MovieChat Forums > Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired (2008) Discussion > Rebuttal documentary.

Rebuttal documentary.

posted 13 years ago by rongan
8 replies | jump to latest

In several interviews Polanski stated he has a passion for young girls. He admits to having sex with two girls under the age of 16. Another girl came forward and said Polanski raped her when she was 16 and then gave her a role in his movie ‘Pirates’.

Polanski believes most men are sexual attracted to young teenage girls. I think NOT! The older men that are are considered pedophiles (except in New York, Hollywood and France).

The pro Polanski documentary is clearly loaded with transparent lies. It tries to imply the girl was an adult, there was no evidence of sex and there was misconduct between the prosecutor, Wells, and the judge. Wells wasn’t the prosecutor. That’s a FACT. The judge gave Polanski preferential treatment. He even allowed Polanski to leave the U. S. to work on a movie prior to sentencing.

The judge ordered Polanski NOT to associate with children unless another adult was present. When the judge saw the pictures of Polanski with a 15 year-old (Kinski), he ordered him back to the U.S. And he was going to give him time in jail. (obviously Polanski didn’t get the message it’s unlawful to have sex with children.)

The psychiatric report was a ‘whitewash’ as the judge called it. Simply read that ridiculous report. Polanski’s lawyer was with him when both psychiatrists were interviewing him. Polanski pleaded the fifth when he was asked questions about the rape and sodomy charges. So that meant to those clowns he didn’t do it.

Here’s a ten minute accurate documentary about the Polanski rape case: http://youtu.be/zzt1jqNei0A

[–] vnisanian2001 12 years ago

rongan, let it be known that you are a moron.

First off you are a moron for saying that Polanski is a pedophile. He is not a pedophile.

And nice try moron, Polanski had a relationship with Kinski BEFORE Rittenband.

And Polanski DID show remorse. It's obvious that your piece of sh*t video, has everything twisted around (including his "infamous" quote) to make it seem like he showed no remorse.

Burn in hell you moron. I'm sure in hell, you'll have David Wells and Laurence Rittenband to talk to.

[–] lornamd-1 11 years ago

"It tries to imply the girl was an adult, there was no evidence of sex"

Have you seen the film? It makes it clear that she was 13 and it has quotes Polanski admitting to having sex with her. Not once is it stated or implied that she was an adult or that no sexual contact happened.

The film opens with Polanski admitting to liking young girls so it doesn't gloss over that.

[–] rongan 11 years ago

“It makes it clear that she was 13...” “Not once is it stated or implied that she was an adult or that no sexual contact happened.”

The documentary ends with, “Was Samantha Gailey a child? – No, she wasn’t. Her medical examination defines her as “adult female”: all people knew her at that time estimate her age at about 18.” (Do you believe that? What age did Polanski believe her to be?)

It also states Polanski didn’t rape her and adds the medical examination didn’t show any trace of penetration.

What do those statements mean to you?

Polanski knew she was 13. No doubt about that.

The girl claims (to this day) he raped her and was scared of him.

He gave her champagne and a part of a drug. The movie implies that didn’t happen because the charges were dropped. (You must be smart enough to realize why those charges were dropped during the plea bargain.)

Apparently vnisanian2001 doesn’t see anything immoral with a 43 year old man taking advantage of a 13 year old girl. I think it’s wrong and SHOULD be illegal. What do YOU think?

[–] lornamd-1 11 years ago

Have you seen the film or are you basing your ideas on it on what posters like Prometheus or the Roman Polanski facts of 1977 youtube video?

I've seen Wanted and Desired and it does not say he didn't rape her or any of that other stuff. The director also said in interviews and the audio commentary that Samantha was Polanski's victim.

To answer your question what do those statements mean to me: nothing. Samantha was a kid, its what age you are not what age you look that matters, Polanski admits he knew she was 13, no qualified person has ever said that the physical evidence showed him to be innocent and he committed a sex crime he should have been punished for.

[–] rongan 11 years ago

I caught probably the last half on HBO.

You have to agree the film maker knowing lied about Well’s being the prosecutor. People like ‘vinisanian2001’ still don’t realize Well’s wasn’t the prosecutor.

I wrote how the film ending: “Was Samantha Gailey a child? – No, she wasn’t. Her medical examination defines her as “adult female”: all people knew her at that time estimate her age at about 18.” It also stated Polanski didn’t rape her and adds the medical examination didn’t show any trace of penetration.

Do you believe Woopie Goldberg, Michael Savage (Fox radio), Harvey Weintein and Gore Vedal are qualified people?

Goldberg on The View implied the girl’s mother and the girl consented before the act and Savage said the mother pimped off her daughter in exchange for movie roles.

Of course there’s absolutely no evidence backing any of that.

And I suspect the medical report was a ‘whitewash’ as the judge in the case thought.

The documentary also suggested he was innocent of the five charges that were dropped.

You, unlike vinisanian2001, know better.

At least 2 women came forward and claimed Polanski raped them. Both appeared very credible and were given film roles. To my knowledge, Polanski never publicly denied those rapes.

It appears at least 3 of his victims were paid a great deal of money – especially Gailey.

I guess many can debate that’s punishment enough – and maybe they’re right.

I think raping a child is far worse than a drunken saying the Jews are responsible for all the wars going on now. Of course many in Hollywood think otherwise. – Blacklist the drunk and give the rapist awards every chance they get.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rongan 11 years ago

"I think raping a child is far worse than a drunken saying the Jews are responsible for all the wars going on now."

Excuse me, but how did anything I wrote above have anything whatsoever to with drunk driving?

Gibson wasn't put on their hate list because he was driving drunk or going to abuse a love interest in the near future (after being placed on the 'let's destroy his career list').

Are suggesting we ALL should blackball any actor guilty of drunk driving?

I'm concerned about blacklisting - it was wrong in the 50's and it's wrong now.

Polanski raped a child - no doubt about that.

It appears by the evidence Woody Allen molested a 6 year old girl - and apparently because of Woody's status in New York - a prosecutor was fired (and rehired at a higher level) for doing what he's paid to do.

My guess is you're one of many who believe certain people are above the law. Mainly because you were bothered by an unwritten suggestion that's it's okay to drive drunk and not concerned AT ALL about a 43 year old getting away with raping a 13 year old child.

[–] prometheus1816 8 years ago

At least 2 women came forward and claimed Polanski raped them. Both appeared very credible and were given film roles. To my knowledge, Polanski never publicly denied those rapes.

Those two women can be completely refuted due to two things: 1) As to Edith Vogelhut, according to her Polanski butt raped her in the same "bedroom" as he did Samantha Geimer. Problem with that "bedroom" as Vogelhut called it, it was a TV Room and had a couch not a bed as she contends, and finally Jack Nicholson has said Vogelhut has never been inside his home, and 2) Charlotte Lewis can be totally discounted when asked about working with Polanski on the film "Pirates", she stated that “I’d love to have had a romantic relationship with [Polanski], and a physical one. You can’t help falling in love with him. But he didn’t want me that way.” This was in an interview at the Cannes Film festival where she can be seen on his arm from 1986.

http://tinyurl.com/jzqbacb
http://tinyurl.com/zr7uuod
http://tinyurl.com/zyv6maj
http://tinyurl.com/jb3xv38

Four photos showing how very comfortable she was with him, and that she was not afraid of him despite "being used in the worst way." Both Vogelhut and Lewis are lairs and not to be believed. Polanski has never denied them because they never happened. He never had a sexual relationship with Lewis hence her statement about "he didn't want me that way." And as according to Nicholson, Vogelhut was never in his house and she described the room as a bedroom when it was a TV room. It should be noted both women had books to sell when they made their claims. Money, it appears, is a great motivator.

Sometimes my ruminations are too confusing for someone not inside my head. -Anon