In 1977, award-winning director Roman Po- lanski pleaded guilty to drugging and raping a 13-year-old girl in California. Instead of serv- ing his time, Polanski fled to France where he could not be extradited for his crime; that is, until he travelled to Switzerland to where U.S. authorities were waiting for him. But with the crime taking place over 30 years ago and the victim saying she wants the charges dropped, is it still worth it to jail the director of films like Rosemary’s Baby, Chinatown and The Pianist? ...and justice for none By Angela Espinoza e should never serve as an excuse to be held Fe: the law. When famous celebrities are charged with serious crimes, they usually manage to get away with light sentences, ranging from “community service” to a few days in jail. The Polanski case, however, is one of those rare instances where fame did not stand in the way of the (American) judicial system. I am of course speaking of highly acclaimed French director Roman Polanski. Polanski seems to be one of those people born into tragedy. Born in Paris in 1933 to Polish-Jewish parents, he lived in France until 1936 when the Polanski family moved to Krakow. Their life was disrupted in 1939 when Nazi Germany invaded Poland. They soon found themselves living in a Jewish ghetto. Roman managed to escape, but both his parents were sent off to concentration camps. His mother died in the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp, but his father survived the Mauthausen-Gusen camp. In January 1968, Polanski married rising starlet Sharon Tate. However, tragedy was to strike again when on August 9, 1969, Tate—who had been pregnant for eight-and-a-half months—was brutally murdered with several others in her California home by the Manson family. Polanski’s recent extradition to the United States stems from a rape charge dating back to the 1970s. On March 10, 1977, the alleged victim, Samantha Geimer, who was 13 years old at the time, had agreed to a private photo shoot in Jack Nicholson’s Los Angeles home. According to Geimer, Polanski drugged her with champagne and methaqualone, a sedative. Despite her resistance, Polanski followed through with his intentions. A court hearing followed soon after, and to avoid several major charges he pleaded guilty in order to be given a single charge: “engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.” But instead of serving out his term, Polanski fled to France, where he has been living since, avoiding countries that might have an extradition treaty with the U.S. However, on September 26, after thirty-two years on the lam, Polanski was arrested in Zurich, Switzerland, where he was to receive his lifetime achievement award. As brilliant and gifted as Polanski is, rape is a horrible crime, and the man should’ve served some level of punishment. His victim should have felt that justice had been served. Over the last decade, Samantha Geimer has spoken out about the incident, surprisingly, out of forgiveness. Geimer has stated numerous times that despite what occurred, she feels Polanski has learned his lesson, and that he regrets what happened as much as she does. Geimer has also defended her choice to forgive him by stating that she wishes the entire incident would just be dropped. For over these last thirty years, the media has constantly reminded her of a past she wants to forget. She’s attempted to move on with her life, even going as far as changing her surname (originally Gailey). But for all her efforts, she continues to be the victim of a stalking media. In fact, just last year, following the release of a documentary entitled Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, Geimer herself took this opportunity and went to see the current judge in charge of the case, Laurence J. Rittenband (seeing as the original judge is now deceased), and pleaded to have her case dropped from the court system, in hopes of finally living a normal life. Her request was denied, with Rittenband demanding that justice be served. Separate the art from the artist in the Polanski case By Kris Watrich oman Polanski was arrested in Switzerland last R= after over 30 years on the run from California uthorities. This was the first in a series of surprises surrounding an incident that happened in the 1970s. First, I found it extremely surprising that Roman Polanski was finally being extradited to the USA. I was not even born when his trial was held in the late “70s. He has been on the run for 30 years now so he must have been doing something right. So, my only real connection to the man is my enjoyment of his movies. Second, I found the number of people, especially influential people involved in the entertainment industry, who want nothing of consequence to happen to this man very sinister and surprising. Outcry has been voiced by the Hollywood elite including Harvey Weinstein and many others by producing t-shirts that read “Free Roman” or “I ‘heart’ Roman.” I would like to explicitly state that I think Roman Polanski is a great artist. I have enjoyed his movies and respect his vision for what he is trying to accomplish in his chosen medium. However, I think that his creations have no relationship with his personal life. His movies and work should not be condemned for past action in his life. And (this is a big “and’) his movies and artistic credibility should not give him any sort of free pass out of the consequences of his real life actions. I understand that many of the Hollywood elite are close personal friends with the man, seem to enjoy his company and obviously want no harm to come to him. However, one small fact remains... when he was 43 he drugged and had sex with a 13-year-old girl orally, vaginally and anally. The question has been repeatedly been brought up about whether the act was consensual, but that is probably difficult to decipher (especially while being force-fed champagne and Quaaludes). The girl in question has also forgiven him and stated that she feels that he has been punished enough. She has also stated that she no longer wants to be in the spotlight for what happened. Whoopie Goldberg recently went on record saying that it was not “rape-rape.” While it may not have been rape in the classic sense of a predator in a dark alley forcing himself on someone just trying to get home, it was still rape in the sense that a 43 year old gave champagne and Quaaludes (a sedative and muscle relaxant) to a 13- year-old girl and then proceeded to penetrate every single orifice that she was born with. Yes, I still think he is a great director, but never while watching one his movies have I thought to myself, “My goodness, this movie is so good that he should be allowed to have sex with small children!” Finally, like everyone else who has done something wrong (like having sex with a 13 year old), he needs to man up and face justice. Although he has been “on the run” in Europe he has hardly been slumming it. For the most part, Europe is not a very difficult place to live; people rave about it for a reason. The man has been working and living freely and aside from being confined to Europe none of his rights and freedoms have been affected in the least. How is this punishment enough? Anyone who supports him and feels that he should not be tried needs to take a look in the mirror and ask themselves if anal sex with a 13 year old is okay, and perhaps add champagne and Quaaludes to their shopping list this weekend.