Very persuasive documentary


I didn't really know much about the details of the case before watching this documentary. From what little I did know, or thought that I knew, I began the viewing regarding Polanski as a horrible monster who had committed an unpeakably horrid crime and then fled from justice.

By the end of the viewing, I couldn't help feeling sorry for him (as well as for the woman/girl who had been victimized).

I wonder what the attorneys and police officials who were interviewed had to say about the work when they saw it. Did they feel that the editing had been fair? Did they feel that the filmmakers had been too sympathetic to Polanski?

reply

Well we know that the prosecutor thought it made sense for Roman to run...that speaks volumes and he worked with Polanski's attorney to make sure that Roman got a fair shake (or at least tried to both during and after the original trial) when he could have very, very easily went along with the judge and scored a huge, public win. The judge in this case was negligent in just about every possible way a judge can be...asking bailiffs and random people in the bathroom what he should do is absolutely insane as is staging those mock motions. Plain and simple: The judge put his own ego and thirst for notoriety ahead of his job, ahead of justice...quite similar to what Sheriff Joe Arpaio is doing now.

As for Polanski's crime...he absolutely was in the wrong but there are sometimes things that have to be considered in addition to the crime itself. Polanski is not a pedophile...I don't think many people would assert that. Times were different in the 70's, morality was different in Eastern Europe, etc...and perhaps most importantly, the girl's mother was absolutely as negligent as anyone else. She used her daughter as an "in" with these types of men, exposed her daughter to sex, drugs and rock and roll at a very, very young age, etc.

But yeah...Polanski really got screwed over by the system here.

reply

Just like Samantha said in the film, it is not her mother's fault that she was raped. Polanski should not have raped her--plain and simple. Blaming everyone but the perpetrator is disgusting.

What's the name for someone who drugs and rapes a 13-year-old and has a sexual relationship with a 15-year-old when he is more than 4 years older than either one? Well-Respected Film Director, apparently.

The judge in this case was horrible, no disagreement there, but it doesn't changed that Polanski was convicted and admitted what he did.

reply

I agree. Also his continued interest in underaged girls including Kinski shows a pattern. Regardless his conviction and probation reports and Chino recommendation as well as the DA's request combined tell me judicially the corrupt judge should have given Polanski probation,

All alone you don't send someone to Chino and then declare it a whitewash. Those reports are generally very heavily weighed.

reply