Roman Polanski Case

Change in Times?

The particular article that I retrieved online from the New York Times is explaining the role that the culture of the 1970’s played in Mr. Polanski’s prosecution. “But the soft deal was also in tune with the more permissive times, when sex with the under age was often winked at, especially among entertainment world sophisticates”. This quote taken from the article helps to point out the lack of boundaries within this particular time period; also showing how this activity was socially condoned. Even the authorities did not necessarily view Polanski as a sexual assailant; instead they viewed him as “ a normally responsible person who had shown terrible judgment by having sex with a very young, but sophisticated girl”. The article represents Polanski’s charge, as not being taken very seriously by the one’s who were involved in prosecuting him. A judge who was scolding Polanski was also sure to include how she looked older than her actual age and how she was in fact sexually experienced. Polanski’s probation officer seemed to show pity for Polanski as well by writing a 28-page report portraying his sympathy for him and his behavior. It was then signed by a deputy who agreed that Polanski did not deserve further jail time, “the present offense appears to have been spontaneous and an exercise of poor judgment by the defendant.” A finger was also pointed at the victim’s mother for allowing her daughter to spend time with Polanski. Believe it or not Geimer, the rape victim, was also blamed for this act. During her grand jury testimony she was questioned about her sexual history, even though she had explained that she did not wish to comply with Polanski to have sex with her and said no numerous times.

It seems as though the article is showing how the blame for Geimer’s rape has been doled out to everyone but Polanski. The article is showing that the time period of the 1970’s and its social structures and moral codes should be enough to excuse Polanski for the rape that he committed against Samantha Geimer. If the case was that of statutory rape where Samantha Geimer was compliant with Polanski than I may be able to see how the time period could possibly serve to distort Polanski’s decision on this sexual act, however that is not the case. Not only was Samantha Geimer drugged by Polanski, she said no multiple times. The article is failing to point that out. I feel that the article is one sided and does not portray the perspective of Samantha Geimer, which is hard to believe considering she is a thirteen year old rape victim.