This is not the first time Samantha Geimer has asked the court or gone public with her desire to have the charges against Roman Polanski dropped, but it is the first time she has said or done anything since he was arrested in Switzerland last month. In papers filed yesterday in LA, Ms. Geimer says that she wants the charges dropped because all the media attention interferes with her employment and health.
I feel for her because this has gone on a very long time. It doesn't mean I want the charges dropped but this isn't exactly like a case where a woman gets beat by her husband, files charges and then decides to drop them. It is much more complex because this woman has been living with this situation for 32 years. It hasn't gone away. It is always in the news and they have made movies about it and her name is always associated with it. She can't escape it. If I were her I think I would want it gone as well, but I also think if the charges were dismissed it would show that all you have to do in life is be rich and successful and run away and if you wait long enough all is forgiven. Oh, and meanwhile organizations in that country will present you with awards and people will suck up to you even though you are an escaped convict. Roman Polanski didn't embezzle money from a company or run from a 3 year sentence for smoking pot. He raped and sodomized a 13 year old girl after giving her drugs. Just because he is a movie director doesn't somehow make him a better person. Are you telling me that all the people who signed that petition would sign it if Roman was a guy who bagged groceries for a living? Hell no. The signers of that petition think that because the guy directs movies he must be great and that hasn't raped anyone they know of for 32 years. They think.
Wonder if he offered her any money. As for the petition signers, they are just sucking up to him.
ReplyDelete^^^BINGO!
ReplyDeleteThis girl has wanted the charges dropped for years. She says she just wants a normal life with her family. Hard to relive something like that every time the papers brings it up.
ReplyDeleteif polanski had acted like a man 32 years ago this would have been over and done with then. HE is the reason she is still dealing with this. First he raped her then screwed her by fleeing for 32 years.
ReplyDeletethis situation infuriates me to no end. i actually wrote a little note about it on fb - enty, you are my friend on there so i'll link to it in case you're really bored today. :)
http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?ref=sb#/note.php?note_id=141344468233
I agree with brooklyn040204. It all comes down to Polanski himself. He fled. He is a fugitive. While I sympathize with Ms. Geimer, I truly hope the charges are not dropped. They need to haul his ass to the US and face up to it, once and for all. He's had a 32 yr vacation and arrogantly acted as if he did nothing wrong. Time to pay up.
ReplyDeleteAs for the petition signers, I see they have been terribly quiet. Where are the protestations now? They just confine their indignation to an electronic signature. Such conviction!
Roman Polanski needs to share a prison cell with Charlie Manson and find out why rape is illegal
ReplyDeleteAnd...shouldn't we be expecting new, additional charges for leaving the country without leave?
ReplyDeleteoh yeah, he is looking at years, isnt he?
ReplyDeleteThe woman who was raped isn't the one pressing the charges. The state is pressing the charges. He broke the law that protects 13 year old girls from being raped by men with anti-social personalities and hebephile tendencies. He is a danger to the public (as is obvious from his behavior since then) who is incapable of taking responsibility for his actions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Melody .. though my heart breaks for Samantha. At this point this situation has gone beyond the damage he did to her. In my opinion, Polanski made a mockery of the legal system in LA County and California .. granted that is apparently not all that hard if you are a celebrity. Still, where I can sympathize with Samantha, it is not her decision to drop the charges and I hope they do not.
ReplyDeleteAnd he is a serial offender, IMHO, as well. Has he EVER dated a woman that wasn't a mid-range teenager [15-16] since Sharon Tate's murder? How old was Natasha Kinski when he started diddling her? 15?? How old was Emmanuelle Seigner when they started dating .. she was only 23 when they got married. Nope .. the man is a pervert and he has gotten away with this for way too long.
Sticky wicket. Think he should pay, but don't think the girl should have to go through it again after 32 years if she doesn't want to. Like ripping open a scar and making it a would again.
ReplyDeleteI believe he did offer her money. He offered her money, she agreed, and then he fled and didn't pay. At least that's what I've read.
ReplyDeleteI get why she wants the charges dropped and for this whole thing to go away. However, I don't think it will go away unless justice is served. I wonder if she wants it to go away for the wrong reasons - like, because of what people are saying about her and what she was supposedly like when she was 13, and that's horrible because that means she might still feel, in some way, that this was her fault.
ReplyDeleteI hope the charges do not get dropped. Like enty said, that just means it's OK for rich, famous people to commit crimes and never have to pay for them. I don't care how long it has been, he had sex with a child, and he should be punished.
"wonder if she wants it to go away for the wrong reasons - like, because of what people are saying about her and what she was supposedly like when she was 13, and that's horrible because that means she might still feel, in some way, that this was her fault."
ReplyDeleteExactly my thoughts. Thanks for articulating.
You know I wonder if the US had a Most Wanted for Polanski.
ReplyDeleteRegarding Samatha Geimer she should stand up and face her rapist. If this was to happen to one of her family female member would she still tell them to forget it.
bravo, enty! well said!
ReplyDeleteWhile I understand her wanting this to go away, it should not go away and he should take responsibility for what he did, it is the states decision not hers. If anything, I wish she would stand up and yell the loudest on him getting justice, maybe then she will go on with her life and she will get closure and this will not bother her anymore. Of all the things I have read she just wants it to "go away", that's it. I have also heard he never paid her in the civil suit, if I were her I would reopen everything and make him pay and pay big. If anything she can be a positive example of not letting hollywood people (and others) get away with crimes expecially this horrific crime against a child. Why isn't she rallying for justice after all these years?
ReplyDeleteCDAN folks have said it well and I don't have a lot to add. Don't do the crime if you can't do the crime. It's HIS fault that she has to relive this. Let's settle it once and for all and I pray that she can find a sense of peace.
ReplyDeleteMelody - you're absolutely right. That's why it's the People of the State of California v. Roman Polanski, not Samantha Geimer v. Roman Polanski. The case really isn't hers to drop. While she may have been the actual victim, society at large is the aggrieved party.
ReplyDeleteYeah, what Beth said. Oh, btw, anyone know where one can read this petition?
ReplyDeleteagreed with Enty!
ReplyDeleteShe did file a civil suit in 1993 and he agreed to pay her $500K to settle the suit. He didn't pay though and a few years later a court filing showed he owed her $604,416.22, including interest. I don't know if he's paid her since or if there is some sort of agreement to pay her a larger sum if she can help make the criminal penalty go away.
ReplyDeleteI doubt she's seen a cent, OlCranky.
ReplyDeleteYes to what others are saying. She has no say, no standing to affect the charges at all. Whatever she feels or says is just not an issue at all.
I believe that if Polanski should pay then so should that woman's cunt of a mother. Yes, she is a pimping CUNT who pretty much sold her child to Roman Polanski. Why is she getting away with it? Since when is it acceptable to whore your child out? Oh, but no one cares about THAT. It's all about Polanski. Well, sorry, but Samantha's mother is MORE guilty than Polanski because it was her responsibility to nurture and protect her daughter, not whore her out to a famous director.
ReplyDeleteThe LA Times did a story on this that ran on Sunday. It was a cover story. They named her, and on the first page, detailed her testimony. The first page of the f-ing paper. They also had pictures of her over the years (including when she was 13). In my opinion that is horrible. She is and was a victim. The reason she wants this to go away is because each time this is mentioned, her privacy is invaded. She has a family and they have all been approached about this. Each time the case is mentioned, her name is mentioned.
ReplyDeleteCould you imagine if this was your life? That's why she wants the charges dropped. It's not about money. I bet she wishes she never went to the authorities. Unfortunately, that keeps most of us from going to the authorities. I refuse to buy the LA times again. What's to stop them from naming all rape victims or victims of crime?
This infuriates me and the comments that she did this for money . . . no money can bring back her innocence.
@Making and Saving in the LBC
ReplyDeleteShe is actually the one who revealed her identity; the paper would not have been able to run the story had she not done so. I also believe, though I could be wrong, that she and her mom provided pictures and participated in interviews over the past few years - so that's where the paper got additional access to now public information.
While I feel bad that this is a nightmare for her, Polanski ran from a pretty light sentence. He made matters worse by fighting for dismissal on the grounds of judicial misconduct but refusing to come to the US for that appeal to be heard.
If the victim doesn't want him to serve his sentence or wants the charges dismissed, she'll have to show due cause for dismissal and the only cause she could provide would be to say he did not give her drugs or alcohol and that there was no sexual activity between them. She has not argued the charges should be dismissed due to his innocence, she has argued for dismissal because she is sick and tired of the media circus he continued to create by refusing to serve his sentence or argue his case in front of the court. Since his guilt is not in question, the state has every right as well as the responsibility to ensure he faces the consequences of his actions for the crimes he's plead guilty to.