Mark my words, if he was not a Jew, he would not be alive now. Jews are untouchable, simply they have lots of money that let them buy an politician or judge, you white Christians, respond to Jews who rape your children by saying "Bless Israel", good for you and for the Jews. Free yourself from Jews, before you go invading the whole world bringing them freedom and democracy.
Was that a ass whipping room Jack Webb was in with the sound proofing walls...I can think of several former Wall st CEOs that need to be in Polanski seat for molesting America...
Did you see that interview that he did while he was under house arrest? Basically, all he did was whine that the LA prosecutor was out to "get" him.
And in an interview one year after the crime, he didn't think he did anything wrong; declaring "everyone wants to f*ck young girls". Google it and you can find the transcript.
Child molesters are very good at rationalizing what they do. Letting Polanski get away with this only gives other molesters encouragement.
bulletpeople > '.. may Mr. Polanski have a long and healthy life ..'
"Mister" Polanski? Why such deference (esteem) to a self-confessed pedophile and rapist? Are you lower than that? Seriously doubt he would address you in such an esteem manner.
Polanski knew he would be going to the big house for what he did. He knew that he would be put into a cell with some big guy named Bubba and would be turned into the guy's bitch. Given a taste of his own medicine. So he decided to flee rather than face the consequences of his crime. It is so sick how Hollywood justifies his crime just because he's an "artist".
I was laughing until you included that idiot pedophile Luc Besson at the end, like he's the honorable one, untarnished, full of integrity. He might not have raped his child bride Maïwenn Le Besco, but when she was pregnant at 16, that certainly puts his words today in the Pot-Calling-Kettle territory.
What he did to Joan of Arc constitutes enough abuse to justifiably put him in the booby hatch for life.
I only wish that a real Joe Friday could've been let loose on Roman Polanski and his hollywood defenders. How can stars--esp stars like Debra Winger,who are parents defend that creepy,morally clueless pervert? At the end of Chinatown,which co-stared Polanski,the little girl goes off to be sexually abused by her grandfather played to creepy good effect by the great John Huston. A happy ending to Polanski. I'm sure.
He had a hard time knowing it was wrong??? He got a 13 year old child drunk and got her high then stripped her, raped, and sodomized her. When he was done he sent her home. Then he fled the country to avoid getting raped and sodomized in prison. What a maggot he is and anyone that defends him (Whoppi Goldberg and Debra Winger for example. Who'd have thought two liberal women defending a confessed child molester. Isn't the Hollywierd Cult of Personality great?)
Yes!! Your Jack Webb videos are appropriate, superiorly edited, and great for a time when there are so many criminals running our country and our media!!! Please, more, more, more!!!! hahaha
Roman's a scumbag for doing a little girl anally but also because HE RAN *AFTER* HE PLED GUILTY!!! You don't run from US law, you foreign piece of crap, how dare you think you can get away. I hope his cellmate thinks he has a purty mouth....
It is simple in this day and age to rape a woman, and you don't even know you raped her until a day, months, or years later.
A lot of women do not want to take responsibility for having sex, so they say they didn't want to and that the man seduced them into it or they gave "resistance" but he had sex with her anyways . This way they can avoid the "slut" label, and blame the man for the sex.
Geimer had a boyfriend when she fucked Polanski. She cheated on him, that is unless was she "raped."
From what I read, the quaaludes were found in Nicholson's bathroom, they weren't Polanski's, so there was no premeditation; i.e. Polanski intending to use the drug to weaken her resolve.
Geimer also had experience with the drug, knew what the drug was, and took the drug on her volition without encouragement from Polanski because she had a history of abusing the drug before.
@WilliamRowlett I actually don't think polanski wouls want anyone supporting him. All those who have only brought more attention to the case. Many younger people here on youtube as well as in the press have only learned of the whole sordid affair recently due to the amount of discussion. He is despised now by ten times as many people. I think it has been a good thing because people are in the modd for demanding justice. If the CA District attorney backpedals there will be a huge outcry.
@gcmc2 I was about 16 when the Polanski case happened in LA in 1977 or 78, whenever it was. He was supposed to receive probation but the judge was a flake and Polanski panicked & fled. If this happened today, I doubt he'd receive probation.
Exactly. I laugh at some polanski supporters saying he should get a retrial. He must be close to begging folk not to help him any more ! A retrial would expose him to the full force of the law including the penalties in place at the time. As U'd be aware the misconduct of the judge was a bit of a beat up anyway. There was the suggestion that the judge was going to reject the plea agreement but since polanski ran away before sentencing it is a non issue ! It was never more that rumour anyway
The only argument the Polanski defenders have which has half a leg to stand on- is, supposed he had served 5 or 10 years for rape and he comes out. What would a rehabilitated Roman look like. He realizes he was wrong, he never does it again, he gets married, has children, works and lives a productive life.
Well, all that happened - without prison, so what purpose would prison serve now. It makes some sense, even though I don't agree with it.
first, you don't have read my comment, cause i was not "makin fun"second, have you present what wanna say FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION?, ya probably not cause u are american....
Yes, true, at one time girls got married at 13. And in some cultures today, Africa, Middle East, girls still get married at 13. But who's choice is that? The girl's? Or is it her FATHER's choice to 'marry off his daughter to his fat rich friend'?
A child of 13 wants to play, explore her new world, learn & read & have fun. She's only been in this world 13 yrs!
It's MEN who decide in these cultures that a child 'should become a wife' & thus be used 4 sex w/old men at her tender years.
Let's forget about age for a minute. What if the girl, young or old, says no? What if she asks to be driven home because she does not have a car or a driver's license? Further, what if the man has given her Champagne, which is illegal in the country in which this happened? Also he has given her a drug? Despite all of the things this man has done to her to get her to consent, she still says no, please take me home.
Those are the facts of this case. He is a child molester, and that buys you jail.
@alessiaaa94 The age of consent in Spain is 13, as specified by the Spanish Penal Code, Article 181(2). However, if deceit is used in gaining the consent of a minor under 16 years an individual can be charged under Article 183(1) upon parental complaint.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Women were married in older times at that age because the role of women was relegated to wife, and man as bread winner. When girls reach puberty, they could fall to temptation and have sex, thus producing children out of wedlock which is bad on many levels for a society. So it was better to marry them off.
Today in the age of equality, both sexes pursue lucrative careers, so the girl at 13 will not be married, but she can't have sex either because of the risk of teen pregnancy.
Women were married in older times at that age due to the rule of *men*, not thru choice! All these ridiculous roles (wife, breadwinner) were created by a bunch of *men*-- the women/girls having no say in the matter. Woman's sexuality suppressed. That's how it's been for centuries --since the Divine Feminine was squashed by the Patriarchal church.
Today kids are respected & treated as kids, so 13 year olds, female or male, have 'relationships' with other 13 yr olds, not with 45 yr old men!
That's the feminist perspective on human history, which may or may not be true. I would say the issue is much more complex than summarizing that men oppressed women just for the fun of it.
I do not know if it was solely the rule of men as there were female aristocrats, queens, rulers, nobility throughout history that held sway along with men.
The tradition probably held some practical purpose just as only men going to war (which is oppressive to men) held some practical purpose.
You are absolutely correct there. Before the establishment of the church Women were the Authority! Women were worshipped. The role of males were as consorts (to do the bidding of the High Priestess). It was this fear of Female Power that gave birth to the Male Chauvanist mind-set. Bully the Empowered Female into submission.
It worked.
But now all that macho superiority has been exposed for what it is: insecurity, fear...Now the world is learning HERstory, rather than hiStory!
There is a real mob mentality around this Polanski case. He should be let go and allowed to return to France where he has lived for more than 30 years without molesting anyone. The case should be dropped in California and everyone go about their business.
I don't know where your personal attack comes from. I am not advocating or dismissing the crime of having relations with a young girl. I just think given the bizarre circumstances of the trial (and the judge who was reprimanded and dismissed); the fact that the victim and her family have long said they want the charges dropped; the fact that Polanski served time and was recommended for release, and has not done this again in 30 years, that we should move on. Reasonable people can disagree.
Polanski didn't 'have relations' with a young girl! He raped a child!.. who said no, who wanted to go home, who was scared! The victim's 'forgiveness' has nothing to do with the case.
He didn't 'serve time' either...40 days in a hospital 4 assessment is not 'time'!
Were he a local plumber who raped a little girl 30 years ago u ppl wud be baying for his blood! I have always adored his work but just cos he's a very talented movie director does not mean he shud be 'excused' for raping a child.
You go too far, Polanski never confessed nor was he convicted of raping anyone. He made a deal with the court and the judge waffled and was about to go back on his deal (the judge was later removed). I don't approve of Polanski's actions but he has apologized and made restitution, the victim and his family are satisfied (which I believe is important) and he has been a good citizen for 30 years. No one is better off nor is justice served if this man dies in jail.
Non-consensual sex is normally defined as rape, no? When a female says 'no' & the male just goes ahead & has sexual intercourse with her, that is rape.
Because of her age, even if she stripped off all her clothes, danced like Mata Hari & said 'Take me, I'm yours!' Polanski still wud be the 45 year old adult male who should've been responsible for his *own* actions in the company of a 13 yr old child. If she'd been 3 would that have made it 'rape'? Or just 'relations with a very tiny woman'???
You act like you want me to defend Polanski and I won't do that: I am on your side when it comes to any 40 something year old man having sex with a young teenager. Where we seem to be talking passed each other is that you do not KNOW what happened nor do I. You throw around the rape word without all the facts and the facts you think you have come from Polanski's plea bargain which was to a lesser offense, and one he made only as part of a deal with an unethical judge.
No..I don't think u are defending Polanski, & I don't want others to think you are defending him. I know u are just talking in legelese & assessing the case from all perspectives.
I'm sorry if I came on too harsh. Nothing worse than a ranter! And I've been reading so many right-wing posts lately, (political) I've turned into a 'ranter' in my style of rhetoric. ;-)
I appreciate your comments. And yes, this does seem to be a heated subject. I don't really have a dog in this fight and will be mostly comfortable whatever the outcome. I think I may be somewhat attracted to the Polanski side of the debate only because the vast majority of people are so quickly on the other side. You may enjoy the documentary Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, a pretty balanced accounting of all of this done in 2008. P.S. I feel your pain about the right wing bloggers!:)
I actually find it really difficult to actually *watch* Polanski becos...you may be surprised to hear...my heart wants 2 go out to him! Were he some Manson (not intended to use that name here, but it came out) then it wud b easier to *watch* his discomfort, his demise etc. But I don't feel comfortable watching him. Maybe a part of me is looking at it from another angle. One has to see every perspective in this life b4 passing judgement..
If it were not for Polanski, the anti-satanic-cult would never started. Satanic Ritual Abuse would have gone unnoticed. Satanic Cults have tried to silence Polanski before - the Charles Manson Family even tried to assasinate him, but only succeeded in murdering his wife, Sharon Tate, and their unborn child. The International Satanist Movement has struck again, framing Polanski for the "statutory rape" of a 13-year old girl. This is a lie. ROMAN POLANSKI IS INNOCENT.
Fully concur with your sentiment behind this video, Polanski is a filthy pedophile; but it might've been keen to delve into the history of Mr. Jack Webb before using his name(as opposed to his character's name on Dragnet) as Roman's nemesis.
I know there are 2 biographies and I've read one. I didn't think there was any dirt to be found--poor guy from wrong side of the tracks through hard effort becomes successful radio then TV actor/director/producer. Is there some baggage that you think disqualifies him from lecturing a pedophile?
Check out the biography-"Just The Facts, Mam.". Besides it clearly illustrating his weasely philandering, and his blatant hypocrisy toward Stimulants-(Nicotine & Alcohol vs. Marijuana); it also details his child abusive ways toward his daughter "Alisa".
Sexual offending against a child is not a one time event. It invariably involves multiple victims and multiple assaults. A cursory review of the professional literature will demonstrate that.
So, the gutless freak defending itself in this video had far more than the one victim he was charged with. He knows it. His supporters know it. Yet, he's defended anyway. Ya gotta love hollyweird.
The "non-hippies" were around 95% of the population when this Dragnet episode was filmed. Today? The childe molesters and Hippies are running our nation. FRIGHTENING!
The "non-hippies" (lol) voted for Nixon TWICE. Then they grew up and voted for W TWICE. We're still paying the price for 1968, however, never in my wildest dreams did I ever think that I would someday look back at Nixon (a joke) as the "good" (lol) Republican president based on the "conservative" clowns that followed.
I agree with Fox News Liberal Juan Williams when he said if someone ever does what Polanski did to that girl to his daughter, you better try to get Juan outta jail because: "I'll kill his ass!" Amen Mr. Williams.
Have you not seen what real torturers do? Goodness, do some reading. We fight with one hand tied behind our back and do the minimum amount of effective force on the least number of people and you folks will not stop complaining.
Nice bit of moral equvalency there. So using coercion to get info from terrorists is the same as drugging and raping a 13-year-old? You're one to talk about "twisted 'logic'" when you can't differentiate between an innocent little girl and a hardened jihadist.
I know what you said, I chose a more accurate term. Y're the one who seems to be unable to distinguish real, sadistic torture from the interrogation techniques in question. Such hyperbole cheapens the impact of true torture -- just as your insistence on changing the subject to your own political obsession cheapens the discussion of what a sleazbag Polanski is.
Nice diversion attempt from the Polanksi rape case...it looks like it worked pretty well too. ADD/tangent issues evident, as is usually the case with liberals...Polanski case discussion brings up Cheney and terrorist interrogations in your mind.
I have to compliment you though, because you finally got an original thought, instead of posting that same stupid list of rightwingers over and over on different videos like you usually do.
Thanks Rufless! So nice of you to notice! Now if only "mainstream" conservatives could come up with some original thought . . . outside of the self-imposed (dumb it down) "What would Reagan/Limbaugh do?" box.
Another original thought, I had you pegged all wrong.
I don't know exactly what your game/angle is on politics, but if you're going to look for conservatives outside of fans of Reagan you're going to end up with like 7 people. He was a great president, and one of the best articulaters, if that's a word, of rightwing politics. He would have balanced the budget too, if he'd had Republican congresses, but he couldn't axe handout programs as much as he wanted to with Demos running things.
As an independent, my biggest problem with Reagan is that he made the lack of fiscal discipline fashionable, acceptable for Republicans. And the "left" (congress) actually spent LESS than he asked for - EVERY year. Reagan laid the template for BIG conservatism. W was the natural conclusion. A credit card wrapped in a flag . . .
Reagan failed in his bid for the presidency in 1968 and 1976.
In 1980, he had the good fortune of running during the Iranian hostage crisis.
As long as the hostages remained in captivity, Mickey Mouse, Stalin, and probably even the Ayatollah would have beaten Carter that year. Hell, my grandmother would have beaten Carter that year, and she wasn't even alive.
Be fair to Reagan though, do you honestly think if he had Republican Congresses 1981-1988, that he would not have severely hacked the welfare state? Everything he stood for was about limiting that. Allegedly he got Democrats to go along with some cuts in exchange for hiking back up some of the tax rates he lowered, but he would have done a lot more with RW congresses. He couldn't push through fiscal discipline on his own, could push through tax cuts and national defense hikes.
Well, just keep in mind, it's not personal & I did vote for the Gip - in '80 anyway. I just think conservatives need to set the bar a LOT higher (my "angle" as you say) as I HAVE seen it higher - at least at an intellectual level (in the decades earlier - albeit briefly). But all the radio/Fox hacks never talk about that. It's all "Reagan" because it's all their audience cares to know/learn. For what it's worth, "R" did control the Senate from '81 to '87. (I know they didn't have the House.)
yah I know they had Senate for a while, if they'd had all three, and Reagan had had his way, big cuts in the welfare state. Instead he raised spending in defense, and couldn't cut spending in handouts, so we had big deficits.
It was under Reagon that the deregulation of banks began, that eventually led to the S&L scandal.
Reagon cut programs for the poor, to PBS (which you probably applaud), and started changing the tax code to favor the rich, even as he loosened the bank regulations that protected the poor from predatory lending. Yep, that sure is some "fiscal discipline" you got there in Reagon, who doubled our national debt after promising to end it.
Reagan couldn't cut anything on his own, only what the Democratic Congress cut he could sign, I wish he had been able to cut all welfare, Medicare, etc by 20%, but he couldn't because he didn't have a Republican Congress. The tax code was not changed to favor the rich it was changed to not severely punish the rich as Democrats had set it up to do before. There was an unbelievably stupid top 70% fed rate before Reagan which he cut down to 28%. Couldn't balance budget, Demos blocked cuts.
So as a matter of fact it comes out that Polanski didn't pay the $500,000 judgment she won against him in '93. So now they turn up the heat to get that money with interest. Get all the goons riled up as cinders. I guess that is where the word incendiary comes from. Most likely he'll wipe his ass on the check and mail it to the L.A. D.A.
you first, me next, ya know she will fight back and profanity will spew, so first give whoopie drugs and alchohol and when she is really defensles slap her and tell her how good it feels.....
Major kudos to Chris Rock, Kirstie Alley, and Jewel for expressing excellently how appallingly wrong it is to support the rapist of a 13 year old girl.
I haven't heard about Roman Polanski before but imo I think this looks fake. Maybe it isn't but sure looks like it to me. If all this footage is true then sure throw him in jail again. Just looks fake to me cause it doesn't look like all the footage belong together.
It is not fake. The fuzzy footage can be found searching youtube for "roman polanski diane sawyer". At around 8:00 in he makes his most damning statements. When Sawyer asks "nobody was hurt?" he qualifies it by saying "at the time" that's what he thought. I did remove that. But later he says Americans are being prudish but I did not use that because he was talking about Natasha Kinski at the time. So yes it was edited but the editing was even-handed, and I didn't use stuff I could have.
I'm wondering what made his dumb ass think he could just walk out of france anytime he wanted ? Didn't he know the rules ? But then agian he probably though 30 years had passed and he had gotten away with his crime this long so he'd just go except his little award in person and feel above the law rather than have them mail the damn thing to him, it's a once in a lifetime gig right ? WRONG !!
I think he just got lazy. then his lawyers here in los angeles tried to get the case dismissed. It was big news, and I guess the District Attorney's office finally moved on the warrant.
Most people don't focus on the one law he definitely broke: taking flight from the US to avoid his charges and scoffing the law for 30 years - I'd say he deserves life just for that. Who would argue that if you don't like the judgment, you get to run away?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Whoopi did NOT support him. This is taken out of context. She simply made her view cohost's stop and state the facts of the case instead of simply spouting off about it emotionally. In fact, watch the show and you'll see that the producers were feeding her the words through her ear piece. It was total ass covering by them so that they would not be setting themselves up for a lawsuit. Later she stated outright that she was not supporting the scumbag. Get your facts straight.
That's a good point. However, in the field even soldiers who have been trained to take orders almost without a second thought are permitted, even encouraged not to follow an illegal order. Saying "it wasn't rape rape," even if it came from her earpiece, is an offense so great that the fact that it came from her lips at all, whatever its origin, is a strong indictment of her presence of mind. Did she also state outright that diminishing what happened was wrong?
The confusion here is that she never said that it wasn't rape. I did not hear that when I watched the program. She merely cleared up the misconceptions about the legal status that were stated by her cohosts. If you can find where she said "it wasn't rape" I would gladly change my view. She never said that. When cohosts were saying that the judge was guilty of misconduct she corrected them via the input she received in her earpiece. Your statement of principle is sound, it just doesn't apply here
"why should i be punished?" bwahaha! thank you mr. besson...and as for the celebrity support for this scumbag...you are dead to us now...except for you whoopie goldberg...you were already dead to us.
Polanski is worst than a pig and Lady Justice needs to stick her sword of justice right up his butt.
Why do people care what these Hollywood jerks say? Honestly, they only makes movies...so what. I think the opinions of brick masons or welders would be more informed and more important.
All Hollywood has ever done (and will continue to do) is to proclaim that we should never, ever feel shame for anything we do.
Defending a child rapist...really? That's pure evil.
Sure, everybody loves cool and hard Jake Geddes is; and loves cynical & crooked book dealer Dean Corso - but when you need a cop to do the dirty hard work that cops do, cleaning up all our human garbage, well, give me Joe Friday and Frank Gannon. Yeah they're square, but sooooo solid.
As for forgetting what "artists" like Polanski have done, I don't think so. I see the drunk jerk, Kanye West, had to cancel his concert tour. Not just one show, or one town - THE ENTIRE TOUR. Ah, justice.
WHAT? You sick freak, you gave multiple glasses of champaign to a 13 year old gir, took photos of her naked, called her mother to tell her that you were going to be a while, gave the girl part of a quaalude, went down on her, penetrated her, then sodomized her. How DARE you say there was "np premiditation."
Missed putting Natalie Portman on the list. I find her to be pretty odd since she trashed the story of Lolita years ago. Then she works with Roman and defends him.
Mark my words, if he was not a Jew, he would not be alive now. Jews are untouchable, simply they have lots of money that let them buy an politician or judge, you white Christians, respond to Jews who rape your children by saying "Bless Israel", good for you and for the Jews. Free yourself from Jews, before you go invading the whole world bringing them freedom and democracy.
cancer19850624 1 month ago
There's a new Polanski movie "Carnage" coming out. I think people need to be reminded of this before they see it.
PaperbackWizard 10 months ago
Comment removed
ERROLCUSTERFLYNN4EVR 10 months ago
Was that a ass whipping room Jack Webb was in with the sound proofing walls...I can think of several former Wall st CEOs that need to be in Polanski seat for molesting America...
stevefromPA2 10 months ago
YEEAAAHHHHHHHH!!! I LOVED THIS!!!
RozitaVideo 1 year ago
Did you see that interview that he did while he was under house arrest? Basically, all he did was whine that the LA prosecutor was out to "get" him.
And in an interview one year after the crime, he didn't think he did anything wrong; declaring "everyone wants to f*ck young girls". Google it and you can find the transcript.
Child molesters are very good at rationalizing what they do. Letting Polanski get away with this only gives other molesters encouragement.
frantic1971 1 second ago
frantic1971 1 year ago
where is the original Polanski interview
zipjok 1 year ago
bulletpeople > '.. may Mr. Polanski have a long and healthy life ..'
"Mister" Polanski? Why such deference (esteem) to a self-confessed pedophile and rapist? Are you lower than that? Seriously doubt he would address you in such an esteem manner.
stewartx5 1 year ago
hE cant be a pedo he doesnt like pre-pubessents.
cymrutroll 5 months ago
@cymrutroll Semantics. He's whatever you call someone who fucks 13 year olds.
CoolerKing37 4 months ago
Fucks 13 year olds? he only fucked ONE.
cymrutroll 4 months ago
@cymrutroll Welsh wanker!! You fucking cunt boyo!!!!!! LOL
DonaId6899 4 months ago
@cymrutroll Ydych chi'n siarad Cymraeg!! I bet you don't!! LOL You fucking illiterate fuckass whore!!
You fucking "coc oen"!! That's Welsh for dickhead!! You fucking shit ass bastard!!
There's nice for you!! LOL
DonaId6899 4 months ago
Brilliant! Thanks for posting!
Polanski knew he would be going to the big house for what he did. He knew that he would be put into a cell with some big guy named Bubba and would be turned into the guy's bitch. Given a taste of his own medicine. So he decided to flee rather than face the consequences of his crime. It is so sick how Hollywood justifies his crime just because he's an "artist".
zooeyhall 1 year ago
It's funny that if it happened in Spain or Vatican no one would say he is a paedophile because the age of consent there is 13yrs and 12yrs old.
gulldarek 1 year ago
I was laughing until you included that idiot pedophile Luc Besson at the end, like he's the honorable one, untarnished, full of integrity. He might not have raped his child bride Maïwenn Le Besco, but when she was pregnant at 16, that certainly puts his words today in the Pot-Calling-Kettle territory.
What he did to Joan of Arc constitutes enough abuse to justifiably put him in the booby hatch for life.
FungusMossGnosis 1 year ago
HIlarious--I think?
aitch3 1 year ago
this video made me stand up and cheer!
kylebakersanangelo 1 year ago
Superb.
10/10
gnash555 1 year ago
too funny!
andie531 1 year ago
A Frenchman who's against child molestering? Wow.
GlengarryGlennBeck 1 year ago
Freakin' brilliant!
yiminnybuck 1 year ago
Hilarious
PrismaticRAYS 1 year ago
Roman Polanski has a new movie out, "The Ghost Writer". I won't be watching it, or any other films of his until he has paid in full for his crime.
PaperbackWizard 1 year ago
You are a genius !
bearriver666 1 year ago
I only wish that a real Joe Friday could've been let loose on Roman Polanski and his hollywood defenders. How can stars--esp stars like Debra Winger,who are parents defend that creepy,morally clueless pervert? At the end of Chinatown,which co-stared Polanski,the little girl goes off to be sexually abused by her grandfather played to creepy good effect by the great John Huston. A happy ending to Polanski. I'm sure.
sleedolfine15 1 year ago 2
"A happy ending to Polanski. I'm sure. " Yes exactly. I'm sure movie directors particularly enjoy making movies about their hobbies.
gcmc2 1 year ago 2
He had a hard time knowing it was wrong??? He got a 13 year old child drunk and got her high then stripped her, raped, and sodomized her. When he was done he sent her home. Then he fled the country to avoid getting raped and sodomized in prison. What a maggot he is and anyone that defends him (Whoppi Goldberg and Debra Winger for example. Who'd have thought two liberal women defending a confessed child molester. Isn't the Hollywierd Cult of Personality great?)
infectedvector 1 year ago 3
comon she lookes like she was 16.. and was pretty hot
JLSsux 1 year ago
@JLSsux LMAO
infectedvector 1 year ago
since you know it wasnt right you should be pay for this you rapist
RijenRijen 2 years ago
13 is not a child and he did not "have sex" with her, he raped her.
stalepieonceagain 2 years ago 2
Yes!! Your Jack Webb videos are appropriate, superiorly edited, and great for a time when there are so many criminals running our country and our media!!! Please, more, more, more!!!! hahaha
SFVAfilms 2 years ago 7
Roman's a scumbag for doing a little girl anally but also because HE RAN *AFTER* HE PLED GUILTY!!! You don't run from US law, you foreign piece of crap, how dare you think you can get away. I hope his cellmate thinks he has a purty mouth....
shimauma42 2 years ago
It is simple in this day and age to rape a woman, and you don't even know you raped her until a day, months, or years later.
A lot of women do not want to take responsibility for having sex, so they say they didn't want to and that the man seduced them into it or they gave "resistance" but he had sex with her anyways . This way they can avoid the "slut" label, and blame the man for the sex.
Geimer had a boyfriend when she fucked Polanski. She cheated on him, that is unless was she "raped."
TheMadStrangler 2 years ago
From what I read, the quaaludes were found in Nicholson's bathroom, they weren't Polanski's, so there was no premeditation; i.e. Polanski intending to use the drug to weaken her resolve.
Geimer also had experience with the drug, knew what the drug was, and took the drug on her volition without encouragement from Polanski because she had a history of abusing the drug before.
TheMadStrangler 2 years ago
Oh yeah, fuck jews.
gracezchen35 2 years ago
I hope the hillbilly from Deliverance is his cellmate.
gracezchen35 2 years ago
So he can teach Roman how to play the banjo?
By the way, I wouldn't want Woody Allen (who married his teenage adopted daughter) to be supporting me if I was Roman.
WilliamRowlett 1 year ago
@WilliamRowlett I actually don't think polanski wouls want anyone supporting him. All those who have only brought more attention to the case. Many younger people here on youtube as well as in the press have only learned of the whole sordid affair recently due to the amount of discussion. He is despised now by ten times as many people. I think it has been a good thing because people are in the modd for demanding justice. If the CA District attorney backpedals there will be a huge outcry.
gcmc2 1 year ago 3
@gcmc2 I was about 16 when the Polanski case happened in LA in 1977 or 78, whenever it was. He was supposed to receive probation but the judge was a flake and Polanski panicked & fled. If this happened today, I doubt he'd receive probation.
WilliamRowlett 1 year ago 2
Exactly. I laugh at some polanski supporters saying he should get a retrial. He must be close to begging folk not to help him any more ! A retrial would expose him to the full force of the law including the penalties in place at the time. As U'd be aware the misconduct of the judge was a bit of a beat up anyway. There was the suggestion that the judge was going to reject the plea agreement but since polanski ran away before sentencing it is a non issue ! It was never more that rumour anyway
gcmc2 1 year ago 2
The only argument the Polanski defenders have which has half a leg to stand on- is, supposed he had served 5 or 10 years for rape and he comes out. What would a rehabilitated Roman look like. He realizes he was wrong, he never does it again, he gets married, has children, works and lives a productive life.
Well, all that happened - without prison, so what purpose would prison serve now. It makes some sense, even though I don't agree with it.
Plampf 2 years ago
@Plampf
it's interesting how people think he changed his life, getting married and kids!
It's because he knew he did something wrong!
& if he didn't re-commit the crime,
should we look at rapists/criminals & give them 3 warnings before jailing them?
He fled, I hope he does it again & someone whose daughter has been raped, catches up with him!
1longname 2 years ago
gracezchen35 and alessiaaa94: If you care to repost those last comments without making fun of the jewish people then I won't delete them.
bulletpeople 2 years ago
first, you don't have read my comment, cause i was not "makin fun"second, have you present what wanna say FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION?, ya probably not cause u are american....
alessiaaa94 2 years ago
@bulletpeople
but Polanski IS a Jew!
TheSunmanho 1 year ago
This man drugged and raped a child, AND pleaded guilty to it. CASE CLOSED. Rot in prison, Roman.
gracezchen35 2 years ago
redneck...
alessiaaa94 2 years ago
Polanski: "I had a hard time ...to persuade myself....that it was wrong!"
Even he admits it himself that what he did was Wrong..with a Capital 'W'!!
Enough said.
witchwild 2 years ago 2
STOP PURITAN HIPOCRISY
a 13 years old could be young or very young, but she's A WOMEN, SHE GAIN PUBERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!
one time girl get MARRIED at that age, and not so long time ago
alessiaaa94 2 years ago
Yes, true, at one time girls got married at 13. And in some cultures today, Africa, Middle East, girls still get married at 13. But who's choice is that? The girl's? Or is it her FATHER's choice to 'marry off his daughter to his fat rich friend'?
A child of 13 wants to play, explore her new world, learn & read & have fun. She's only been in this world 13 yrs!
It's MEN who decide in these cultures that a child 'should become a wife' & thus be used 4 sex w/old men at her tender years.
witchwild 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i have to repeat: 13 YEARS=WOMAN
YOUNG, VERY YOUNG,, BUT WOMEN,this society grow up youngs as child, but they're aldult.
my granma voluntary married my granpa at 14, and at the time was normal and not father's decision.
again, CALL A YOUNG A CHILD IS PURITAN IPOCRISY
alessiaaa94 2 years ago
Let's forget about age for a minute. What if the girl, young or old, says no? What if she asks to be driven home because she does not have a car or a driver's license? Further, what if the man has given her Champagne, which is illegal in the country in which this happened? Also he has given her a drug? Despite all of the things this man has done to her to get her to consent, she still says no, please take me home.
Those are the facts of this case. He is a child molester, and that buys you jail.
bulletpeople 2 years ago 6
WHY IS SHE NOT bothered about prosecuting him then ?
cymrutroll 4 months ago
@alessiaaa94 The age of consent in Spain is 13, as specified by the Spanish Penal Code, Article 181(2). However, if deceit is used in gaining the consent of a minor under 16 years an individual can be charged under Article 183(1) upon parental complaint.
SSuper88 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Women were married in older times at that age because the role of women was relegated to wife, and man as bread winner. When girls reach puberty, they could fall to temptation and have sex, thus producing children out of wedlock which is bad on many levels for a society. So it was better to marry them off.
Today in the age of equality, both sexes pursue lucrative careers, so the girl at 13 will not be married, but she can't have sex either because of the risk of teen pregnancy.
TheMadStrangler 2 years ago
Women were married in older times at that age due to the rule of *men*, not thru choice! All these ridiculous roles (wife, breadwinner) were created by a bunch of *men*-- the women/girls having no say in the matter. Woman's sexuality suppressed. That's how it's been for centuries --since the Divine Feminine was squashed by the Patriarchal church.
Today kids are respected & treated as kids, so 13 year olds, female or male, have 'relationships' with other 13 yr olds, not with 45 yr old men!
witchwild 2 years ago
That's the feminist perspective on human history, which may or may not be true. I would say the issue is much more complex than summarizing that men oppressed women just for the fun of it.
I do not know if it was solely the rule of men as there were female aristocrats, queens, rulers, nobility throughout history that held sway along with men.
The tradition probably held some practical purpose just as only men going to war (which is oppressive to men) held some practical purpose.
TheMadStrangler 2 years ago
You are absolutely correct there. Before the establishment of the church Women were the Authority! Women were worshipped. The role of males were as consorts (to do the bidding of the High Priestess). It was this fear of Female Power that gave birth to the Male Chauvanist mind-set. Bully the Empowered Female into submission.
It worked.
But now all that macho superiority has been exposed for what it is: insecurity, fear...Now the world is learning HERstory, rather than hiStory!
witchwild 2 years ago
Please take these false views to another forum.
Of course, this might just be a parody post. put up to make feminuts look bad.
FrankLJ 2 years ago
Her story? More like HURR STORY
sventoby 2 years ago
I have been a life long admirer of David Lynch.
That just came to an end. I will no longer enjoy
his films and TV series.
drbotanus 2 years ago
Listen to that self centered prick forgive himself.
Hear that folks? If you only rape once and it was 20 years ago
and given you haven't been caught doing it again and hide behind the technicality that you moved to a country where
screwing underage girls is acceptable, Then RAPE is okay.
Who is saying he never did it again?
He DID do it again. But they approve of it in Europe.
drbotanus 2 years ago
There is a real mob mentality around this Polanski case. He should be let go and allowed to return to France where he has lived for more than 30 years without molesting anyone. The case should be dropped in California and everyone go about their business.
Mkundera 2 years ago
Disgust attitude of yours.
dswynne 2 years ago
You are very sick.
drbotanus 2 years ago
I don't know where your personal attack comes from. I am not advocating or dismissing the crime of having relations with a young girl. I just think given the bizarre circumstances of the trial (and the judge who was reprimanded and dismissed); the fact that the victim and her family have long said they want the charges dropped; the fact that Polanski served time and was recommended for release, and has not done this again in 30 years, that we should move on. Reasonable people can disagree.
Mkundera 2 years ago
Polanski didn't 'have relations' with a young girl! He raped a child!.. who said no, who wanted to go home, who was scared! The victim's 'forgiveness' has nothing to do with the case.
He didn't 'serve time' either...40 days in a hospital 4 assessment is not 'time'!
Were he a local plumber who raped a little girl 30 years ago u ppl wud be baying for his blood! I have always adored his work but just cos he's a very talented movie director does not mean he shud be 'excused' for raping a child.
witchwild 2 years ago 2
You go too far, Polanski never confessed nor was he convicted of raping anyone. He made a deal with the court and the judge waffled and was about to go back on his deal (the judge was later removed). I don't approve of Polanski's actions but he has apologized and made restitution, the victim and his family are satisfied (which I believe is important) and he has been a good citizen for 30 years. No one is better off nor is justice served if this man dies in jail.
Mkundera 2 years ago
Non-consensual sex is normally defined as rape, no? When a female says 'no' & the male just goes ahead & has sexual intercourse with her, that is rape.
Because of her age, even if she stripped off all her clothes, danced like Mata Hari & said 'Take me, I'm yours!' Polanski still wud be the 45 year old adult male who should've been responsible for his *own* actions in the company of a 13 yr old child. If she'd been 3 would that have made it 'rape'? Or just 'relations with a very tiny woman'???
witchwild 2 years ago
You act like you want me to defend Polanski and I won't do that: I am on your side when it comes to any 40 something year old man having sex with a young teenager. Where we seem to be talking passed each other is that you do not KNOW what happened nor do I. You throw around the rape word without all the facts and the facts you think you have come from Polanski's plea bargain which was to a lesser offense, and one he made only as part of a deal with an unethical judge.
Mkundera 2 years ago
No..I don't think u are defending Polanski, & I don't want others to think you are defending him. I know u are just talking in legelese & assessing the case from all perspectives.
I'm sorry if I came on too harsh. Nothing worse than a ranter! And I've been reading so many right-wing posts lately, (political) I've turned into a 'ranter' in my style of rhetoric. ;-)
We'll just have to wait & see what happens...
This is a very heated topic, isn't it?
witchwild 2 years ago
I appreciate your comments. And yes, this does seem to be a heated subject. I don't really have a dog in this fight and will be mostly comfortable whatever the outcome. I think I may be somewhat attracted to the Polanski side of the debate only because the vast majority of people are so quickly on the other side. You may enjoy the documentary Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, a pretty balanced accounting of all of this done in 2008. P.S. I feel your pain about the right wing bloggers!:)
Mkundera 2 years ago
"I feel your pain about right wing..!" LOL!
I actually find it really difficult to actually *watch* Polanski becos...you may be surprised to hear...my heart wants 2 go out to him! Were he some Manson (not intended to use that name here, but it came out) then it wud b easier to *watch* his discomfort, his demise etc. But I don't feel comfortable watching him. Maybe a part of me is looking at it from another angle. One has to see every perspective in this life b4 passing judgement..
witchwild 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If it were not for Polanski, the anti-satanic-cult would never started. Satanic Ritual Abuse would have gone unnoticed. Satanic Cults have tried to silence Polanski before - the Charles Manson Family even tried to assasinate him, but only succeeded in murdering his wife, Sharon Tate, and their unborn child. The International Satanist Movement has struck again, framing Polanski for the "statutory rape" of a 13-year old girl. This is a lie. ROMAN POLANSKI IS INNOCENT.
undergroundresistor 2 years ago
I wish he was home when Charlie Manson visited his house.
gracezchen35 2 years ago
They should stick him in the same cell as Manson so he can finish the job.
demon515 2 years ago
He makes my skin crawl. Yuck.
shrumpiedoodles 2 years ago
Great job. Thanks for this!
BarbaraDesignLA 2 years ago
I do hope Polanski is returned to the US and has the opportunity to serve time and be remorseful for what he did.
There is no greater sin than his -- abusing a child sexually will, I hope, earn him a very hot seat for eternity.
Wallikn 2 years ago
"Why should I be punished for having a penchant for young girls," Roman Polanski
"No one was hurt by my actions," Roman Polanski
Ciada91 2 years ago
ahh.. u will burn in hell roman u sick fucker
dodoshlodo 2 years ago
Fully concur with your sentiment behind this video, Polanski is a filthy pedophile; but it might've been keen to delve into the history of Mr. Jack Webb before using his name(as opposed to his character's name on Dragnet) as Roman's nemesis.
JohnnybMean 2 years ago
I know there are 2 biographies and I've read one. I didn't think there was any dirt to be found--poor guy from wrong side of the tracks through hard effort becomes successful radio then TV actor/director/producer. Is there some baggage that you think disqualifies him from lecturing a pedophile?
bulletpeople 2 years ago
Check out the biography-"Just The Facts, Mam.". Besides it clearly illustrating his weasely philandering, and his blatant hypocrisy toward Stimulants-(Nicotine & Alcohol vs. Marijuana); it also details his child abusive ways toward his daughter "Alisa".
JohnnybMean 2 years ago
Good sir you have earned my subscription. :)
ChristainPatriot01 2 years ago
Oh this vid is GREAT !! lmfao
worldwide390 2 years ago
Sexual offending against a child is not a one time event. It invariably involves multiple victims and multiple assaults. A cursory review of the professional literature will demonstrate that.
So, the gutless freak defending itself in this video had far more than the one victim he was charged with. He knows it. His supporters know it. Yet, he's defended anyway. Ya gotta love hollyweird.
Billyothon 2 years ago 4
"I don't understand; why should I be punished for my penchant for young women"?
What a brilliant defense! Every child molester (i.e., rapist) in the world should use the Polanski Defense!
Why should I be punished for my "penchant"?
Uh, the same reason that serial killers are punished for their penchant for murder, and bank robbers are punished for their penchant for robbery?
Thanks for posting this. It's very funny! And indicates how far we've slipped from the time of Dragnet....
OrmEmber 2 years ago 4
Some of the greatest minds in Cinema. And Luc Besson.
kitsch2spacea 2 years ago
We could use somebody like this on tv today, these guys are hilarious. So is this what the non-hippies watched back then?
RuflessRecords 2 years ago 2
The "non-hippies" were around 95% of the population when this Dragnet episode was filmed. Today? The childe molesters and Hippies are running our nation. FRIGHTENING!
sirweldsalot 2 years ago
The "non-hippies" (lol) voted for Nixon TWICE. Then they grew up and voted for W TWICE. We're still paying the price for 1968, however, never in my wildest dreams did I ever think that I would someday look back at Nixon (a joke) as the "good" (lol) Republican president based on the "conservative" clowns that followed.
RonPaulGeorgeRingo 2 years ago
I agree with Fox News Liberal Juan Williams when he said if someone ever does what Polanski did to that girl to his daughter, you better try to get Juan outta jail because: "I'll kill his ass!" Amen Mr. Williams.
Jazmckay 2 years ago
Cool. Mike Huckabee played the video on his show on Sunday, 4 OCT 09. See info for link to the segment.
bulletpeople 2 years ago
child predators should be castrated
cut it off...ALL of it
TheChrisnew 2 years ago
Wow! Jack Webb kicked his Ass but good! Love it!
StinkFingerr 2 years ago
Sure, bring Polanski to justice.
Then, let's bring Dick Cheney and the torturers to justice for their crimes.
RonPaulGeorgeRingo 2 years ago
Have you not seen what real torturers do? Goodness, do some reading. We fight with one hand tied behind our back and do the minimum amount of effective force on the least number of people and you folks will not stop complaining.
bulletpeople 2 years ago
I could use the same twisted "logic" for rapists (violent vs. "passive") and everything in between.
Wrong is wrong.
RonPaulGeorgeRingo 2 years ago
Nice bit of moral equvalency there. So using coercion to get info from terrorists is the same as drugging and raping a 13-year-old? You're one to talk about "twisted 'logic'" when you can't differentiate between an innocent little girl and a hardened jihadist.
BrianBinOR 2 years ago
I didn't say "coercion". You did.
I said "torture". Look it up.
RonPaulGeorgeRingo 2 years ago
I know what you said, I chose a more accurate term. Y're the one who seems to be unable to distinguish real, sadistic torture from the interrogation techniques in question. Such hyperbole cheapens the impact of true torture -- just as your insistence on changing the subject to your own political obsession cheapens the discussion of what a sleazbag Polanski is.
BrianBinOR 2 years ago
Nice diversion attempt from the Polanksi rape case...it looks like it worked pretty well too. ADD/tangent issues evident, as is usually the case with liberals...Polanski case discussion brings up Cheney and terrorist interrogations in your mind.
I have to compliment you though, because you finally got an original thought, instead of posting that same stupid list of rightwingers over and over on different videos like you usually do.
RuflessRecords 2 years ago
Thanks Rufless! So nice of you to notice! Now if only "mainstream" conservatives could come up with some original thought . . . outside of the self-imposed (dumb it down) "What would Reagan/Limbaugh do?" box.
RonPaulGeorgeRingo 2 years ago
Another original thought, I had you pegged all wrong.
I don't know exactly what your game/angle is on politics, but if you're going to look for conservatives outside of fans of Reagan you're going to end up with like 7 people. He was a great president, and one of the best articulaters, if that's a word, of rightwing politics. He would have balanced the budget too, if he'd had Republican congresses, but he couldn't axe handout programs as much as he wanted to with Demos running things.
RuflessRecords 2 years ago
As an independent, my biggest problem with Reagan is that he made the lack of fiscal discipline fashionable, acceptable for Republicans. And the "left" (congress) actually spent LESS than he asked for - EVERY year. Reagan laid the template for BIG conservatism. W was the natural conclusion. A credit card wrapped in a flag . . .
RonPaulGeorgeRingo 2 years ago
Reagan: Timing . . . and Context
Reagan failed in his bid for the presidency in 1968 and 1976.
In 1980, he had the good fortune of running during the Iranian hostage crisis.
As long as the hostages remained in captivity, Mickey Mouse, Stalin, and probably even the Ayatollah would have beaten Carter that year. Hell, my grandmother would have beaten Carter that year, and she wasn't even alive.
The age of red ink "conservatism" had begun.
RonPaulGeorgeRingo 2 years ago
Be fair to Reagan though, do you honestly think if he had Republican Congresses 1981-1988, that he would not have severely hacked the welfare state? Everything he stood for was about limiting that. Allegedly he got Democrats to go along with some cuts in exchange for hiking back up some of the tax rates he lowered, but he would have done a lot more with RW congresses. He couldn't push through fiscal discipline on his own, could push through tax cuts and national defense hikes.
RuflessRecords 2 years ago
Well, just keep in mind, it's not personal & I did vote for the Gip - in '80 anyway. I just think conservatives need to set the bar a LOT higher (my "angle" as you say) as I HAVE seen it higher - at least at an intellectual level (in the decades earlier - albeit briefly). But all the radio/Fox hacks never talk about that. It's all "Reagan" because it's all their audience cares to know/learn. For what it's worth, "R" did control the Senate from '81 to '87. (I know they didn't have the House.)
RonPaulGeorgeRingo 2 years ago
yah I know they had Senate for a while, if they'd had all three, and Reagan had had his way, big cuts in the welfare state. Instead he raised spending in defense, and couldn't cut spending in handouts, so we had big deficits.
RuflessRecords 2 years ago
RuflessRecords, are you kidding me??
It was under Reagon that the deregulation of banks began, that eventually led to the S&L scandal.
Reagon cut programs for the poor, to PBS (which you probably applaud), and started changing the tax code to favor the rich, even as he loosened the bank regulations that protected the poor from predatory lending. Yep, that sure is some "fiscal discipline" you got there in Reagon, who doubled our national debt after promising to end it.
OrmEmber 2 years ago
Reagan couldn't cut anything on his own, only what the Democratic Congress cut he could sign, I wish he had been able to cut all welfare, Medicare, etc by 20%, but he couldn't because he didn't have a Republican Congress. The tax code was not changed to favor the rich it was changed to not severely punish the rich as Democrats had set it up to do before. There was an unbelievably stupid top 70% fed rate before Reagan which he cut down to 28%. Couldn't balance budget, Demos blocked cuts.
RuflessRecords 2 years ago
You got it bassackwards.
brettwrb 2 years ago
That is great video!
600racer 2 years ago
HAHAHAHA!!!
sunlightangel87 2 years ago
Personally, I think the charges should be dismissed, but this was VERY funny.
jamesjeffreypaul 2 years ago
This guy and anyone who supports him is GARBAGE!
THEREALKING40 2 years ago 2
G-D Bless Jack Webb and his character of Joe Friday
kennydale 2 years ago
Brilliant
herself311 2 years ago
rofl+
LETHLSS 2 years ago
So as a matter of fact it comes out that Polanski didn't pay the $500,000 judgment she won against him in '93. So now they turn up the heat to get that money with interest. Get all the goons riled up as cinders. I guess that is where the word incendiary comes from. Most likely he'll wipe his ass on the check and mail it to the L.A. D.A.
malkooth 2 years ago
good video, roman is disgusting and my opinion of whoopie is not much higher.
shitzulovey 2 years ago 6
If someone were to walk up her and slap the s---t out of her would she say it was OK because it wasn't a b--ch b--ch slap?
OrionCA1 2 years ago 3
you first, me next, ya know she will fight back and profanity will spew, so first give whoopie drugs and alchohol and when she is really defensles slap her and tell her how good it feels.....
shitzulovey 2 years ago
Major kudos to Chris Rock, Kirstie Alley, and Jewel for expressing excellently how appallingly wrong it is to support the rapist of a 13 year old girl.
bulletpeople 2 years ago
I haven't heard about Roman Polanski before but imo I think this looks fake. Maybe it isn't but sure looks like it to me. If all this footage is true then sure throw him in jail again. Just looks fake to me cause it doesn't look like all the footage belong together.
DiceAdept 2 years ago
It is not fake. The fuzzy footage can be found searching youtube for "roman polanski diane sawyer". At around 8:00 in he makes his most damning statements. When Sawyer asks "nobody was hurt?" he qualifies it by saying "at the time" that's what he thought. I did remove that. But later he says Americans are being prudish but I did not use that because he was talking about Natasha Kinski at the time. So yes it was edited but the editing was even-handed, and I didn't use stuff I could have.
bulletpeople 2 years ago
Nice work on this video. Good old Joe Friday, count on him to give it to ya straight
TopMJW 2 years ago
Comment removed
TopMJW 2 years ago
I'm wondering what made his dumb ass think he could just walk out of france anytime he wanted ? Didn't he know the rules ? But then agian he probably though 30 years had passed and he had gotten away with his crime this long so he'd just go except his little award in person and feel above the law rather than have them mail the damn thing to him, it's a once in a lifetime gig right ? WRONG !!
indez23 2 years ago 4
I think he just got lazy. then his lawyers here in los angeles tried to get the case dismissed. It was big news, and I guess the District Attorney's office finally moved on the warrant.
Lesson: Let sleeping dogs lie.
jx14aby 2 years ago
Comment removed
indez23 2 years ago
Most people don't focus on the one law he definitely broke: taking flight from the US to avoid his charges and scoffing the law for 30 years - I'd say he deserves life just for that. Who would argue that if you don't like the judgment, you get to run away?
DocWyoming 2 years ago 4
Rich people.
google Andrew Luster for a laugh at what money can buy you.
jx14aby 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Whoopi did NOT support him. This is taken out of context. She simply made her view cohost's stop and state the facts of the case instead of simply spouting off about it emotionally. In fact, watch the show and you'll see that the producers were feeding her the words through her ear piece. It was total ass covering by them so that they would not be setting themselves up for a lawsuit. Later she stated outright that she was not supporting the scumbag. Get your facts straight.
Philinspaces 2 years ago
That's a good point. However, in the field even soldiers who have been trained to take orders almost without a second thought are permitted, even encouraged not to follow an illegal order. Saying "it wasn't rape rape," even if it came from her earpiece, is an offense so great that the fact that it came from her lips at all, whatever its origin, is a strong indictment of her presence of mind. Did she also state outright that diminishing what happened was wrong?
bulletpeople 2 years ago
The confusion here is that she never said that it wasn't rape. I did not hear that when I watched the program. She merely cleared up the misconceptions about the legal status that were stated by her cohosts. If you can find where she said "it wasn't rape" I would gladly change my view. She never said that. When cohosts were saying that the judge was guilty of misconduct she corrected them via the input she received in her earpiece. Your statement of principle is sound, it just doesn't apply here
Philinspaces 2 years ago
Lemme see...spontaneous rape is better than premeditated rape? I guess it's not rape-rape.
roarthwo 2 years ago 2
maybe it's rape rapity rape rape, rape rape
DocWyoming 2 years ago 7
stinking perverted slime
pimadave 2 years ago
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
itachi705 2 years ago
Hey, give him timed served, read the girls testimony for the WORLD TO HEAR, at the very least.
Hey, Joe the plumber, a Catholic Priest ( a mohter Teresa) would do time.
chewbaca1989 2 years ago
School Michael Moore, too.
chewbaca1989 2 years ago
you can't, unless you're at peace with lying
DocWyoming 2 years ago 4
"why should i be punished?" bwahaha! thank you mr. besson...and as for the celebrity support for this scumbag...you are dead to us now...except for you whoopie goldberg...you were already dead to us.
sonderkommando2 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i only have 1 video but subscribe to me anyway.i'm trying to be the first person to have the most subscribers with just 1 video.
subscribe just for laughs.
Melo15xSTAT1 2 years ago
very good. BTW - throw polanski in jail.
ShutUpDad 2 years ago
Ya know, these guys are so square -- but so right on!
Polanski pled guity. Do the time, scumbag.
Brutarius 2 years ago
Good for Besson!
GooseHinson 2 years ago
No premeditation?!?!?!
You give her quaaludes, and there's no premeditation?!?!!
ToddonCapeCod 2 years ago
I think David LECHERMAN should be next in the HOT seat.
NoCensorshipYT 2 years ago 3
Will they put him in with Charles Manson?
Ron01104 2 years ago
Polanski is worst than a pig and Lady Justice needs to stick her sword of justice right up his butt.
Why do people care what these Hollywood jerks say? Honestly, they only makes movies...so what. I think the opinions of brick masons or welders would be more informed and more important.
All Hollywood has ever done (and will continue to do) is to proclaim that we should never, ever feel shame for anything we do.
Defending a child rapist...really? That's pure evil.
bughead152 2 years ago 5
Lady Justice or Leroy his 300lb cellmate?
Csmallo 2 years ago
Excellent vid. Polanski should be castrated and then left to rot in prison.
thafoofa 2 years ago 3
Sure, everybody loves cool and hard Jake Geddes is; and loves cynical & crooked book dealer Dean Corso - but when you need a cop to do the dirty hard work that cops do, cleaning up all our human garbage, well, give me Joe Friday and Frank Gannon. Yeah they're square, but sooooo solid.
As for forgetting what "artists" like Polanski have done, I don't think so. I see the drunk jerk, Kanye West, had to cancel his concert tour. Not just one show, or one town - THE ENTIRE TOUR. Ah, justice.
jum1801 2 years ago 4
Problem is Luc Besson makes shitty movies.
malkooth 2 years ago
Whoa there! Have you SEEN "Taken"? He didn't direct but he wrote that.
bulletpeople 2 years ago
I'll watch Taken but the other Besson movies are moving in the wrong direction.
malkooth 2 years ago
When the French can claim the moral high ground, it's time to acknowledge that one might have been just a tad wrong.
And Polanski wasn't just "a tad wrong". What he did was COMPLETELY wrong.
newfrontiers 2 years ago 3
"there was no premiditation..."
WHAT? You sick freak, you gave multiple glasses of champaign to a 13 year old gir, took photos of her naked, called her mother to tell her that you were going to be a while, gave the girl part of a quaalude, went down on her, penetrated her, then sodomized her. How DARE you say there was "np premiditation."
Sick, sick bastard.
protocol66 2 years ago 6
mr beson rules great clip polanski has to do his time
larrypdwc 2 years ago 2
Good for Luc Besson. I'm going to go watch the Fifth Element on Blu-ray right now just for that!
Yakko77 2 years ago 4
Outstanding job.
A couple of my favorite movie lines from all time come from the original 1954 "Dragnet" movie:
(Jack Web upon coming onto the scene of a shotgun murder)
"The first shot cut him the half. The second made him a crowd."
dottyonbody 2 years ago
Missed putting Natalie Portman on the list. I find her to be pretty odd since she trashed the story of Lolita years ago. Then she works with Roman and defends him.
notohous 2 years ago 3
Agree to not use imagery of the victim.
Would have be much more effective to paste Polanski's head into those shots.
HayateAce 2 years ago
Sorry you didn't like it. I was trying to make the point to the celebrities "this could have been your loved one."
bulletpeople 2 years ago
How about a buddy movie with Polanski and Garry Glitter?
RobGoth100 2 years ago
May Woody Allen get his own encounter w/ Webb!
jimmmmie 2 years ago 3
What this guy did is horrific.
SarahConnorRocks 2 years ago 5
DUHHH DUH-DUH DUH....
(face of suspect appears onscreen looking towards audience)
The suspect was remanded to the custody of the state and is awaiting trial in the detention facility.
DUHHH DUH-DUH DUH DUHHHN....
vllmer 2 years ago
Yeah, but he didn't molest-molest her.
njimko23 2 years ago 2