CBC: Mr. Roman Polanski OUT Of Jail

a bullshit religious "crime".


:cuckoo:




Two weeks after Polanski plied her with Champagne and a Quaalude, Samantha Gailey appeared before an L.A. grand jury and recalled Polanski's predatory behavior in a Mulholland Canyon home owned by Jack Nicholson.

The teenager's troubling--and contemporaneous--account of her abuse at Polanski's hands begins with her posing twice for topless photos that the director said were for French Vogue. The girl then told prosecutors how Polanski directed her to, "Take off your underwear" and enter the Jacuzzi, where he photographed her naked. Soon, the director, who was then 43, joined her in the hot tub. He also wasn't wearing any clothes and, according to Gailey's testimony, wrapped his hands around the child's waist.

The girl testified that she left the Jacuzzi and entered a bedroom in Nicholson's home, where Polanski sat down beside her and kissed the teen, despite her demands that he "keep away." According to Gailey, Polanski then performed a sex act on her and later "started to have intercourse with me." At one point, according to Gailey's testimony, Polanski asked the 13-year-old if she was "on the pill," and "When did you last have your period?" Polanski then asked her, Gailey recalled, "Would you want me to go in through your back?" before he "put his penis in my butt." Asked why she did not more forcefully resist Polanski, the teenager told Deputy D.A. Roger Gunson, "Because I was afraid of him."

Following his indictment on various sex charges, Polanski agreed to a plea deal that spared him prison time (he had spent about 45 days in jail during a court-ordered psychiatric evaluation). But when it seemed that a Superior Court judge might not honor the deal--and sentence Polanski to prison--the director fled the country.

Below you'll find links to Gailey's grand jury testimony, the heart of which runs 36 pages (we've broken the transcript into two 18-page sections for easier navigation).
The Smoking Gun: Archive
 
Key word: FEMI-NAZI

So persecuting a man and pretending that a plea agreement - which was obtained FRAUDENTLY - is valid may be OK to you but those of us that care for due process of law reject it.

.:eek:


He confessed to plying a 13 year old child with drink and drugs. He chose to plead it out - he was welcome to due process and then skipped because the judge decided to impose a harsher sentence than had been agreed upon.

If being pleased that this scumbag rapist gets his ass hauled back to face his punishment.

Who hit you with the jackass stick?

Key word: FEMI-NAZI

So persecuting a man and pretending that a plea agreement - which was obtained FRAUDENTLY - is valid may be OK to you but those of us that care for due process of law reject it.


.

Except that Confusedatious, the NAMBLA wannabe pervert piece of shit that he is, lied about the "fraudulently" obtained plea.

There was nothing fraudulent in how it was obtained whatsoever.

Confusedatious is just a liar. What do you expect from a pedophile piece of shit like him?
 
Last edited:
Yes, it is criminal behavior. To say otherwise reveals the delusional emotional world that you inhabit.

No it is not criminal behavior. To say otherwise reveals that your are a sheeple.

.

yes, it is criminal behavior. to say otherwise reveals you're a predator, shorteyes.

Hummmmmmmmm

You want to have sex with a 13 y/o so bad that you can taste . You are engaging in REACTION FORMATION:

In psychoanalytic theory, reaction formation is a defensive process (defense mechanism) in which anxiety-producing or unacceptable emotions and impulses are mastered by exaggeration (hypertrophy) of the directly opposing tendency.[1][2]

.
 
No it is not criminal behavior. To say otherwise reveals that your are a sheeple.

.

yes, it is criminal behavior. to say otherwise reveals you're a predator, shorteyes.

Hummmmmmmmm

You want to have sex with a 13 y/o so bad that you can taste . You are engaging in REACTION FORMATION:

In psychoanalytic theory, reaction formation is a defensive process (defense mechanism) in which anxiety-producing or unacceptable emotions and impulses are mastered by exaggeration (hypertrophy) of the directly opposing tendency.[1][2]

.

uh, no.

sorry, shorteyes, everybody isn't like you.
 
a bullshit religious "crime".


:cuckoo:




Two weeks after Polanski plied her with Champagne and a Quaalude, Samantha Gailey appeared before an L.A. grand jury and recalled Polanski's predatory behavior in a Mulholland Canyon home owned by Jack Nicholson.

The teenager's troubling--and contemporaneous--account of her abuse at Polanski's hands begins with her posing twice for topless photos that the director said were for French Vogue. The girl then told prosecutors how Polanski directed her to, "Take off your underwear" and enter the Jacuzzi, where he photographed her naked. Soon, the director, who was then 43, joined her in the hot tub. He also wasn't wearing any clothes and, according to Gailey's testimony, wrapped his hands around the child's waist.

The girl testified that she left the Jacuzzi and entered a bedroom in Nicholson's home, where Polanski sat down beside her and kissed the teen, despite her demands that he "keep away." According to Gailey, Polanski then performed a sex act on her and later "started to have intercourse with me." At one point, according to Gailey's testimony, Polanski asked the 13-year-old if she was "on the pill," and "When did you last have your period?" Polanski then asked her, Gailey recalled, "Would you want me to go in through your back?" before he "put his penis in my butt." Asked why she did not more forcefully resist Polanski, the teenager told Deputy D.A. Roger Gunson, "Because I was afraid of him."

Following his indictment on various sex charges, Polanski agreed to a plea deal that spared him prison time (he had spent about 45 days in jail during a court-ordered psychiatric evaluation). But when it seemed that a Superior Court judge might not honor the deal--and sentence Polanski to prison--the director fled the country.

Below you'll find links to Gailey's grand jury testimony, the heart of which runs 36 pages (we've broken the transcript into two 18-page sections for easier navigation).
The Smoking Gun: Archive

The Smoking Gun piece is WRONG on the claim that it EVER "appeared" that the judge "might not honor the deal" AND wrong on the part that CLAIMED that the plea deal would "spare him jail time." The plea deal AS RECORDED AND ENTERED and fully reflected in the transcript never promised such an outcome. Instead, as the transcript of the plea itself proves, the "deal" left OPEN the possibility that the judge MIGHT at his sole discretion give the pedophile Polanski jail time -- and it was under THAT specific open sentencing option that Polanski voluntarily pleaded guilty.
 
Looks like everyone at USMB is a femi-nazi.

Except the poster that thinks getting thirteen year olds drunk and raping them is acceptable behavior.

:clap2:
 
Fewer things more despicable than a shorteyes predator. I wonder if any number of "burkes" have dedicated themselves to such predators.
 
yes, it is criminal behavior. to say otherwise reveals you're a predator, shorteyes.

Hummmmmmmmm

You want to have sex with a 13 y/o so bad that you can taste . You are engaging in REACTION FORMATION:

In psychoanalytic theory, reaction formation is a defensive process (defense mechanism) in which anxiety-producing or unacceptable emotions and impulses are mastered by exaggeration (hypertrophy) of the directly opposing tendency.[1][2]

.


.:rolleyes:
uh, no.

sorry, shorteyes, everybody isn't like you.

Let's get serious here.


Are you mad because Roman had sex with a 13 y/o in LA while you have to fly all the way to Thailand?!?!?!?!?

.
 
Hummmmmmmmm

You want to have sex with a 13 y/o so bad that you can taste . You are engaging in REACTION FORMATION:

In psychoanalytic theory, reaction formation is a defensive process (defense mechanism) in which anxiety-producing or unacceptable emotions and impulses are mastered by exaggeration (hypertrophy) of the directly opposing tendency.[1][2]

.


.:rolleyes:
uh, no.

sorry, shorteyes, everybody isn't like you.

Let's get serious here.


Are you mad because Roman had sex with a 13 y/o in LA while you have to fly all the way to Thailand?!?!?!?!?

.

Awwww POOR CONT!!!! The truth hurts.. :lol:
 
Looks like everyone at USMB is a femi-nazi.

No there are some homosexuals who believe that Roman should have been doing them instead. Would that be you?


Except the poster that thinks getting thirteen year olds drunk and raping them is acceptable behavior.

:clap2:

That's pure fiction and you know it.

.

No it's not and we all know you are just lying. You just reecently claimed that what that fucking piece of ratshit Polanski did was not "criminal." Well, dipshit, of COURSE it was criminal. And it is also utterly unacceptable. You nevertheless persist in attempting (however ineffectually) to "defend" it.

You are a sick twisted piece of shit.
 
Yeah I know.. HE is the one having the reaction formation.. OBVIOUSLY..

ROFLMAO I deducted reputation points from him after that shit. Lets ignore him. He is too much of a sociopathic predator for anyone to be able to talk any sense into him.

In psychiatric terms this patient is "untreatable", I would think!!!!
 
So persecuting a man and pretending that a plea agreement - which was obtained FRAUDENTLY - is valid may be OK to you but those of us who care for due process of law reject it.
Gotta agree the plea has fraud written all over it
The fraud here seems, as is typical, to follow the money; Roman Polanski's money.
Polanski knew the case was lost.
Polanski knew he had sodomized the girl.
Polanski entered a plea hoping to avoid jail time.
Polanski then fled the country to avoid the jail time when his first ploy to escape punishment failed.
Only now that Polanski requires the medical expertise found only in countries with extradition treaties with the US does he get arrested.

Yeah I can see the fraudulent intent in that original plea.
 
So persecuting a man and pretending that a plea agreement - which was obtained FRAUDENTLY - is valid may be OK to you but those of us who care for due process of law reject it.
Gotta agree the plea has fraud written all over it
The fraud here seems, as is typical, to follow the money; Roman Polanski's money.
Polanski knew the case was lost.
Polanski knew he had sodomized the girl.
Polanski entered a plea hoping to avoid jail time.
Polanski then fled the country to avoid the jail time when his first ploy to escape punishment failed.
Only now that Polanski requires the medical expertise found only in countries with extradition treaties with the US does he get arrested.

Yeah I can see the fraudulent intent in that original plea.

Excuse Mr. Sucker:

The Prosecutor knew that Ms Geimer had lied on her resume by stating that her age was 14.

The Prosecutor also understood that Ms Geimer had a reputation of being a Lolita so he felt a need to enhance the indictment by alleging "drugging" and coached her to testify before the grand jury. The strategy was to force Mr. Polanski to plead guilty without going to trial.

The grand jury testimony was never subjected to cross examination so it is useless.

The plea was induced by a promise that he could withdraw the plea if the judge did not accept probation as a sentence.

.
 
So persecuting a man and pretending that a plea agreement - which was obtained FRAUDENTLY - is valid may be OK to you but those of us who care for due process of law reject it.
Gotta agree the plea has fraud written all over it
The fraud here seems, as is typical, to follow the money; Roman Polanski's money.
Polanski knew the case was lost.
Polanski knew he had sodomized the girl.
Polanski entered a plea hoping to avoid jail time.
Polanski then fled the country to avoid the jail time when his first ploy to escape punishment failed.
Only now that Polanski requires the medical expertise found only in countries with extradition treaties with the US does he get arrested.

Yeah I can see the fraudulent intent in that original plea.

Excuse Mr. Sucker:

There is no excuse for you fuckface.

The Prosecutor knew that Ms Geimer had lied on her resume by stating that her age was 14.

The child lied on a resume! Well, gee. I guess drugging her and forcing sex on her against her will and over her protests is ok then. You fucking skell. It makes no difference what the prosecutor knew, either, asslicker. The fucking criminal Polanski said, under oath during his fucking plea allocution, that he KNEW her age was only 13. So try again you hack pedophile piece of shit.

The Prosecutor also understood that Ms Geimer had a reputation of being a Lolita so he felt a need to enhance the indictment by alleging "drugging" and coached her to testify before the grand jury. The strategy was to force Mr. Polanski to plead guilty without going to trial.

The grand jury testimony was never subjected to cross examination so it is useless.

The plea was induced by a promise that he could withdraw the plea if the judge did not accept probation as a sentence.

.

All your would-be defenses of the pedophile Polanski are deseperate and beyond weak. Like you, they are completely defective. Polanski is a fucking child-rapist and a fucking criminal sick fuck bastard. You are like him in so many respects. Fuck off shitbrain.
 
The plea was induced by a promise that he could withdraw the plea if the judge did not accept probation as a sentence.

IF what you say is the truth, then Polanski could have insisted on a trial and IF, as you claim Polanski had a defense, then he would have had no need to run.
He did run. That fact is undisputed.

As for whether he "knew" she was 13 instead of 14 - Statutory rape does not include a "but she looked 18 to me" clause, and 14 is STILL statutory rape. Even IF it was "consensual" it was still a crime.

The Facts are clear - Polanski ran because he did not want to face punishment for his crime.
 
First, this happened back in the 70's. One thing that I would like to know is what exactly were the laws back then, as many changes have taken place since then.

Now, if this was something that had just happened in the past few years, then yeah, I'd be at the head of the pack calling for his skull. However.............there are some extenuating circumstances............

First, there is the fact that he has been in exile from the US for 32 years. Then, there is the fact that he has ALREADY SETTLED WITH THE VICTIM AND SHE HAS SINCE PUT THAT EXPERIENCE BEHIND HER. She's stated this publicly several times. She's also stated that she's not interested in seeing him behind bars as she feels he regrets what he's done, and has forgiven him.

Then, there is also the questions about the judge who handled the case and his dirty dealings in trying to screw Polanski to the wall.

Now..........I'm probably more violently opposed to sexual predators of children than most, had some of that shit happen to me from 8 - 12.

But........think about this..........if he'd gone to real jail back then, he'd be out already.

She's forgiven him, so I think the court system should let it go as well.

Our court systems would be better served right now prosecuting the YFZ ranch and Warren Jeff's followers.
 

Forum List

Back
Top