repeat that testimony and did not refer to the incident as rape. It clearly shows the part Gailey’s mother played in this scandal and how she used her daughter to bait and blackmail a Hollywood celebrity. However, she could not predict things would go this far and get this complicated.
2. The Aftermath: Polanski was initially charged with with six counts: Furnishing Quaaludes to a Minor, Child Molesting, Rape by the use of Drugs, Sodomy, Oral Copulation and Unlawful Sexual Intercourse.
These charges were later dismissed under the terms of his plea bargain, and he pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. Under the terms of the plea agreement, the court ordered Polanski to report to a state prison for a 90-day psychiatric evaluation, but granted a stay of 90 days to allow him to complete his current project. Under the terms set by the court, he was permitted to travel abroad. Polanski returned to California and reported to Chino State Prison for the evaluation period, and was released after 42 days. All parties expected Polanski to get only probation at the subsequent sentencing hearing, but after an alleged conversation with LA Deputy District Attorney David Wells, judge Laurence J. Rittenband suggested to Polanski’s attorneys that he would send the director to prison and order him deported. As many journalists and historians suggest, this sudden, unexpected and unexplainable decision which was against all previous agreements, was judge Rittenband’s attempt to maintain his accidental celebrity status, extend his 15 minutes of fame and showcase his power over Hollywood celebrities. In response to the threat of imprisonment, Polanski fled the United States. He was a resident of France until his arrest in Swiss on September 26. It’s interesting to note that Polanski has a house in Swiss and he used to travel there regularly. What triggered this arrest, was the fact that in 2008, the documentary movie Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired examined this case thoroughly for the first time in 30 years, and many judicial misconducts which led to Polanski’s flee were revealed. Following the release of that movie, Polanski tried to get the conviction overthrown with the consent of the victim, and the judge said he couldn’t do it because Polanski had to be here in the Untied States in person. But the judge noted how troubled and upset he was by the judge Rittenband’s manipulation and misconduct. This was an embarrassing situation for California authorities who in response created a smoke screen by distracting the public opinion from their judicial misconduct through releasing Samantha Gailey’s first official testimony, prepared by her mother and arresting Polanski.
3. Closure: In 1988, Samantha Gailey filed a civil lawsuit, accusing Roman Polanski of sexual misconduct and seduction. In it, she did not repeat her 1977 testimony prepared by her mother, and there is no mention of rape. In October 1993, Polanski agreed to pay Gailey $500,000 with interest, according to the settlement documents. Since then, her attorneys were garnishing wages to Polanski from movie studios, his agent and the Screen Actors Guild, the records show. Collecting this payment is still in process, it hasn’t been completed and there’s no record indicating how much is exactly paid and how much is still owed. The last document in the file is an August 1996 statement saying the director still owed her $604,416. Nevertheless, Roman Polanski and Samantha Gailey have resolved this issue between themselves, and Gailey is now among Polanski’s supporters. In February 2003, after Polanski’s movie the Pianist was nominated for several academy awards including the best director, Samantha Gailey wrote an article in defense of Polanski, and the article was published in Los Angeles Times. In it, Gailey says about the incident: ‘It was a very long time ago, and it is hard to remember exactly the way everything happened.’ She continues: ‘We pressed charges, and he pleaded guilty. A plea bargain was agreed to by his lawyers, my lawyers and the district attorney, and it was approved by the judge. But to our amazement, at the last minute the judge went back on his word and refused to honor the deal. Worried that he was going to be sent to prison rather than just time he already served (42 days in Chino State Prison for the evaluation period), Mr. Polanski left the country. He’s never been back.’ In regards to Polanski’s nomination for the academy award, she writes: ‘I believe that Mr. Polanski and his movie should be honored according to the quality of the work. What he does for a living and how good he is at it have nothing to do with me. I don’t think it would be fair to take past events into consideration. I think that the academy members should vote for the movies they feel deserve it.’
Furthermore, in January 2009, Samantha Gailey filed a legal declaration asking that the charges against Polanski be dismissed: ‘The insistence by prosecutors and the court that Polanski must appear in person to seek dismissal is a joke, a cruel joke being played on me. If Polanski cannot stand before the court to make this request, I, as the victim, can and I, as the victim do. I believe prosecutors are reciting sexually explicit details of the case to distract from their office’s own wrongdoing 31 years ago.’ She said in the declaration signed at her current home in Kilauea, Hawaii.
Polanski’s recent arrest is clearly nothing but a political stunt orchestrated by California authorities who felt humiliated by the recent chain of events from the release of the documentary Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired to Samantha Gailey’s declaration, etc. They wanted to prove that if they ever wanted to arrest Polanski, they could have. Also as Gailey mentions, they were agitated and disturbed over the exposure of their wrongdoings and judicial misconduct in this case, therefore they created a distraction by publishing the explicit details of Gailey’s first testimony and arresting Polanski. Now that Polanski is arrested, in order to bring him to an American court, they must go through the complicated diplomatic process of extradition: the U.S. must file formal extradition papers. Those are presented through a diplomatic note, from the State Department, working with the Office of International Affairs (OIA). See, Office of the Legal Advisor’s Law Enforcement and Intelligence (OLA/LEI).
After being approved by OIA, the formal extradition request is sent to Department of State’s OLA/LEI and then presented through diplomatic channels at the Department of State to the foreign government.
With all the attention brought to this case and the international support for Roman Polanski, it remains to be seen whether or not the State Department would be willing to involve themselves in this case, especially when they know even if they bring Polanski to the United States, in all likelihood the charges against him will be either dropped, or he will be sentenced to a few months in prison and paying a relatively small fine.
* * *
Roman Polanski served his time in Chino state prison according to the initial agreement between his lawyers, Samantha Gailey’s lawyers, the district attorney and judge Rittenband. If it wasn’t for Rittenband‘s surprising misconduct, this issue would have been resolved in 1978. Nevertheless, this case came to its conclusion in 1993, when Polanski agreed to pay Gailey $500,000 with interest; and even though the specific details as to how much has been paid to this date and how much is still owed were not published, but what’s obvious is that Polanski and Gailey have reached an agreement and made peace. That’s why today Gailey is one of Polanski’s supporters and asks the academy to honor his art and profession and is willing to travel from Hawaii to California to go in front of the judge and ask for the case’s dismissal. If there was any doubt and hard feelings left, she would have never supported Polanski to this extent. At this point, it seems this case is about anything but justice and the truth; but if anybody is interested in knowing the truth and drawing a conclusion based on facts rather than raw emotions and hype, these were the facts. I’d like to finish this article by quoting a line from one of Roman Polanski’s classic movies. In Chinatown, when J.J. Gittes (Jack Nicholson) goes to visit the mysterious Noah Cross (John Huston), Cross tells him: ‘You may think you know what you’re dealing with, but believe me, you don’t.’
Sources:
Roman Polanski by Daniel Bird: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1903047897/romanpolanski-20
Polanski: A Biography by Christopher Sandford: http://www.amazon.com/Polanski-Biography-Christopher-Sandford/dp/0230607780/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255201251&sr=1-1
Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired by Marina Zenovich: http://www.amazon.com/Roman-Polanski-Desired-Pedro-Almod%C3%B3var/dp/B001HB1K46/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1255202532&sr=1-1
The Motion to Dismiss: http://www.talkleft.com/legal/polanskimotion.pdf
The Victim’s Declaration http://www.talkleft.com/legal/polanskivictim.pdf
So I’m going to need a minute for my rebuttal, because I’m not sure how to respond to a fair tale.
Fairy Tales are written for our amusement and to get across a cretin anecdote. But this?????????????????
So, summarizing the facts as stated above, the Colonel believes that it is okay to “sexually assault” (not “rape”) a 13 year old girl after getting her drugged up, if one is a famous director with enough money to pay her off and is supported by Hollyweird.
I submit that the misreading of the public in this case is tremendous (a great many people that are not feminists, radical right wingers, or religious, support his extradition and incarceration), the belief that the judicial branch engaged in illegal conduct is ill founded (a judge has the authority to set aside plea bargains and prosecutors are free to recommend any line of action that is legal), and the apologist tone that drives this and other pieces by the writer is fanciful at best.
Under our system, a 13 year old lacks the capacity to make decisions such as if she can legally allow her body to be pried open by a 44 year old that needs Quaaludes, booze, and other intoxicants. This is because we, as a society, have determined 13 year olds are not “fair game” as they might be in France or other parts of the world. Just because her mother was a piece of shit trying to cash in or that the victim figured her best option was to settle for cash at Polanski’s folly does NOT change the fact that he engaged in illegal conduct most people would consider reprehensible.
He pled guilty to the crime and the best defense he could offer was that he, a photographer that would have needed/seen the release forms showing her true age, did not know how old she was is strikingly weak. As one of Hollyweird’s elites, he figured he was untouchable and thanks to his own flight from justice (which is another criminal charge he has to answer for that the victim can’t “sell off”), he has avoided answering for his crimes supported by a variety of types that cause us to collectively roll our eyes.
In short, while there was a lot of blame to go around for events surrounding the case, stripping all that away leaves us with the undeniable conclusion that Polanski did what he was accused of and his fame, wealth, status in Europe or with those in the movie industry really should have no bearing.
Funny how a 44 year old man couldn’t tell that she was only 13 years old….
I’m glad I didn’t waste my time reading this biased diatribe in it’s entirety. Colonel, do us all a favor and quit posting here. This site isn’t for pedophiles or rapists (in Polanski’s case both). Stick to your NAMBLA forums you douche.
Take all the time you need, Kay, what was presented here are the documented facts whether you like them or not. They’re not fairy tales. More question marks, please.
And Don, summarizing the facts as stated above, I don’t believe it’s fine for an adult man to have sex with an underage girl. I never said such thing. What I do believe, is that Samantha Gailey’s mother baited Roman Polanski with her daughter to blackmail him. She was not be the first nor will be the last woman to take advantage of her child. As for the release forms showing her true age, there was no such thing in 1977. In fact there was no organized system of record keeping before Tracy Lords incident which occured in the mid 80’s. So in all likelihood, Polanski didn’t know the girl’s true age at that time.
And ST94 or whatever the hell you call yourself, if you didn’t read the article, then shut your face and don’t comment on it.
What you believe about Gailey’s mother doesn’t mean shit. As far as I’m concerned, Polanski raped & sodomized a 13 year old girl.
Justice is overdue for this scumbag…
Colonel, you stated that this was the second time he shot her and regardless of whether the mother baited him or not, he took the underage bait. In order to publish the photographs, he would have to have model releases and as she was underage, I’m sure she would not be able to enter into a legally binding contract regardless of the date.
You can also argue that he did not know her EXACT age beforehand and whether that would be a mitigating factor in his guilt in the eyes of some (perhaps Europeans are more likely to think this way given their support of the guy), but the law is clear.
It is also clear that he fled the country illegally and deserves to be held accountable for that but as most men are aware, you are playing with fire when you screw women you know nothing about.
It’s not what I *think* about Samantha Gailey’s mother, Lotefa, it’s what the facts say about her and the role she played in this scandal. And by the way, you’re the scumbag. Now go fuck yourself.
And Don, as I stated in my previous comment, there was no organized system of record keeping niether in mainstream Hollywood nor in porn during the 70’s. It was a much different world back then. Model releases, 2257 forms, etc. came after Tracy Lords incident. Besides, Samantha Gailey’s mother arranged the private photo shoots intenionally, and my understanding is she instructed her daughter on how to engage Roman Polanski in a sexual act. The whole thing was set up by her; you can argue that Polanski was negligent and did not take necessary precautions to make sure of the girl’s age, etc. But it doesn’t change the fact that a woman used her daughter to bait and blackmail a Hollywood celebrity and things got out of control.
As for Polanski leaving the country, I believe he snapped and couldn’t take anymore of the American bullshit. Ask yourself this question: what would you do if you were put through everything he went through from the brutal murder of his pregnant wife to being baited in a sex scandal, going to prison for 42 days, being subjected to judicial misconduct and becoming a tabloid headline? You could have snapped, anybody could have snapped.
This case came to it’s conclusion years ago, and Samantha Gailey, the victim, is now among Roman Polanski’s supporters. The only reason we’re talking about it now is because California authorities were exposed and humiliated when the accounts of their wrongdoings and judicial misconduct came to light, and they wanted to get back at Polanski because of that, so they arrested him in Swiss of all the places, where he has a house and been travelling there all these years. If you can’t or don’t want to see what went down then and what’s going on now, then I don’t know what else to tell you.
You call me a scumbag and yet you defend a child rapist….
Colonel, we’re just going to have to disagree then because he did the crime, admitted to it, and fled. The case is NOT over just because the victim is intent on keeping the revenue stream alive, remember that it is the state versus the criminal, not the victim, in criminal cases (and his other felony, the fleeing, has nothing to do with her).
Slanted documentaries aside, your “understanding” of the mother’s intent aside, and the ever present need for releases to publish commercially viable photograph’s (they were for the French edition of Vogue, remember?) not truly in question, he committed the crime. Were not he not a wealthy, famous director with all sorts of influential friends, he’d still be rotting in prison (well, in the People’s Republic of California, maybe not) at this writing but even a lesser charge not involving his use of drugs and booze to nail her, he should have received a lot more than probation.
In answer to your question though, if I were the one that did what he did, I like to think I would have thrown myself off the highest building in town into a swimming pool full of double edge razor blades and the remains tossed into a vat of acid. Instead, he took the cowardly way out and fled. 😉
Alright Don, we’re going to disagree then, that’s fine. What I did in this article was providing documented facts and explaining the circumstances of this case. People can and will draw their own conclusions and are entitled to their opinions. Some will agree, some will disagree. To each his own.
wow, what a load of shit… some people really are attention addicts
Not that this is totally relevant to this case but did you know that Elvis was duped by underage 14 year old Priscilla under a diabolical plot hatched by her mother? 14 year old Priscilla even fucked an Army buddy of Elvis to get introduced to him. Just FYI on what underage girls and their mothers are capable of.
And Elvis, your a dumb ass sucka!
I stand by my statement, his ignorance of her age is no excuse, it is still an age of consent issue, even if she was on her knees begging for him to fuck her ass, it’s still rape, because of the age of consent laws. She was not old enough to consent, read the laws.
We will agree to disagree on this one.
Well Colonel he is in jail now…. Too bad. I can only hope that he get some kind brother as a roomie who will take him under his wing if you know what I mean. I would love to hear of him being sodomized, which seems possible if he gets extradited. I believe in an eye for an eye or an ass of an ass in this case. And this has to be in the back of his mind if he finds his way back to the states.
This could be smacks of the last Michael Jackson trial. A lot of showbiz parents “pimp” their kids and then take all the money. I heard Dustin Diamond on Stern yesterday and his folks took all his money, same goes for Corey Feldman. Not comparable, but parents are capable of anything. I believe he raped the girl, but why was it just her and him. Where was mom? I still like my idea of having Polanski doing his time in California in the same cell as Manson, and a heavily armed to end Manson’s time on earth, which in most other states would have happened a long time ago.
Colonel the problem with this entire piece is it is not FACT. It is YOUR OPINION of the FACTS.
The research you used to support YOUR OPINION were Polanski’s own books an records of the account. You didn’t even have the common curtsy of reading the transcripts from the case. If you had even do that I might have been inclined to actually take this as a valid argument, but your arrogance stood in the way. What you did was take his words and just help him apply the excuse “I didn’t know how old she was.”
I have seen the pictures her too of her, about 60, to be precise and she does not look like a 18 year old women posing for molding shots. In most of the pictures she has a scowl on her face or is squinting while looking at the camera. There are no come hither looks from her at all.
And the other “misguided” fact bout your opinion is that you did say it was “not rape”, but a “subduction.” Those were your words, not mine.
But the ultimate FACT is that you idolize Polanski as a man and a Hollywood star and you are now doing what you accused the judge of doing.. “is what judge Rittenband’s attempt to maintain his accidental celebrity status, extend his 15 minutes of fame and showcase his power over Hollywood celebrities.”
But now you are the judge and we are Hollywood. Fortunately in the coning months and days you will see the true light of your hero, and his facts that you call them will be his undoing.
It’s hard to see your idol fall Colonel, but you’ll survive.
And also please ask for a picture ID when signing your next lady in one of your film, because in this day and age the “I didn’t know” defense doesn’t work. But then again you can always flee to your mother land if it happens.
As many a lawyer has said, ignorance of the law isn’t a credible defense.
Thusly, despite media efforts to make it appear as if Mr. Polanski was duped, conned, or tricked into having sex with a thirteen year old girl (of even hypothetical motives)…the law (not to mention, common sense) clearly states what the age of consent is.
Polanski violated that law and should be duly punished. Likewise, he can fight the charges with all of the legal firepower his wealth and status grants him.
Age of consent is 15 to 16 years old in most if not all states, to compare it to Tracy Lords is stupid because she was over the age of consent, ask your attorney, he will back my original statement, learn your laws because that’s what matters. Ignorance of the law is no excuse in a court of law.
It’s interesting to see how you’re chasing your tail when facing the facts, Kay, but as I stated before, the facts are the facts, whether you like them or not. It seems you’re trying to make this into a Kay Ryan vs. the Colonel debate, that’s not going to happen, I won’t give you the attention you crave. However, I’ll address a few things:
I have read the transcripts from the case, you desperate house wife, and I addressed them in this article several times and pointed out that Samantha Gailey’s first official testimony, which you refer to as transcripts from the case, was in fact prepared by her mother, and the only time she gave that testimony was in 1977. She never repeated that testimony again, not when she filed her civil law suit in 1988, not now, never. In 2003 article she wrote for Los Angeles Times to support Roman Polanski’s academy award nomination, this is what she says in regards to that incident: ‘It was a very long time ago, and it is hard to remember exactly the way everything happened.’ Clearly the 1977 testimony was false and shady.
Furthermore, I have also seen some of Samantha Gailey picturs taken by Polanski, and I agree with Mr. Polanski and Mrs. Angelica Huston: she doesn’t look like a 13 year old girl in those pictures. She appears to be in any age group up to 25. Her mother knew her daughter looks older than her actual age, that’s why she plotted to bait Polanski the way she did.
And finally as for my business, you don’t worry about me. In the past 15 years that I’ve been producing my movies, I have never hired a performer unless she presents 2 forms of valid ID and her social security card. Hollywood and the adult industry have learned their lessons from Samantha Gailey and Tracy Lords incidents. Now go pack some more empty bottles to recycle.
Nobody compared Tracy Lords incident to Samantha Gailey case. What I said was that there was no organized system of record keeping niether in Hollywood nor in porn before Tracy Lords incident in the mid 80’s; and that’s a fact.
All in all, I presented my opinion on this issue and you presented yours, Ruby. To each his/her own. We can agree to disagree.
Colonel’s favorite pick up line:
“I have some candy in the car.”
al, you said it best, colonel a legend in his own mind.
Colonel you are grasping at straws with you FACTS.And I don’t agree to disagree, because your entire “guide” is nothing but excuses.You are just flat out wrong. And all you are doing is throwing in excuses on top of excuses.
You cannot have sex with a 13 year old in 1977 or in 2009. And further more the state didn’t need her or her mothers approval to charge Polanski with rape.
Now Colonel go back to warping the minds of starry eyed 18 year olds just off the bus. And your are right you do know your business the porn world. Leave the reality to the grown ups.
Always my kisses!
So this was the best you could come up with?
And most of the people appalled by the child molester polandki are average everyday people. Your weak attempt tosay that MOST opposition to polanski comes from feminists and right wing nutjobs, yeah, great FACT colonel(defender of child rapists.
Colonel. to say you are a piece of shit would be insulting to all the peices of shit in the world, but what the hell, Colonel, YOU ARE A PIECE OF SHIT.
Wrong again, bitch boy, my favorite line is: ‘I have a funny monkey, his name is Al Blanco.’ You wrote some 40 plus shitty, worthless comments on my previous article. Let’s see how many you can write on this one, let’s see if you can break that record this time around.
And Porn Fan, I’m no legend in my mind. In my mind, I am what I am in reality: a guy who makes a living off making porn movies and contributes articles and comments to his favorite web site in his spare time.
And General Malfunction, first of all, you and your buddy Shelly Lubben are and always will be pieces of shit, the biggest of them all. Secondly, of course I’m right about the fact that in the United States, the main opposition against Roman Polanski comes from the feminist groups, radical right wingers and religious nut jobs. You’re one of them, you little home fuck cunt, it’s more than obvious who and what you are. That’s why there’s no point in debating with you and the likes of you: church going, community observing, media watch dog scum who believe the world was made in 7 days and dinosaurs co-existed with men some 5000 years ago. You have become the Sarah Palin of LIB, and that’s fucking awesome for cheap, drunken laughs and free entertainment. Just don’t expect anybody to take you seriously; and keep doing what you do best which is hitting those keyboard buttons and spewing as much bullshit as you possibly can. The more the better for me and my mini fridge.
Cheers to Mr. Polanski.
40 plus? sure about that? na, I’m done with you completely. Just remember angry people are not happy people. I don’t even care enough to have pity for you. You’ll never be a part of this website, and as someone who is I shouldn’t be engaging with you through comments. You are a nobody in the porn world and even more of a nobody in the grand scheme of things. Your book has been written already, and I’d be upset if I were you too. When Cindi is done having fun with you she’s gonna toss you away, you do know that right? Keep working on your usage of commas and syntax. You are at a 4th grade level now, maybe one day you can get it to a high school level.
In regards to this, no one has expressed support for you. The general is also correct in that the majority of support comes from regular people who view child rape as an atrocity. No impartial individual would say you have achieved anything or changed anyone’s opinion, so besides from your writing being unreadable, it’s also a failure.
Avoiding the personal attacks that have been tossed around like Halloween candy, the ‘official testimony’ as cited by the Colonel is from the victim’s interview by the Grand Jury.
For those unfamiliar, the Grand Jury is a vital part of our judicial system (that ultimately helps keep a case from being tried simply on a prosecutor’s whims). The prosecutor still has to convince the Grand Jury, an impartial panel of citizens, there exists reasonable suspicion, probable cause, or a prima facie case that a crime has been committed.
The Grand Jury can compel witnesses to testify. Unlike an actual trial, the grand jury keeps their deliberations secret. Likewise, the defendant and their counsel are usually not present for a witnesses’ testimony.
From my understanding of Polanski’s case, Samantha Gailey’s mother did in fact, help with said testimony (as at the time, she wanted to keep her daughter out of court as much as possible, fearing it would only further traumatize her…as rape victims often feel as if they’re ‘reliving’ the event when testifying in open court).
Now perhaps those who are siding with Polanski, feel that this is the ‘smoking gun’ in their arguments. That perhaps Samantha’s mother altered the facts to suit her own agenda. That there’s evidence Samantha lied or at best, didn’t fully admit to being a willing participant in how Polanski dealt with the grief from his wife’s brutal murder (and thusly, that the only thing the director was truly ‘guilty’ of was bad judgement in a moment of sexual fever).
Personally, even if this was the case and/or the feeling at the time by lawyers on both sides — then I don’t see why Polanski felt the need to place himself ABOVE THE LAW. If he and his lawyers felt they were being railroaded, then there are better…more proper legal avenues to travel down, then fleeing the country and becoming for all purposes, a fugitive.
Phil Spector, OJ Simpson, Robert Blake, Heidi Fleiss, Michael Jackson, Wesley Snipes, Martha Stewart, Robert Downey Jr., Mike Tyson…all put their faith within our legal system, for better or for worse. They answered the charges put forth, went through the nightmare of standing in front of a jury of their peers and accepted the verdict. None of them ran away. While I might not agree with the verdict as handed down, or sentenced given, they accepted their fates, and moved on with their celebrity lives (unless they wound up in jail, as some of the people cited did).
Now if The Colonel wants to argue the facts of a particular case — fine. Yet I would be stunned if he couldn’t agree that when one is charged with a crime, no matter how they or their legal representatives feel, they still have to answer to said charges. They can’t and should not be permitted to simply act as if said charges are totally false…and then proceed as they want (in this case, the defendant fled the country before he could actually have his ‘day in court’).
For if that’s his view, then why should any of us obey any and all laws as written? Tomorrow, we all should break every speeding law on the way to work, beat and murder anyone who gets in our way, and lie about our preceding actions (under the guise of, how can you trust the other side…they have it out to get me because of X, Y and Z!). Once caught, we should simply tell the judge to ‘fuck off, I don’t prescribe to the laws of the United States’ and promptly get on the first plane to a country that doesn’t have any extradition treaty with us (such as France).
Of course, it helps if you’re a talented film director with a lot of wealthy friends who will help us get back on our feet and keep our careers going while we’re on the lam from the law. Otherwise, you’re going to probably end up back in the US Justice System getting the book throw at you faster than you can say ‘Max Hardcore is a scumbag’….
Or to put it another way and infinitely closer to home, what if Max Hardcore, The Earl of Pimpwich, Jack Venice, and Michelle Braun all skipped out of town before THEY could face a judge for their crimes (alleged and otherwise)? Would the Colonel happily defend them if the facts didn’t 100% square up? Would the Colonel be telling everyone 30 years later to let them ‘stay’ in Europe and continue their lives and careers if their victims had slightly suspicious motives for bringing a case to court (and later recanted their accusations based somewhat, on winning a civil judgement).
Would the Colonel say, “…come on everyone! Max Hardcore, Jack Venice and Ben English are genius pornographers! Their ‘victims’ changed their minds long ago, won a civil judgement against them, and even published editorials asking for them to ‘forgiven’ so they can travel to America and pick up their lifetime achievement AVN awards! We should cut them some slack since the accuser has and why should we question the wants of their accuser?! Do you know that the underage girls they supposedly raped looked like they were 25, were ‘managed’ by their agenda-driven parents and plus back then, the industry didn’t have standardized records keeping for a performer’s age. They had to take it on the girl and her parents word they were ‘legal age’. Plus, they were not even on a set! It was a little dinner party at their friend’s place. So we should just let Max, Jack and Ben live quiet little lives in Europe…”
The only true defense of Polanski would be that “she told me she was 19”, and showed me a fake drivers license, but he hasn’t used that one yet, therefore he has NO excuse in my eyes.
Let’s be honest here, he didn’t CARE about her age, because he thought, just like Elvis, Steven Tyler, and a ton of other rock stars, movie stars, etc. . . that they were invincible and normal laws don’t apply to him.
I don’t care if her mother programmed her using Soviet brainwashing techniques. It’s HIS job as an adult to figure out where he’s stickin’ his dick, and if it’s in a 7th grader, he’s gotta go to jail. There’s plenty of guys in prison who supposedly “didn’t know”, but ignorance in this case is no excuse.
The only argument that has been made here is that the mother should be in jail with Polanski, and you have no disagreement from me there.
Speaking of real scumbags, where is John T Bone. I bet he’s violated many an underage girl, boy, tranny…well allegdly.
On October 12, 2009, at 3:55 PM Al says:
‘I’m done with you (the Colonel) completely.’
Don’t let the door hit you in the head, bitch boy. We’ll see how long you can keep this promise; but I believe as the biggest fan of my fascinating character and excellent writings, you’ll be back. Your life is meaningless without me.
As for me and Cindi, you don’t worry about us. We’re doing just fine.
President4Life says:
‘The only argument that has been made here is that…’
ZING. The only argument that has been made here is that you’re a fucking buffoon who can’t even come up with an original screen name when posting garbage on an internet message board.
Carry on, lady.
Sammy, you and I might not always agree on every issue, and we don’t have to. But You’re a knowledgeable, intelligent guy and I always enjoy reading your writings. Keep up the good work.
Got to say I was disappointed in this Colonle I thought you could have done better then, “he didn’t know.” defense.
One of your reasons why he is such a “great guy” is that his victim is talking out in defense of him. She can hold candle light vigils for him, donate money to his defense fund, hell even marry him like Mary Kay Letoutneau did, but it is still be rape.
The sad thing is Colonel you are so wrapped up in making this stand that you cannot see the truth that you so profess is out there. This time it is staring you in the face.
IT WAS RAPE!
Of course the truth is out there, Kay, but who said it has to be what you like it to be? Who gives you the right over Samantha Gailey; and what makes you think you know better than her about what happened? You can scream your ass off *it was rape*, it doesn’t matter what you say when she, the victim, doesn’t say *it was rape* anymore.
I’m sorry to break it to you, but this case is over. California authorities fucked up with their wrongdoings and judicial misconduct, they were exposed, embarrassed and humiliated; so they decided to make a sudden move on Roman Polanski to cover their mess. But there’s nothing they can do to harm him. I promise you. They will only end up making bigger fools of themselves, while Mr. Polanski will go back to continue his genius work. This man is one of the greatest, most gifted filmmakers in the history of cinema. He recently finished working on his new movie the Ghost starring Ewan McGregor, Pierce Brosnan and Tom Wilkinson, scheduled for release in 2010. I’ll look forward to seeing the Ghost. Every Roman Polanski movie is a complete cinematic experience.
It’s not a child’s fault their mother pimped them to a rapist. You can’t lay blame on any child because of what their parent’s allow. If it was so consensual, he wouldn’t have had to drug her. Regardless of “consent” and regardless of age, she was still 13 while he was 43 and he drugged her. He also plead GUILTY.
I recently read part of the victim’s court transcript in the LA Times I believe where she told him no and to stop and how he had raped her orally and anally because she wasn’t on the pill and he didn’t want to get her pregnant which would prove he was with her.
He was also with Nastassja Kinski when she was 15 and she blames the industry for not helping her when she was a child and the people who had even allowed her to do underage nudity. Though she should blame her parents 100% for allowing it all.
I saw a video once of Polanski saying “all these girls want me and throw themselves at me”.
This stopped being about the rape victim after Polanski fled the country. He never served any prison time except the 40 days which were pre-sententencing.
I recently heard how in 1993, Polanski agreed to pay the rape victim $500,000. He was given two years to pay but has never paid. At one point her lawyers attempted to garnish his wages. As of 1996 he owed her over $600,000 which is with interest. After not paying and this dragging out in court, she then contacted the judge saying she was dropping the case and she didn’t mind if he was allowed back in the United States.
I don’t know how someone can despise Max Hardcore so much but support a known pedophile as Polanski.
This case is, if nothing else, a great example of where the problems lie within the legal system. The people who oppose The Colonel on this one all favor making the victim completely irrelevant, and when that happens, the system breaks down. The same thing happens, as we know, with domestic violence charges. If the victim of domestic violence opts to not pursue any charges, that’s not the end of the case, as it should be. So we end up with a ridiculous clogging of the legal system with victimless crimes at our neverending expense. What kind of fool would want to perpetuate such nonsense? I’ll bet it’s the same fool who loves to whine about how “liberal” governments waste tax dollars;) A crime should be between a criminal and a victim, end of story. But unfortunately some armchair social scientists think they know what is best for everybody from some deluded moral point of view, as though it’s going to affect anything. Guess what? It won’t. This isn’t going to send any fucking message to other potential rapists, nor will it prove to be any deterant. How do I know? Because we’re always going to have a certain number of sex criminals in society, and cases like this with high profile participants and non-victims who don’t want their assailants punished, don’t factor in with what happens day in and day out in middle America among the average citizens. A high profile case like this only allows some people to feel better about themselves (because they clearly don’t give a shit about the victim’s wishes) by making them think their demand for “justice” makes them good citizens. Completely delusional.
The Colonel said:
California authorities fucked up with their wrongdoings and judicial misconduct, they were exposed, embarrassed and humiliated; so they decided to make a sudden move on Roman Polanski to cover their mess.
Humm…I never knew sudden to mean 30 years??
also
California put out an arrest warrant out on him. The Swiss were the ones to “suddenly” arrest him.
Keep trying Colonel you’ll get there soon.
Colonel(defender of chilp rapists)
I havent seen the inside of a church since I attended a wedding three years ago. Your support for child rapists has sealed your fate here. You will always be known as the guy who supports child rapists.
Wow… that was 5 minutes of my life I’ll never get back.
“ZING. The only argument that has been made here is that you’re a fucking buffoon who can’t even come up with an original screen name when posting garbage on an internet message board.”
Ooooh, insulted by pedophile defender. And a guy who believes he’s the first person to call himself “Colonel”. Colonel Tom Parker anyone? You’re a joke and a degenerate.
“This case is, if nothing else, a great example of where the problems lie within the legal system. The people who oppose The Colonel on this one all favor making the victim completely irrelevant, and when that happens, the system breaks down.”
That’s crazy talk. Many victims defend their abusers. What about the wives who get the skulls bashed in by their husbands and then say, “I don’t wanna press charges”? What happens when they end up dead the next time? Who’s fault is it then? What about when rich guys commit crimes and then pay off their accusers(like Polanski did)?
Are we as a society supposed to just allow murderers, rapists, and molesters go free because their accusers “changed their stories”?
What about kidnapped children? Are we supposed to ask Elizabeth Smart and Jaycee Dugard if they want the guys who kidnapped them and molested them, if they want to press charges? What if they’re psychologically attached to their victimizers?
Every psychologist in America would gasp in horror after reading your irresponsible response.
Thank you President4Life. Welcome to LIB.
And for the Colonel to bitch about your screen name is a compliment that means her likes you, he really really likes you!
Keep the logic coming.
Kay, I know your mind is a bit slow, but if you try to think harder, maybe you ask yourself why California authorities made a move on Roman Polanski 31 years after the incident and right when their wrongdoing and judicial misconduct came to light through releasing documented facts and the recent victim’s declaration and her public support for Polanski? Keep beating your dead horse and live in your delusion of morality. In the end, nothing you feel, nothing you think and nothing you say matters. That’s the only guarantee.
And General Malfunction, next Sunday when you go to your local church to kiss your invisible god’s ass, don’t forget to take some of your home made apple pie and share it with your fellow christian scum while debating the latest guidelines Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck have provided for you. Also, keep monitoring your local TV programs, and don’t blink, you might lose a nipple gate. I’m sure the FCC gets a kick out of your and your colleagues’ monkey rants as much as I do on this board.
Tell Shelly Lubben AKA Roxy I said hi. Damn, she’s such a good fuck. I’ll never forget how sweet it felt when I was inside her.
pres4life, he can’t be col. tom parker, we’re told he looks like a cross between obama and forrest gump.
President says….” A crime should be between a crimina and victim, end of story.”
This is without a doubt the dumbest, stupidest, most assinine statement ever made on this topic.
Pres. does that mean if the victim wants to kill the criminal that would be ok?
Then he goes on to say that punishing criminals does no good, is not a deterrent. re you really that stupid president, or is it just an act.
I guess we just all be vigilantes, righ President.
And finally to the Colonel(defender of child rapists)
Why do you defend child rape? Is it because, as an adult pornographer, you have never had the chance to do what your idol,mr. polannski, has done. I can see the colonel now, idolizing the man who had the ‘guts’ to do what he only dreams of doing, that is raping teenagers. Given the chance,I bet the colonel(defender of child rapists) would stick his tounge as far up polanski’s ass a s humanly possible.
President, what about murder, after all the victim is not around to press any charges? And what prt of this is a victimless crime?
Quite a few in Hollywood have suggested the reason the case was reopened 30+ years after the fact — is that Polanski’s lawyers wanted to settle the case once and for all in the wake of their client recently winning an Oscar and thusly, being able to possibly shoot movies in America (as it’s no small feat to imagine, he would have gotten many serious offers in the wake of The Pianist).
One could also argue I suppose, in light of the HBO documentary/general interest in the case (again generated by his Oscar win), Polanski’s lawyers felt they might of had ‘history’ on their side and tried to shoot for the legal fences with challenging the Los Angeles’ DA’s office to ‘put up or shut up’.
Suffice it to say, America called their bluff and now Polanski’s legal team will have to fight with the cards dealt them after so many years of the case being in a sort of limbo.
Really Colonel that is what you are going to do throw insult at me?
We both know that is just your defense mechanism kicking in because I hit a nerve.
And I know that you don’t believe a word of the insults you throw my way. Remember I know you!
Look Porn Fan/Jerry/Dude, I don’t care what you were told, I can only say what you were told is wrong. You were cool to me, I was cool to you. You respected me, I respected you. You thought I had to become your buddy and share information about my personal and professional life with you. I told you I won’t do that and I told you why. Now you’re acting like a fucking asshole and I’m getting tired of your obsessed fanboy/drama queen bitch behaviour. Act like an adult or go fuck yourself.
Now to you General Malfunction, I’d like a piece of your home made pie and a blow job. Tell me again when was the last time you got laid.
And finally to my favorite half crazy house wife, Kay Ryan, why do you think I throw insults at you? If you know me, then you should know what I told you is far from insult. Consider it role play, and role plays can get rough some times. Nothing you wouldn’t like anyway.
All hail Mr. Polanski. Continue, ladies.
Hello, Claude. Where’d you get the midget?
You know your Chinatown, Sammy. I’m impressed. Man, I wish Roman Polanski would have directed the sequel the Two Jakes. He would have made it into another classic; but instead Jack Nicholson took over the director’s chair, and the result was a run of the mill crime drama. Genius filmmakers like Polanski don’t come along too often.
Lets take a poll.
Who wants me to print the colonels(defender of child rapits) real name?
On second thought, forget the poll. Just like the colonel tried to tell everyone that I was Sophia, now the tables are turned. Sleep tight colonel(DCR) this is your last night of anonimity.
LOL — yea, I was also disappointed with The Two Jakes. It had potential in the idea of ‘natural gas’ being the next resource to be ruthlessly exploited in LA, but alas, it was not to be even a tenth of the movie Chinatown was.
On second thought, I still want my piece of your home pie and a blow job, General Malfunction.
Besides, let me make it easy for you and introduce myself: my name is Bond. James Bond; and I’d like my Vodka Martini shaken, not stirred. Now get your obese ass to the kitchen and make me some, or you will say hello to the back of my mighty hand.
Comparing Chinatown to the Two Jakes clearly reveals the important role the director plays in making or breaking a movie. All of Chinatown key personnel including Jack Nicholson, the producer Robert Evans and the screen writer Robert Towne were on board for the Tow Jakes; but they couldn’t make it without Roman Polanski’s genius diricting.
Some Chinatown trivia:
The scene where Roman Polanski slits Jack Nicholson’s nose was extremely complex to film, and the two men involved got so tired of explaining how it was done (by using a specially constructed knife with a short hinge that would be safe as long as it was handled very carefully) that they began to claim Nicholson’s nose was actually cut.
Roman Polanski eliminated Jake Gittes’ voiceover narration, which was written in the script, and filmed the movie so that the audience discovered the clues at the same time Gittes did.
In 2007, the American Film Institute ranked this as the #21 Greatest Movie of All Time.
Ranked #2 on the American Film Institute’s list of the 10 greatest films in the genre ‘Mystery’ in June 2008.
The movie’s line ‘Forget it, Jake, it’s Chinatown.’ was voted as the #71 of the 100 Greatest Movie Lines by Premiere in 2007.
Two Jakes was awful, Nicholson was too fat, Robert Towne(as usual) never finished the script and so on. It would have been interesting if Bob “Cocaine” Evans would have played the other Jake as it was intended. Harvey Keitel showed up as himself in that role. Casting was awful and Nicholson shouldnt have directed but I think he had to cause of Towne. Had Polanski been around I bet the movie would have never been made. Roman doesnt like being in jail I’ve heard, too bad, he must have known this would happen someday. He should just wave extradition and come here and get on with it. Besides its LA County, anything is possible.
Speaking of Robert Towne, his original Chinatown script was only 80 pages. When Roman Polanski took over the project, he and Towne co-wrote the script. When shooting the movie started, Towne was supposed to be on location everyday to look over the shooting process. He then started interfering with Polanski on how to shoot the scenes, etc. They clashed several times and eventually after 2 weeks, Polanski kicked him out of the set.
Later in an interview Polanski said: I didn’t want to imitate black and white 1930s noir movies, I wanted to make a movie in which the story takes place in the 30’s, but the movie has a 70’s feel and mood to it. That’s exactly what he did. Many film critics agree that Chinatown was the birth of neo-noir genre.
In this interesting clip, Roman Polanski gives a masterclass on the making of Chinatown:
—-Are we as a society supposed to just allow murderers, rapists, and molesters go free because their accusers “changed their stories”?
This “we as a society” crap is where you go wrong from the get-go. Nobody gives a shit about you. At least I don’t expect anybody such as yourself to give a shit about me, you self-righteous ass.
—–What about kidnapped children? Are we supposed to ask Elizabeth Smart and Jaycee Dugard if they want the guys who kidnapped them and molested them, if they want to press charges?
Yes. Yes. Yes. When they are legally adults, then they should have the option TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES about pressing charges. The system can take on the role for the protection of minors at the time. This decades-after the fact horseshit is just that.
—–What if they’re psychologically attached to their victimizers?
That’s their business and their problem, you crapstain.
—–Then he goes on to say that punishing criminals does no good, is not a deterrent. re you really that stupid president, or is it just an act.
If you think this particular case is going to serve as any sort of example to deter any rapists from acting on their desires, it’s you who is the idiot living in some Pollyana wishful bubble. It’s no wonder people like you, general, end up as old malcontents with no shortage of laughable problems. You actually believe in this shit, so you’ll always end up disappointed. Keep the faith, jackass;)
Towne reminds me of the Grady character in “Wonder Boys” who just keeps writing that second book and never finishes it. He can never find an ending, I am always amazed how he was able to finish two movies, the last being the second movie about Steve Prefontaine, the original Nike athlete. I still believe Lasse Viren would have beaten him in Montreal in ’76 had Prefontaine lived.
Presudebt,
If you put a child rapist in jail for ten years I GUARANTEE you that persone will NOT rape another child for at least ten years. Do the crime, do the time.
Wouldnt you agree that jail is a pretty good deterent from allowing child rapists to contunue committing those crimes?
And COLONEL, your child rapist buddy is STILL in jail as we speak. I thought yousaid this case is over. If thats true, why is he still in jail?
Interesting trivia, as I wasn’t aware of the elimination of Gittes’ voice-over.
Although if you ask me, this pales to how the famous ending of the film came about (without it, would the movie still be as powerful as it is?). As noted, Polanski and Towne famously fought during the entire shoot and likely, the biggest fight came at the very end. Towne (and I believe Evans as well) wanted a ‘happy ending’ in which Gittes is triumphant over evil — Polanski argued for the more ‘true’ end to the sorry mess of a case involving political corruption and familial incest.
The movie could have survived a voice-over explaining more of Gittes’ thought process, yet I doubt it would have been the masterpiece that it is, if the case was wrapped up with a nice neat bow with a cherry on top.
“Can you believe it? We’re in the middle of a drought, and the water commissioner drowns. Only in L.A.”
And Pres. as far as my personal life goes….you continue to let your imagination run wild. I always find it funny that internet warriors like you and the colonel just make up these fantasies about the people they dbate whith, and the saddest part is you probably actually convince yourself that these fantasies in your head are true.
I am confortably retired,(early retirement) have two vacation homes, one in the Sierra Nevadas, where I love to fish and hike, and one in Denver where my family is originally from. I pay the tuition to two UC schools, for one of my neices and one of my nephews, and I have golfed at over 600 different courses around the unites states and canada(my goal is 1000 before I die>>>started keeping count in 1979)
So please, continue living your fantasy life, its all you got, isnt it?
p.s. How many children can a rapist raped while they are in prison? Deterrent anyone?
Colonel don’t you think that Polanski would have been better off taking his punishment back then in ’77, then now??
Now with the Jaycee case in the headlines and stiffer penalties for rape, your boy is going to definitely see hard time. No judge in his right mind would let him off with a slap.
And then he will have to register as a Pedophile, and that is going to make getting his movies even harder to insure.
Fortunately your boy is just at the opening of the abyss and he will soon tumble forward into it.
“This “we as a society” crap is where you go wrong from the get-go. Nobody gives a shit about you. At least I don’t expect anybody such as yourself to give a shit about me, you self-righteous ass.”
You are a sick fuck, and there’s no psychologist in the world who’d agree with what you are saying, or who’d call me “self-righteous” for saying that a guy who has molested not one, but two underage girls, that we know of(Natasha Kinski anyone? Read what she has to say about Polanski), should be defended and NOT prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Keep opening your mouth, I’m sure Chris Hansen would like to ask you a few questions.
There is one thing you’re right about . . . nobody gives a fuck about you, and we as a society would be better off if you, Roman Polanski, and Col. Klink here were being skullfucked in San Quentin by the Black Guerilla Family and Nortenos, and being passed back and forth for cigarettes and toilet wine, you degenerate.
kayryan “Now with the Jaycee case in the headlines and stiffer penalties for rape, your boy is going to definitely see hard time. No judge in his right mind would let him off with a slap.”
Really? The U.S. Justice System is that fair and equal? Let me see…OJ nearly got away with it…despite the claim/evidence of domestic abuse during his historic murder trial. Likewise, Robert Blake got away scott free — again, despite such lurid murder-for-hire crimes chronicled in the headlines each and every day.
Oh and the best case of recent celebrity ‘misjustice’ is Chris Brown. Despite endless tabloid and otherwise mainstream outlets doing stories about how he beat his ex-girlfriend, he got a ‘slap on the wrist’ what with getting five years probation, five years of a restraining order against his ex-girl, six months of community service and one year of domestic violence counseling.
The only guy who recently DIDN’T get a pass, was Phil Specter — and I half wonder, if it was just because of his endlessly creepy wigs and decades of being an infamous loose canon prick.
Thusly, even if Polanski is found ‘guilty’, you can bet you last dollar it’ll be fifty-fifty odds, he sees any real jail time.
Look the difference is that those were a jury of their peers and “got away with it”.
He has already made his guilty plea, he has just not been repentance yet, because he ran.
And unfortunately in this country domestic violence is tolerated way more then child rape.
—-And Pres. as far as my personal life goes….you continue to let your imagination run wild. I always find it funny that internet warriors like you and the colonel just make up these fantasies about the people they dbate whith…I am confortably retired,(early retirement) have two vacation homes, one in the Sierra Nevadas, where I love to fish and hike, and one in Denver..
Yeah blah blah blah, suuuuure. That’s why you come here non-stop to fill up every thread related to HIV and everything The Colonel does with endless angry rants about societal problems. The proof is in the pudding, and you are one angry old man who doesn’t matter in the scheme of anything discussed on this site.
—–If you put a child rapist in jail for ten years I GUARANTEE you that persone will NOT rape another child for at least ten years. Do the crime, do the time. Wouldnt you agree that jail is a pretty good deterent from allowing child rapists to contunue committing those crimes?
LOL. Except the thought of incarceration is supposed to act as some deterrant stopping POTENTIAL rapists from acting on their impulses when they see others incarcerated for the crime. And it just ain’t so. I know that bothers you nad makes you feel helpless so this is why you cling to this sad notion of “lock em up lock em up, we’ll be better off!” Keep dreaming, fucko.
—–You are a sick fuck, and there’s no psychologist in the world who’d agree with what you are saying, or who’d call me “self-righteous” for saying that a guy who has molested not one, but two underage girls, that we know of(Natasha Kinski anyone? Read what she has to say about Polanski),
Yep, another self-righteous pointless dickhead, now speaking on behalf of Natashja Kinski, who will you speak on behalf of next?
—-There is one thing you’re right about . . . nobody gives a fuck about you, and we as a society would be better off if you, Roman Polanski, and Col. Klink here were being skullfucked in San Quentin by the Black Guerilla Family and Nortenos, and being passed back and forth for cigarettes and toilet wine, you degenerate.
And still in denial that nobody gives a fuck about you either;) Keep dreaming about prison fantasies, shitheel. “We as a society, blah blah blah….” Face it, it’s you who is disenfranchised from “society” because it’s you who has the problem. Have a nice day loser;)
You’re right, Sammy, the ending of Chinatown is one of the most important elements in making it into the masterpiece it is. Interestingly enough, the ending including the classic line ‘Forget it, Jake, it’s Chinatown’ was written by Roman Polanski the night before the shooting; and he had to fist fight with everybody from Robert Towne to Paramount executives to get it approved. Turned out he was right.
You need to think straight before going house wife ape shit, Kay: each case will be examined and judged based on it’s specific merits. The case of Jaycee Lee Dugard has nothing in common with the case of Samanthat Gailey. Dugard was abducted by a registered sex offender, imprisoned and raped for 18 years, while Gailey was instructed by her mother to bait and engage a Hollywood celebrity in a sexual act in order to blackmail him. The only thing these 2 cases might have in common is how badly they were handled by the law enforcement, and in that aspect, they’re both prime examples of the complete, embarrassing, utter failure of the judicial system in America, the system you trust and pay taxes to.
Like I said many times before: This.Case.Is.Over.
Roman Polanski did his time according to the agreement and satisfied the victim through a settlement. The reason he’s in jail as we speak, is because California authorities needed to create a smoke screen in order to cover their mess. But in reality, there’s nothing they can do. I’d like to see how they will go through the complicated extradition process and waste more of American tax payer’s money to bring an internationally acclaimed director to a California court where the victim will travel all the way from Hawaii to support him instead of accusing him. What will they do then; what can they do? They can either sentence him to a few months in prison and/or probation and ask him to pay a relatively small fine, or they have to apologize from him and release him. Either way, the joke’s on them. Everybody with a shred of rationale can see what went down then and what is going on now. As for small town New England house wives, I don’t know. But if they don’t understand, then they don’t understand.
President laughs at the notion of “lock em up, we’ll be better off.”
So if you dont lock them up will we be better off President?
Mr. President, what should we do with people convicted of raping children, or who plead guilty to raping children, like mr. polanski did?
President, are you advocating for ‘NO” punishment for child rapists, since punishment doesnt accomplish anything according to you?
Come on you child rapist loving fuckhead, tell us what should happen to child rapists?
“The case is over”
I guess that is why Mr. Polanski is STILL IN JAIL.
If there is nothing for him to fear why is he fighting the extadition you child rapist loving asswipe?
And the colonels real name is………
And you also know full well that the fantasy of the girl and mother conspiring to frame or blackmail polanski is utter bullshit. And for the sake of argument, even IF it were true, it does not change the FACTthat polanski engaged in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor(dont forget, he plead GUILTY). I see, the mother and daughter planned on polanski giving her drugs and acholhol, and she was the instigator of the sex act, right colonel rapist lover.
Were the drugs and ascholhol part of the ‘plan’ to get polanski?
Your mother would be proud of you Colonel. Maybe we could invite her to your next porno shoot and give her some ludes and beer and play “mr polanski” with her. Then again, you would probably get off on that.
Put it to bed guys, please! Can’t change people, opinions are like assholes man, some times the system works.
And I am sure that others here would agree…..I hope to god that you dont have daughters colonel.
Colonel(defender of child rapists) Would you be upset if someone played ‘mr polanski’ with your kids or nieces, or sisters? Would you like to see them in prison, or would you be okay with a 42 day sentence for drugging and raping YOUR mother or sisiter?
General Malfunction sez:
‘Colonel(defender of child rapists) would you be upset if someone played Mr. Polanski with your kids or nieces or sisters?’
That’ll never happen, because unlike Samantha Gailey’s mother, I’ll never use my loved ones to bait and blackmail people. But I bet you would do something like that, you church going, community observing, media watch dog hypocrite scum; just like your butt buddy Shelly Lubben uses rejected porn whores to milk crazy right wingers, religious nut jobs and radical white supremacists.
On another note, I know I cause you so much frustration, pain and suffering on a daily basis; and I truly enjoy that. I promise you I’ll keep doing my best to make your life even more miserable everyday.
Kiss.My.Ass.
Wow Colonel Check your facts again, I know you are not this dumb. His 42 days was a PSYCH evaluation, as part of his plea. Only part. Nowhere does it say plea and we give you 42 days an nothing else.
Your boy knew he was going to jail and did the “punk bitch thing” (as all the kids are calling it) and ran.
You need to do more homework Colonel. Your argument is weak and you can’t even sustain it with out trying to derail this thread.
Huummm I thought that was one of your pet peeves, having others derail your threads???
Put some meat into your argument and do more then Google Polanski to get your facts.
I expect more from you Colonel. And you don’t fool me, I know your dark fantasies about New England housewives.
And really the only difference between the two cases was Jaycee was 11, not 13. Do better Colonel, you’re loosing this one so far.
Colonel,
You couldnt make my life miserable in a million years. But go ahead and knock yourself out.
Colonel.
You dilussions of granduer are often seriously scary. And your obsession with everything written here is not normal. Of course, defending child rapists is not normal. Either way, thats your problem. Now slither back to your gutter.
And your attacks on Kay are very disturbing.
Don’t get dumb smart ass with me, Kay. I know the facts, I knew them all along, because I’ve been a fan of Roman Polanski’s masterful work for as long as I remember; so naturally I learned about this case as it was developing through the years. Unlike you, I didn’t hear about it overnight. I presented the documented facts and debated them on this board. If you don’t understand the facts, I don’t care. If you don’t like them, I don’t care. I you’re not agree with them, I don’t care.
I know it’s hard living in a small town, you’ll get bored; but that’s your problem, not mine. Go find something fun or useful to do. There’s a big, plastic bag waiting for you to fill it up with empty bottles. Recycle. It’s good for the environment, it’s good for your pocket, and it also gives you something to do.
Meanwhile, I’ll be enjoying watching Mr. Polanski’s masterpieces on DVD. Tonight, I’ll watch the Ninth Gate starring Johnny Depp. What an amazing work of art. See the Ninth Gate, uncle Colonel says.
There you go, jackass:
General Malfunction: You couldn’t make my life miserable in a million years.
The Colonel: I sure can, I’m doin’ it right now; and it feels so damn good.
General Malfunction: Your obsession with everything written here is not normal.
The Colonel: Actually, it’s the other way around. If anybody is obsessed with everything written here, that’s you. I comment on some of the threads sometimes, and contribute articles whenever I have the time to write them. Then when people comment on my articles, I respond to them. It’s you who reads every written words in every threads like an obsessed buffoon fuck and tries to express idiotic opinions in broken English. But it’s all good, we need clowns like you for the sake of entertainment anyway.
General Malfunction: Your attacks on Kay are very disturbing.
The Colonel: Kay doesn’t need scum like you to kiss her ass and be worried about her, she’s a big girl. Not that it’s any of your business, but we’re doing just fine.
Now go stand in front of the mirror and repeat these words: ‘I’m the Colonel’s bitch and I’ll dance for him until I drop. It is my destiny.’
Colonel what facts are you talking about? I just gave you a FACT, and you just sweep it away because it doesn’t fit into your fats.
The way to dispell someones Fact is to counter it with another Fact. All you have done is throw insults?
And you know way better that I have known about this case much longer then over night. Remember I’m the one saving the world one rape victim at a time. They are not recycled cans the a woman’s souls.
A good argument counters with other facts. You are just stating your opinion and blurring it to make it fit your argument.
You have not countered one of the FACTS in the case with another fact, just your opinion. I get it you think the sun raise and sets by him. Then just say so, and that you support him and want him to get off scott free, don’t try and invent facts in the case to make your point. You didn’t really think I would let you get away with that did you?
The 90 Psych evaluation was because he rapped a 13 year old girl. They let him leave after 42 days.
Then he ran like a little boy!
Nobody was saying that the cases of Dugard and Elizabeth Smart were EXACTLY like the Polanski case, only illustrating that we as a society(yes, Pres. we are a society with laws go look em up) cannot depend on the victims and the victims ALONE to seek justice, because after a traumatizing event, they are not always mentally healthy enough to decide whether or not they are hurt or not. People are incapable of deciding whether they are traumatized, just like they are incapable of diagnosing themselves with cancer. That’s why we have doctors.
This woman probably came from a dysfunctional background as it is, judging that her mother would either
A: Let her end up in that situation
or
B: Send her into that situation to “entrap” Polanski.
Either way, that girl/woman aint right mentally. Her mother’s fucked up, Polanski(who’s done this to other young girls)is fucked up, and so is she, AND she’s been paid off. I wouldn’t look to her to decide whether she’s fucked up or not. Hell, look at half of the crazy chicks in porn, they all think they’re “perfectly normal”.
We have a justice system for a reason and it is to protect and serve. That’s not supposed to be arbitrary.
A large part of the colones argument here is the “publicity seeking judge” was looking for his 15 minutes of fame at the expense of Mr. polanski. This is complete bullshit….
It appears thatthis same judge, prior to the polanski case, was the presiding judge in several other “celebrity” cases including….the Elvis&Pricilla divorce, A marlon Brando child custody dispute, a paternity suit against Cary Grant, and the “billionairse boys Club murder.”
Funny how the colonel NEVER mentioned these other cases. Looks like he already had his fifteen minutes with celbrities who are much ‘bigger’ fish than the child rapist polanski.
Colonel, why did you never mention this jusdges involvemnt in these other cases?(lol)
http://www.vachss.com/mission/roman_polanski.html
A few more articles that show how big of a moron the colonel is.
And the anwser to the question…why did the coonel never mention these cases is because he DIDNT KNOW about these cases.
And another lie of the colonels here is that the Psych evaluation was supposed to be his ‘sentence”
Wrong, the psyche evaluation was to determine if polanski sould be “institutionalized as a medically disordered sex offender.”
The above linked articles from the time of the events are veryfactual, and dont have the 30 year old “spin’ that the colonel is trying to use here.
p.s. Colonel, how could the judge agree to a sentece BEFORE the pshyche evaluation was complete?
“The technical effect of the judges decision willbe for planski to spend some thime in prison without haveing the record of a prison sentence against him UNLESS he is eventually placed behind bars under a formal sentece.”
The “90 days” was NEVER meant to be his sentence for the rape of a 13 year old. Good try Colonel, but you lose again, and again, and again.
I would like to say there is not ONE SHRED of evidence that her mother “Pimped” her out.
The Colonel got all of his information from Polanski’s books, and interviews with Polanski.He didn’t even read the transcripts that have been out on every Blog, web-site and newspaper.
It has never been suggested by anyone else that she “pimped” her daughter. Only Polanski supports. They don’t want to believe that The Great Polanski could rape a 13 year old girl.
And Colonel, your good friends in Hollywood are stepping back from their good friend Polanski. Especially Angelic Houston and good old by Jack. There are warrants going out for them to testify in front of a grand jury.
And their lawyers are already drafting motions to keep them out of the grad jury room, and if not keep them sealed.
Colonel it good that you are re-watching all his old movies now, because there will not be any in the distant future.
Keep clinging to the fact that he is just a misunderstood rapist, but aren’t all the rapist in prison just misunderstood?!
general, either print this prick’s name or not. but think twice about it, because the new disclaimer at the top of the page, says we can’t print real names. so if you want to print here in the future, cindi may suspend you.
Were those cases presided by Polanski’s judge before or after, as if they were after then it’s a moot point.
Likewise, even if they were before Polanski, you’d think his lawyers would have known about those other celebrity trials and fought tooth and nail to have a new judge hear the case.
Also, one would hope that the kind of money Polanski was paying his lawyers, even if he was found guilty, they would have decent grounds for an appeal (citing the judge being possibly biased).
Thusly, again we’re back at square one wondering WHY Polanski felt the need to become a fugitive from the law (as he must of had competent legal representation that could/would factor in all of this and realize that they had a halfway shot at getting their client cleared of the charge he copped a plea to).
Yes, General Malfunction, those *articles* only prove everything I said in regards to this case’s developement and Samantha Gailey’s mother role in this scandal were true. Keep on beating your dead horse and kicking yourself in the ass, you little shit. That’s the only thing you’re good at. I love to see how you’re chasing your tail like the old, desperate, mad dog you are. You’re so much fun.
And Porn Fan/Jerry/Dude, I assure you General Malfunction doesn’t know anything about me more than you do. I don’t know what’s your obsession with me and I could care less, because you don’t matter. Assholes like you don’t matter. Never did and never will. Go jerk yourself to sleep.
Kay Ryan says:
‘The Colonel didn’t even read the transcripts that have been out on every Blog, web-site and newspaper.’
Unless you’re dumber than I thought you are, I already said several times the transcripts you refer to are Samantha Gailey’s 1977 testimony prepared for her by her mother; and that testimony has no validity for the reasons I mentioned more than enough.
As for me watching Roman Polanski’s old movies, I enjoy watching them again and again, because good movies are hard to come by and never go out of fashion. But I assure you there’s more to come from this genius director, including the Ghost which he recently finished filming and is scheduled to be released in 2010. And finally as for his Hollywood colleagues and friends, they will never abandon him, so you don’t worry about them.
You’re starting to bore me.
I’m boring you? Is that another tactic to not put up or shut up?
Not one of your facts can be substantiated.It is all you just trying to muddy the waters.
Who argues for a child rapist, by using the rapists own books that he wrote on the matter? What couldn’t find a doctor, or a psychologist, or ANYONE to back up your facts?? Oh yeah that is right, you couldn’t because none exist.
Maybe I should defend Charles Manson for killing Sharon Tate and the others by using what he has written about the murders. Us the “devil made him do it” defense. He at least had an excuse, he is certifiably insane!!!! Maybe now that Polanski will be back in the States he can go to Manson’s next parole hearing (2012)and and listen to all of his supports. come on the guy is 74 who can he hurt now?? Let him out it happened so long ago, and I am sure the judge was just looking for his 15 minutes of fame.
And use your Google search engine again. Ghost is getting killed by the press this has now gotten. It was slated to open the beginning of 2010 and has now been “put on hold”.
Come on Colonel keep making your nice little porn movies, leave the rest to us in the real world.
AND ENOUGH OF “WHO IS THE COLONEL?” WHO CARES? HOW WILL KNOWING WHO HE IS CHANGE ANYTHING???
That’s right, Kay, you’re fucking boring me, because you’re acting like a spoiled house wife. There’s a reason I’m not married with fucking children, because I don’t want to put up with shit like this. Will you shut up if I answer all of your questions once and for fucking all? Alright then, start taking notes:
1. The circumsrances around the night Roman Polanski and Samantha Gailey had sex were discussed more than enough. It’s clear Gailey was instructed by her mother to bait Polanski and engage him in a sexual act in order to blackmail him; and after the attempt at blackmailing Polanski failed, Gailey’s mother went to the police and prepared a false testimony for her daughter. These are the facts backed by more than enough circumstantial evidence. You don’t believe it. Fine. Believe whatever you want.
2. All rape charges were dismissed, and Polanski plead guilty to *unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor*; he never plead guilty to *rape*. After his guilty plea, an agreement was made between all parties. Under the terms of the plea agreement, the court ordered Roman Polanski to report to a state prison for a 90 day psychiatric evaluation, but granted a stay of 90 days to allow him to complete his current project. Under the terms set by the court, he was permitted to travel abroad. Polanski returned to California and reported to Chino State Prison for the evaluation period, and was released after 42 days. Again, according to the agreement, those 42 days were supposed to be the only jail time for him. All parties expected Polanski to get only probation at the subsequent sentencing hearing, but after an alleged conversation with LA Deputy District Attorney David Wells, judge Laurence J. Rittenband suggested to Polanski’s attorneys that he would send the director to prison and order him deported. Judge Rittenband had a reputation of handling celebrity cases, but nothing of this magnitude, and the reason I did not mention this in my article is because those previous cases had nothing to do with the Polanski case. However, all other cases that Rittenband had handled to that date including the cases of Elvis Presley, Marlon Brando, Cary Grant and others paled in comparison to the attention this particular case gained across America; those who are old enough remember this very well. That’s why many people including those who were involved in this like Samantha Gailey and David Wells, the former prosecutor at the center of the Polanski case, suggest that Rittenband’s attempt to disregard the initial agreement was because he felt empowered by all the media attention and wanted to surprise everybody by showcasing the extent of his power over Hollywood celebrities. Polanski left the country and did not return, because he was sick and tired of being a tabloid headline and didn’t need to go through all the bullshit and put up with a delusional judge. The point is the agreement was reached, and Rittenband was the one who broke the agreement and created this situation. Whether you or all other house wives in small town America feel the agreement was fair or not is irrelevant, because the parties who were involved in the case accepted. You on the other hand, can be the backseat driver that you are and have whatever feelings and opinions you want. Doesn’t matter.
3. This whole arrest thing is nothing but a smoke screen created by embarrassed California authorities; they planned it, released the never before published 1977 false testimony that Gailey’s mother prepared for her to enrage the likes of you, and then arrested Polanski. But those who unlike you are familiar with all the circumstances and details of this case, can and will see what’s going on here; it’s not hard to predict what will happen, either. Mr. Polanski will be released soon.
4. Polanski had nothing to do directly with the sources I’ve listed on this article. He didn’t write any of the books and he didn’t participate in making the documentary either; and if you were not too lazy you would have checked those sources and knew this by now. But you are what you are, a bored, spoiled house wife with an inflated sense of self worth and too much time on her hands in a small town. That figures.
5. As for Polanski’s new movie the Ghost, here is the latest news on that movie: on October 14 novelist Robert Harris who penned the screenplay of the movie, said Polanski has come up with a way to finalize his movie ahead of its scheduled premiere at the Germany’s Berlin Film Festival in February 2010. Polanski, who completed the editing of the movie on the day of his arrest, is keeping in touch with his colleagues for help and has even passed on instructions for the musical score to composer Alexandre Desplat from jail. See, you half crazy house wife, another thing you’re wrong about: the Ghost will be released according to it’s 2010 schedule.
I have taken more time than I had to and answered all of your ridiculous questions and concerns, but knowing you, I know you won’t understand. You’re like the fish swimming in the tank: you go forward, you go backward, you go left and you go right; but you don’t look up. You can’t look up. The idea of *up* does not exist in your bubble. So you can go ahead and kick yourself in the ass as much as you want. Be my guest. I’ll drink to that and to Mr. Polanski.
1 It’s irrelevant if Samantha Gailey’s mother instructed her daughter to try and fuck Polanski. I could send my son out with instructions to fuck Beyonce. . . It aint gonna happen. He had to be ready and willing which makes him guilty, because a 7th grader cannot render consent for sex, no more than they can “consent” to join the Army, or “consent” to vote in the next election. Anytime an adult has sex with a minor, who did not show them fake ID stating the opposite, it’s statutory rape.
2. The judge may be a fame whore, but so what? He does not have to agree to ANY sentence agreed upon by the two parties. That’s not how the justice system works. If I kill 10 people in a drive by, I cannot give each one of the families a million dollars and convince them to get their lawyers to drop the charges. That’s not how the justice system is supposed to work. That’s why it’s always the STATE vs. said defendant. The State of California doesn’t give a flying fuck about any agreement between this rich bastard, the girl he paid off, and the attorneys.
3. Put Gailey’s mother in jail too. He still drugged and fucked the girl. Unless he didn’t do that. He’s guilty of fucking a 13 year old girl, which inherently makes him a child molester.
“Straight up, what he did to me was wrong. But I wish he would return to America so the whole ordeal can be put to rest for both of us.”
– Samantha Gailey
That’s not a ringing endorsement of the guy. She’s just TIRED of 30 years of this going on. She never said the guy wasn’t a molester or didnt’ take advantage of her, she’s just tired of the publicity and what it’s done to her family. That is not the judge’s fault. That’s Polanski’s fault.
“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”
– Roman Polanski
Do those sound like the words of a guy who “made a mistake”? He tries to say that EVERYBODY likes fuckin’ little girls, which I guess makes him not that bad, right? There was nothing wrong when he was fuckin a 15 year old Natassja Kinski, right? The assignment that he photographed Samantha Gailey for. . . “Little Girls of the World”, hmm. That says it all. Lock him up.
“All rape charges were dismissed and he was charged with unlawful intercourse with a minor” sayest the child rapist defender Colonel
What the rapist defender doesnt tell you is that in california, all penal codes dealing with the ‘rape’ of a monor do not use the word rape. If you read the links I provided above, you would see that only four states actually use the word ‘rape’ in their penal codes that deal with child victims.
Polnaski wan not charged with the word’rape’, he was charged with the definition of rape. In california, penal code 261.5
http://www.shouselaw.com/statutory_rape.html
Read it and weep colonel. You lose again.
The ‘photo shoot’ was march 10. Poalnski was arrested Mrch 12. Exactly when did this ‘blackmail’ attempt by the mother take place?”
funny how NONE of planski;s lawyers ever mentioned this blackmail attempt that you seem to know so much about colonel.
And i love your….”collecting this payment is still in progress”
The saga of the Colonel beating the crap out of General Malfunction continues:
General Malfunction: Polanski was not charged with the word ‘rape’, he was charged with the definition of rape.
The Colonel: So now in addition to being an expert in safety related issues and the use of condom in porn scenes, you’re a fucking law expert too, right, you little clown? What’s you next area of experties; let me guess: the SETI program.
General Malfunction: The photo shoot was on March 10. Polanski was arrested on March 12. Exactly when did this blackmail attempt by the mother take place?
The Colonel: This blackmail attempt took place between March 10-12. How long do you think it takes to making an attempt at blackmailing a person; 9 months? Are you really that stupid, or you’re just trying to entertain me to the best of your abilities? I think the answer is a little bit of both.
General Malfunction: Funny how NONE of Polanski’s lawyers never mentioned this blackmail attempt that you seem to know so much about Colonel.’
The Colonel: In fact they did, between 1977-78 everybody did. Even Samantha Gailey later in an interview refers to it:
‘Everybody thought this was all orchestrated by my mother, and that we were after the money.’
That’s why all the rape charges were dropped and Polanski was only charged with unlawful intercourse with a minor. And if they bring him back to the United States, that’ll be the only charge against him: unlawful intercourse with a minor. It’s funny how a retired, old dog fart like you whose obviously been around in 1977-78 doesn’t know this. Perhaps you were too busy working at your shitty government job and attending your weeky Sunday ceremonies and bible study sessions.
General Malfunction: And I love your ‘collecting this payment’ (the settlement payment) is still in progress.
The Colonel: And I love the fact that you’re so stupid you need somebody to explain an idiot’s guide for you: of course collecting the payment is still in process. It’s clear that Gailey has been and still is receiving money from Polanski. That explains why she’s one of Polanski’s supporters today. What else do you think will make her write an article for Los Angeles Times to support his academy award candidacy; and why is she willing to travel from Hawaii to California to make her request for the case dismissal? The details of the settlement between Polanski and Gailey have never been published, like many other high profile cases; but the fact that she supports Polanski in everything from his academy award candidacy to the case against him, is proof enough for anybody with a shred of rationale to realize this matter has been resolved between the two of them. Backseat drives like you can eat shit and bark at the moon all they want, it won’t change a damn thing, it amounts to nothing; and we’ll see about that.
Go ahead, little fellow, finish your cooking and cleaning and laundry, then put on your Napoleon hat and ride your wooden horse some more: fight your condom crusade and destroy the adult industry, sentence Roman Polanski to life in prison, convert every human being and animal on the planet to christianity. But it’s all in your head, you know. In the end of the day, you’re nothing but a delusional, lonely, pathetic loser with a big mouth and too much spare time.
So here is your assignment for this weekend: continue filling up this thread with as much crazy, shitty, stupid, worthless comments in broken English as you can. Also, when you go to church tomorrow, ask your man in the sky to help you in your pathetic crusade, you’ll need all the help you can get, though eventually it won’t make a damn difference. You are my bitch, and you’ll be my bitch to the bitter end; and I’ll continue to use and abuse you like a punching bag, because man oh man, it feels so fucking good.
http://www.rr.com/news/topic/article/rr/9000/9263705/Swiss_court_keeps_Polanski_in_jail_rejects_bail
Colonel,
I went to church last sunday and asked God to keep polanski in jail. He answered my prayers. Thank you for the advice.(lol) In the article, Polanski says his family will be bankrupted if he has to stay in jail. God must have thrown that in for free, I didnt even ask for that.(lol)
General Malfunction, first, you didn’t do your weekend home work as I ordered you to. I told you to keep filling up this thread with as much crazy, shitty, stupid, worthless comments in broken English as you can. You disobeyed me, you little shit, for that you deserve extra beating.
Second, I read that article, too, and since you’re so stupid you need everything to be explained to you, let me emphasize on some parts of the article:
‘The tribunal in the southern Swiss city of Bellinzona left open several possibilities for Polanski to challenge its verdict in what is expected to be a lengthy legal battle over his extradition.’
‘Polanski has 10 days to appeal the decision on his release to Switzerland’s supreme court. He also can continue attempts to persuade the Swiss Justice Ministry to release him. More court proceedings are expected after Washington files its formal extradition request, which it has until Nov. 25 to submit.’
‘Lawyers for Polanski offered up the director’s Gstaad chalet as collateral, saying it represented more than half of his personal wealth and that it would definitely guarantee his remaining in the country.’
‘The court sided with Swiss authorities who said even the large bail offer provided insufficient security against flight, and should be made in cash.’
‘The Swiss Justice Ministry said it would examine any new request Polanski submits and evaluate whether it represents a concrete, realizable offer as the court ruling suggests.’
In other words, it ain’t over ’till it’s over. You don’t worry about Roman Polanski, he’s a strong man. This puppet show may entertain fools like you, but for him, in compare to what he’s been through and survived (World War II atrocities, Manson killing spree, etc.) it’s nothing. Your parasite pathetic god must do better than this if he wants to fuck with Mr. Polanski; and you must do better than this to entertain me.
Carry on, my little retired, old ass clown.
Colonel(child rapist lover)
I love your selected quotes form the article. Hers a few you left out.
“Legal exopets said NO path offered polanski much hope for a speedy release.”
“If someone has already fled one, it makes sense to suspect he might flee again,”said Dieter Jann, a former prosecutor.
“Those measures were seen as insufficient to prevent his flight…..”
“He can always ask to be released again, but detention is the rule.”
…Polanski fled befor sentencint was complete, and is expected to face ADDITIONAL penalties for jumping bail.”
“As a result, the motivation to flee is high”
It aint over till its over, and in the meantime polanski is where he belongs, behind bars.
http://www.leisuresuit.net/Webzine/cont_grf/wernerklemperer.jpg
—–I went to church last sunday and asked God to keep polanski in jail. He answered my prayers.
PFFFFFTHAHAHAHAHA!!!! What an utter knob. Yeah that’s some great life you are clearly living.