Polanski victim Samantha Gailey Grand Jury Testimony Reenacted Part 2/2

**Warning: This content is graphic and is not appropriate for users under 18 years old. This content is taken word-for-word from the transcript of Samantha Gailey's grand jury testimony (viewable at
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0610081polanski1.html). Although this content is graphic, it is important for people to understand exactly what Roman Polanski pleaded guilty to on 8/8/77. This content is shocking, but it is not gratuitous.

The staff of Me & Vinnie on Sirius XM reads grand jury testimony of Samantha Gailey given on 3/24/77.

Vinnie Politan is the host of Me & Vinnie on Sirius XM Monday - Friday 6 AM to Noon EST Sirius 108/XM139 More at twitter.com/MeAndVinnie.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Me and Vinnie
• Me
• and
• Vinnie
• Vinnie Politan
• Sirius
• XM
• Polanski
• Gailey
• Roman Polanski
• Samantha Gailey
• The Smoking Gun

[asm6ekyu]

that's sooo boring to hear. Cheap sound effects...lol If you want the facts .. you would be rather incline to search on the net for the blog named " Roman Polanski: The Ballad of Contradictions "

[DJCW]

@spike1138 I was referring to the comments made by mimigeorgesn and F1brawfa.

But in your attempt to rationalise a warped and contorted mind you forgot about the most important parts of this sordid tale.

The victims and that is who I emphasise with.

As for as the perpetrator is concerned nothing short of death would appeal more to me. They have destroyed the life of a mere child forcefully, brutally and sometimes fatally causing complete family meltdowns.

How can justice appease that?

[mimigeorgesm]

@LadyAnura she had sex before..well well she is no child anymore

[spike1138]

@DJCW No one's condoning it, but equally no-one's organising a witch-hunt or passing judgement based on their instincts as a parent in taking precedence over the facts of the case. You think all child molesters are sick freaks who should be kept away from decent people, castrated and painfully killed and I agree with you (at least about the first part). I'm sure you'd murder anyone you thought abused your own children and I wouldn't stop you. But isn't it important to show that he's guilty 1st?

[spike1138]

@LadyAnura Incidentally, I don't myself believe that she was a slut by any stretch of the imagingation I harshly condemn who would say anything of the kind, but I equally don't think he's a "monster" or a "predator" or a pedophile or a child molester either and medical opinnion is with me on this. Most people's sexuality develops ages 12-15 and it's not thought abnormal to be attracted to people your own age. If you really think it's abnomal, try typing "Barely legal" into Google.

[spike1138]

@LadyAnura I completely agree with you that it's not okay, but that's one of the ironies of this case - had he been convicted for Rape of a Minor , the maximum jail term was 15-20years. It was a misdemeanor to have consensual sex with someone 14-16 or a felony if age gap is more than 3 years. Her boyfriend was 17 and she was 2 weeks off of 14, which makes the boyfriend guilty of the same felony and the same penalty were her Mom or a teacher to allege they had had sex consensually - it's farcical

[spike1138]

@LadyAnura They did, and he never denied having sex with her, he only denied raping her, something the foresnics not only fail to confirm but actually contradict - over the course of what seemed to have been a good few hours of sex (both kinds) in different rooms in the house, when the girl was examined, the medical report states that no trace of blood and not a single tear or injury was found on her, whichthe Doctor noted as being inconsistent. Rapes with no blood or tears are unheard of.

[spike1138]

@LadyAnura They did, and he never denied having sex with her, he only denied raping her, something the foresnics not only fail to confirm but actually contradict - over the course of what seemed to have been a good few hours of sex (both kinds) in different rooms in the house, when the girl was examined, the medical report states that no trace of blood and not a single tear or injury was found on her, whichthe Doctor noted as being inconsistent. Rapes with no blood or tears are unheard of.

[spike1138]

@LadyAnura They did, and he never denied having sex with her, he only denied raping her, something which the foresnics not only fail to confirm but actually contradict - over the course of what seemed to have been a good few hours of sex (both kinds) in different rooms in the house, when the girl was examined, the medical report states that no trace of blood and not a single tear or injury was found on her, whichthe Doctor noted as being inconsistent. Rapes with no blood or tears are unheard of.

[LadyAnura]

@F1brawfa "It's not Roman's fault the girl was a slut" - Are you SERIOUS??? So if a "slut" gets raped, it's "okay"? How on earth do you know she was a "slut"? She had a BOYFRIEND. They had had SEX. You're just making shit up because you want to protect a pedophile!