Judge to Polanski: Come back to Cali!
A Superior Court judge in LA told Roman Polanski yesterday he could challenge his original sentencing judge’s behavior—if he surrendered first. Salon just published a piece of mine on the ruling here.
7 Comments so far
Leave a reply
Thank you, thank you, and thank you. I am always amazed that Roman Polanski, a child rapist, is rarely called out as such. He may have been, and continue to be, a great director, but he is also a child rapist. Let him bear the consequences of his actions.
I read the Salon article. You can’t go far wrong peddling sanctimony in blaring headlines in the US market, even to an enlightened readership, and even with a tired old, old story that’s been out there for over 30 years (yaaawn).
You mention that the other party was entirely magnanimous after a civil settlement. Seems a neutral or prejudicial point to me. How about before the civil settlement? What is the relationship between receiving unspecified sums of cash and espousing a magnanimous attitudes, in your view?
Finally, no worries presumably, about having (entirely coincidentally of course but not entirely to your professional disadvantage), the same name as this Bill Wyman (from Wiki):
“Wyman, although moderate in his use of alcohol and drugs, has stated that he became “girl mad” as a psychological crutch.[9] Maxim magazine ranked Wyman at number 10 on its “Living Sex Legends” list, as he is reputed to have had sex with over 1000 women.[10] It is believed and stated by many sources that Wyman’s conquest tally passed 2000 women throughout his 31-year tenure as bassist of the Rolling Stones.
In 1989 Wyman married the eighteen-year-old Mandy Smith, whom he had been dating since she was thirteen; their relationship was the subject of considerable media attention. The marriage ended in 1991, and in 1993 he married Suzanne Accosta. They are still married and have three children”
- Why don’t you write an article denouncing that guy? Or better still, why not stick to writing about arts and let the US legal system look after itself. It is very well capable of doing so.
[…] Shyakutorimushi: That’s a cheap […]
I was just about to post something pointing out the irony in the shared name.
When confronted with his peccadilloes, ‘Stone Alone’ Bill Wyman apologetically told one of the British tabs “I like the nice things in life, especially the naughty ones!” His Mickness seem like a monk by comparison.
Mandy would call him “uncle Bill”. Her mother, herself a former lover of Wyman’s, acted as procurer.
What’s w/ the ad hominem attacks on a writer b/c of a shared name?! Meta-analysis is not done on the basis of shared surname. There must be a rhetorical term for it, but the best I can come up with is “puerile”. And trying to smear an author through his very common surname is not “irony”.
The article never claimed to be an overview of older male celebrities who rape children. It’s a review about a film & the current twists in the Polanski case. Some other interesting article might indeed ask whether the same sexual mores apply to rock star vs. Hollywood director behavior. But that’s not what this brief article set out to do. Use your brains before you go throwing Stones about (that’s a touch of irony, in case you missed it).
Well, you know, Bill, it ain’t cheap if it’s true. OK, the comment about you capitalizing on the same name is a grade school comment. But, really, the irony of you having the same name as a guy who makes Roman look positively monk-ish is too much to overlook.
Just found your article through another blog, and wanted to thank you for writing it. I fully support justice for Polanski, as long as he’s willing to come to Los Angeles County and face it. No matter what it may be.
The problem with much of the media coverage of the case is that ordinarily hard-bitten legal reporters are writing as though they were entertainment/celebrity reporters.