The Truth about Roman Polanski and Samantha Gaily

Continued:

Samantha said that Roman didn't direct her how to pose for the photos, The grand jury asked her many times did Mr Polanski told you how to pose, she said no.

The photos of Samantha in the Jacuzi, was all smiles. nobody forced her to smile.

Samantha admitted she didn't fight (when the grand jury asked her).

No one wants to hear the truth. They want to crucify Roman. Meanwhile, Jack Nicholson, David Bowie, Robert Plant, Jimmy Page and Mick Jagger, all of whom had (allegedly) sex with 14 year old girls, are worshiped.

13 is really young!

R2 Exactly, They are condemning Roman for a thing (every one in Hollywood did) PLUS, the girl was willing and experienced and Not a child.

R2 Don't forget Elvis.

I will post Roman Polanski's side of the story, which is very close to what Samantha said in her testimony.

Your sick

Your sick

She may have come on to him but an adult should be the one to stop the sex. I cane on to older guys as a young teen and now in my 30s I have more respect for the ones who turned me away. I was pissed at the time though.

So he gave a troubled teen girl drugs and slept with her. That’s still illegal

R9 I agree with you, But Hollywood celebrities (especially in the 1960s , 1970s) were not as strong as one might think. They had sex with minors including groupies all the time. That was the norm these days...Elvis, Mick Jagger, Charlie Chaplin, David Bowie and many others.

She was two weeks away from 14. Why no one condemns Elvis for dating 14 YO Priscilla?! Elvis is/was considered God to the world.

Is Trump gonna pardon him? I wouldn't be surprised.

I can’t live knowing there is a Roman Polanski troll! WTF?

These are all signs of having been previously groomed for sexual exploitation, not adult sophistication. FFS.

The OP is the stupid troll who keeps posting about the "innocence" of people like Roman Polanski and Woody Allen. Poor troll.

[quote]Samantha was a willing participant (she knows it). She was 13 YO two weeks away from 14, Not a child.

LOL - an idiot men's rights activist?

By definition at 13 or even 14 years old, she CANNOT be a willing participant. By your logic, Drew Barrymore who started drinking when she was 11 would also be a willing participant.

The ability to provide informed consent is predicated on having sufficient mental capacity to do so. Society has decided that the age of consent at which someone is sufficiently aware of the consequences and potential physical and emotional impact is between 16-18 depending on the state and other factors. As anyone who has ever dealt with high school people knows, there is a wide gulf between an 8th grader and junior in high school in terms of maturity and, most importantly, ability to assess risks and consequences.

How do you wake up in ther morning and feel good about yourself when you are a Roman Polanski troll? Nice purpose in life!

[R10] She encouraged him.

After reading her court testimony in 1977, I understand how she behaves today. She knows what she did and that she was a willing participant.

R18 What's wrong with defending Roman Polanski?!! because it's not politically correct these days!

You absolute piece of shit pedo apologist, OP. I hate cancel culture but you're one of the reasons it exists. I suppose all those little choir boys were just choking for some priest cock as well. Go and die in a grease fire.

"She encouraged him.

After reading her court testimony in 1977, I understand how she behaves today. She knows what she did and that she was a willing participant."

Oh, give it a rest, you pathetic troll. Go suck Polanski's withered dingus if you love him so much.

R21 R22 Are you that angry at people for loving Elvis, Charlie Chaplin, David Bowie??1

Samantha Geimer has some words for the warriors hating on Roman Polanski:

"For all those who insult, degrade and use me, who tweet about my statutory rape as if it is porn, excited to use vulgar words, excited by your hatred. Congratulations to Roman. I am sorry for us both that the level of self serving corruption in the LA Courts seems never ending"

"the only burden I bear is that you would hate for me, I do not wish that."

" it really wasn't horrific"

"the only thing horrific was the conduct of Judge Rittenband, David Wells & former DA Steve Cooley. If anyone cares for my abuse, Roman confessed, served time & apologized."

From Samantha's book:

"I made the decision to just let him do it."

“I felt certain I could have made him stop.”

“It’s just sex. He doesn’t want to hurt me. (…) We are both playing our parts.”

“He wasn’t hurting me, and he wasn’t forceful or mean or anything like that.”

"if you were anywhere from thirteen to forty-five in the 1970s – you could understand (…) there was something considered generally positive about erotic experience then, even in the absence of anything beyond the sex itself. The idea was that emotional growth came about through an expanded sexuality..."

In the end, whether she loves, hates, supports, or reviles him is irrelevant.

Having sex with a 13 year old girl, no matter her experience, drug use, or any other condition or situation is statutory rape. There are no exemptions for girls who seem more mature, who entice or seduce, or who may claim as an adult to know what she was doing.

It is illegal because a 13 year old has been deemed to have insufficient capacity to consent - therefore, statutory rape. He knew it, he plead guilty to it, and he fled the jurisdiction because of it.

If anything, his "crime" is in having fled the jurisdiction to evade punishment - which would have been LONG completed DECADES ago, except for HIS choice to flee. He's on the run because HE chose to flee after pleading guilty.

Here's an excerpt from an article in The Guardian about her book. It explains why she took the Quaalude, drank the champagne, did not fight him off, did what she was told. It explains it quite well:

"It is a frank, convincing book, more shocking in its straightforwardness and apparent good humour than a more obviously manipulative account. That day in Los Angeles in 1977 when Polanski picked her up in his car for a photo shoot he said he was doing for French Vogue, she wasn't wearing a bra, she writes, because she was built like a child (she still wore vests). She was eager to please, because she was a child. She did as she was told – took the Quaalude, drank the champagne, got into the Jacuzzi – because she was a child. She took her clothes off when he asked, because she was a child and, without even factoring in his celebrity, went along with his demands in drugged acquiescence, because he was an adult and she was a child. At one point she asked to go home, but her request was denied. "I didn't want to have sex," says Geimer with brittle levity. "But apparently that is what was going to happen."

R27 Samantha testified in 1977 that She used to drink Alcohol (even was drunk before) and took Quaalude when she was 10 or 11 YO. Also, she was the one who said she was thirsty and asked for a drink. In her book, understandably, Samantha changed some details to whitewash her actions.

Roman detailing the events in his book in 1983 is very close to Samantha testimony in 1977 which I believe was more truthful than her book 40 years after the incident.

"Samantha testified in 1977 that She used to drink Alcohol (even was drunk before) and took Quaalude when she was 10 or 11 YO. Also, she was the one who said she was thirsty and asked for a drink. In her book, understandably, Samantha changed some details to whitewash her actions.

Roman detailing the events in his book in 1983 is very close to Samantha testimony in 1977 which I believe was more truthful than her book 40 years after the incident."

So what if she took drugs before? That didn't give him just cause to rape her.

So what if she drank alcohol before? That didn't give him just cause to rape her.

So she was thirsty and asked for a drink? Why didn't he give her soda pop instead of champagne? Because he wanted to get her drunk/stoned and rape her.

You say the 13 year old child "changed from details to whitewash her actions?" You're moronic. She was a 13 year old child. That's all anybody needs to know.

As for what "Roman" said in his memoir...well, I read it and it's a total self-serving piece of garbage. He portrays the 13 year old child as a not very responsive, but willing sexual partner, a sexually experienced little vixen who knew the score. That's what ALL rapists say; that the victim "wanted it." In this case it didn't matter if she "wanted it" or not; she was 13. A child. He drugged and got a child drunk so he could fuck her. If you admire somebody like that and defend him...well, you need some very serious help.

Someone, riddle me this, seriously.

How did a 13 year old know who the fuck Roman Polanski was? How did these people, meaning Roman and the girl’s “parents”, know this man? Sure, he was famous in a way that most directors aren’t, but for the most tragic of reasons.

Was Samantha running drugs for her parents? I just don’t understand how this 13 year old ended up in a Jacuzzi, with one of the most famous men of that time, having booze and popping ludes, in a Jacuzzi, and topless, with this guy????

At 14, I was convinced I would remain a virgin until Jesus introduced me to my husband, and I wore Laura Ashley skirts with tiny little flowers printed on them, and pretty lace tops, with frills, and ribbons in my hair. Not kidding. I was just so freakin’ innocent back then. I even had a training bra!

I just cannot imagine hanging out with some little twerp in his 30s, and popping some ludes with a white wine chaser, and waking up a few hours later, wondering where my bikini top was, and why my rectum was suddenly making itself known to me, especially when attempting to permit take a poop?

The entire thing truly is bizarre as fuck. 17, 18 years old? I can totally see this going down with the cute stoner who air drummed to Neil Pert in Chemistry, but Roman fucking Polanski? Did she even know who this man was, and what events had recently unfolded in his life?

Was this a set up? Or did Roman but this child’s services from her mother? And was her mother just sitting in the driveway, or was she driving around the block a hundred times, REALLY slowly?

Please explain how this came to be. That information will give me some “perspective”.

TIA!

R29 It wasn't rape. Samantha wasn't a child, she was two weeks away from 14 YO. She was sexually experienced (aside from the drugs an alcohol) and had sex twice before Roman.

Samantha knew what she was doing, she admitted she was a willing participant. I'm NOT politically correct but I'm saying the Truth.

"It wasn't rape. Samantha wasn't a child, she was two weeks away from 14 YO. She was sexually experienced (aside from the drugs an alcohol) and had sex twice before Roman.

Samantha knew what she was doing, she admitted she was a willing participant. I'm NOT politically correct but I'm saying the Truth."

You're not "saying the truth", you're just a moronic troll. I mean, saying age 13 is not a child....you're just a troll trying to get a rise out of people. Poor troll.

R30 Samantha wasn't a naive innocent 13/14YO girl like the usual 13/14 YO. Her mother was a wannabe actress, her step father was an editor for a magazine called "Marijuana monthly". Her sister's boyfriend was a young director who knew a friend of Roman called Henry. Samantha admitted freely that her family were stoners, drugs and Alcohol were the norm.

Samantha's mother ran into Roman in a party, ( She knew through Roman's friend that he was looking for teenage girls to photograph for French Vogue magazine) and told him about her daughter, if he could meet her for an audition.

Roman visited the family, the mother asked him to find her an agent, and her boyfriend Bob asked him if Jack Nicholson would endorse his magazine "Marijuana monthly" and do an interview for it.

Samantha was a precocious sexually active teenage, she admitted she had sex twice with her boyfriend, drank and took drugs and bragged about it. When she left with Roman for photo sessions, she bragged to him about taking Quaalude and that her sister was called "Quaalude freak" and her mother took it as well. She told Roman that she wanted her photos to be like a playboy cover she admired and showed him the magazine when they returned home. Samantha had a bruise on her neck, and when Roman asked her about it, she laughed and said it was love bite.

One thing followed the other, Samantha knew they were getting into and by her own admission, she said:

"I made the decision to just let him do it."

“I felt certain I could have made him stop.”

“It’s just sex. He doesn’t want to hurt me. (…) We are both playing our parts.”

“He wasn’t hurting me, and he wasn’t forceful or mean or anything like that.”

"if you were anywhere from thirteen to forty-five in the 1970s – you could understand (…) there was something considered generally positive about erotic experience then, even in the absence of anything beyond the sex itself. The idea was that emotional growth came about through an expanded sexuality..."

What Roman did was WRONG, but it was usual at this time and culture for celebrities, but it wasn't child rape, Samantha was willing and consenting. young sexually active teenage very close to 14.

R33 here, Also R30, I forgot to add that Samantha was already modelling and had ambition to be an actress.

Continued:

Samantha was already modelling and had strong ambitions to be an actress and star like Brooke Shields and Jodie Foster.

She bragged to Roman that she first had sex when she was 8 years old which surprised the very liberal Roman.

Samantha testified when asked many times by the grand jury, if Roman directed her poses or told her how to pose. She said No. If you see the pictures, (which she strangely used in her book and publicity), her poses were seductive, and even the jacuzzi photos, were all smiles.

When Anjelica Houston came into the house and interrupted them , Samantha said she could have told her if she wanted, but she said she just continued with Roman.

"What Roman did was WRONG, but it was usual at this time and culture for celebrities, but it wasn't child rape, Samantha was willing and consenting. young sexually active teenage very close to 14."

No matter what she was, she was 13. And she didn't "consent" she went along with it; not the same thing. She was 13 and he was in his forties; not many 13 year olds can fend off the advances of a middle aged man.

And if she didn't consider it rape she wouldn't have sued him.

It was rape.

Polanski is a child rapist.

And you're a retard.

R36 Repeat that to yourself if that's what makes you sleep at night. Hahaaaa

R37, seems to me you're the one repeating to yourself, over and over, ".she was sexually active...she was two weeks away from fourteen...precocious sexually active teenage...she encouraged him...was a willing participant...not a child..." You sound like a broken record. You're pitiful. Haw haw haw!

R38 And your broken record is "She was 13, She was a child, It was rape" While the woman herself doesn't agree on any of that and asking all the hating trolls (on her behalf) to STFU

Samanthas own word (aka my broken record):

samgeimer: I was examined in the emergency room that night, and I had no injuries, regardless of your opinions on anal sex. Victims have a right to their own experiences. It is unkind to ask a victim to be more damaged then they are for your own satisfaction. I was a sexually active teenager, not a child, and just for the record, it was 3 weeks before my 14th birthday which really does not fit into the definition of pedophilia. You can’t substitute your feelings for my actual experience."

Samantha Geimer's message to all the hateful trolls:

Samantha Geimer Defends Roman Polanski : I was a sexually active teenager, Not a child

Literally nothing you posted matters, she was a child and could not consent or fully understand what was going on. Having been abused before, having had alcohol, quaaludes, or whatever means absolutely nothing.

R41 I respect your opinion.

She's morphed into Betty Broderick.

Roman Polanski keeps speaking the truth:

SPIEGEL: It was in Nicholson's house in Los Angeles where the next event that shaped your life took its course.

Polanski: Hmm.

SPIEGEL: Samantha Geimer, who you sexually abused in Nicholson's house when she was 13, has just written her autobiography. Much of the book is about you.

Polanski: I'm quite sure that it's probably not how I remember it.

SPIEGEL: Have you read the book?

Polanski: No. But I know about it, of course.

SPIEGEL: Given the circumstances, she speaks very kindly of you.

Polanski: She does?

SPIEGEL: We met with Geimer recently. She holds no grudges against you. But you know that, of course.

Polanski: Yes, I know that. All I can say is that I'm truly sorry about what's happened to her in all these years, and how she was dragged through the media. I always tried to keep her name out of things until it all spread out. I don't think that you will hear more about this from me now. I'll read the book when it comes out here in France.

SPIEGEL: You wrote a letter to Geimer in 2009 and finally apologized to her.

Polanski: Because I had seen her on TV. It was important to me to finally see her.

SPIEGEL: Couldn't you have apologized earlier than 32 years after the incident?

Polanski: There was no reason.

SPIEGEL: No?

Polanski: We all just tried to forget about it. I'm not going to talk about it.

SPIEGEL: Do you perhaps take a different view of the abuse of a 13-year-old today, now that you have a 20-year-old daughter yourself?

Polanski: Look, it was many years after the incident that I had my own daughter. It has now been more than 35 years. Would you say that I've been on probation long enough? If you were my probation officer, would you say that it's okay now?

SPIEGEL: Perhaps that's what one would say.

Polanski: There's your answer.

From Samantha's behavior toward Roman, it shows that she knows that she was willing and knew what she was doing. She feels guilty about ruining RP's life.

[quote] She was two weeks away from 14. Why no one condemns Elvis for dating 14 YO Priscilla?!

Plenty of people have condemned Elvis for that. Also, whether true or not, Priscilla maintains that she and Elvis did not have sex until they were married, by which time she was an adult.

R46 " Priscilla maintains that she and Elvis did not have sex until they were married, by which time she was an adult."

LMAO

[quote] She feels guilty about ruining RP's life.

He ruined his own life by fucking a 13-year-old and then running away to France instead of facing the consequences (which probably wouldn't have been that severe).

R48 The experienced 13 YO girl (very close to 14 YO) was consenting.

How many times do you need to be told that a 13-year-old can't consent?

R46 What would anyone expect Priscilla to say really ?? destroys her cash cow?!!!

Anyone with a functioning brain, knows the deal. It's just people like to pretend that nothing happens as long as Cilla didn't confess.

R50 13/14 YO teenage are Not retards.

The age of consent in France is 14 YO (Which Samantha was 2 weeks away) Are they allowing retards to take decisions for themselves in France. I know it was in America but Are American girls more mentally challenged than Europeans?! Maybe

[quote] [R46] What would anyone expect Priscilla to say really ?? destroys her cash cow?!!!

r51, I agree that her story is risible; nonetheless, it's what she says and probably one reason there wasn't more outrage over her young age when they began dating. (Well, that and the fact that a 24-year-old dating a 14-year-old and eventually marrying her, while questionable, is less skeevy than a guy in his 40s fucking a drunk and high 13-year-old at a party.)

[quote] [R50] 13/14 YO teenage are Not retards.

No, but they are well below the age of consent in California, then and now. And even France has begun to reexamine its traditionally relaxed views on sex between adults and teens, and the current age of consent there is 15, not 14.

R54 At the time it was 14 YO in France. It was culturally acceptable in Europe, That's where Roman came from.

Oh well, Americans are more mentally slow and challenged than Europeans!

Even Samantha said many times that she didn't understand the reason why Roman was going to Jail for what happened, she wondered why this didn't happen when she had sex before. She didn't forgive her mother for ,many years for calling the police that night. She said that the media/court dragging was what hurt her Not what Roman did.

Tatum O'Neal said that she was 14 YO when she seduced an older stuntman in England and had sex for the first time. These things happened and (still happens).

And her life has turned out so well, r57.

R58 Tatum's problems were not because she first had sex at 14. Come on.

Samantha's quote from her book:

"if you were anywhere from thirteen to forty-five in the 1970s – you could understand (…) there was something considered generally positive about erotic experience then, even in the absence of anything beyond the sex itself. The idea was that emotional growth came about through an expanded sexuality..."

[quote] [R58] Tatum's problems were not because she first had sex at 14. Come on.

Of course that wasn't the only or main reason for her problems but it was part and parcel of the shitty, exploitative environment she was raised in.

[quote] [R54] At the time it was 14 YO in France.

Nope. At the time France did not have an age of consent, but did consider children "sexual minors" until age 15.

[quote] It was culturally acceptable in Europe, That's where Roman came from.

It wasn't really. France was unique among European countries in having no age of consent and treating intergenerational sex as though it were just as much fun for the teen as for the 40-year-old. In any case, Polanski lived in CA, where it was illegal, and he knew that, regardless of where he came from.

[quote] Oh well, Americans are more mentally slow and challenged than Europeans!

Not what it's about and again, even France has begun to rethink its attitude toward middle-aged adults who have sex with kids and teens.

Polanski was just into fucking little girls. Girls under 16. Samantha Whats-her-name wasn't the only one, but she was probably one of the youngest ones. One of his more famous conquests was Nastassja Kinski. In 1976, when Kinski was aged 15, she was Polanski's lover. He was 43 at the time. Perhaps ashamed and embarrassed, she many years later denied an affair, saying , "There was a flirtation. There could have been a seduction, but there was not. He had respect for me." I don't think anybody believes THAT. In Polanski's book he talks about their relationship, and it was not a platonic one. Before she denied an affair she once was quoted as saying Polanski was a much better director than a lover.

Polanski was just a Hollywood perv who liked fucking underage girls. He thought he was doing them a favor. What a scumbag.

Paedophiles are into pre-pubescents, not teenagers. it irks me that the word gets tossed around without thinking about what it really means. the girl herself said she wasn't traumatized by Roman and doesn't want it pursued. I don't get the fake public outrage after so long. i think if it were some anonymous dude who'd fled 30 years ago people wouldn't care as much but because he's rich and famous there's an added degree of resentment about how the rich and famous get treated differently.

Samantha Geimer : Roman Polanski is Not a pedophile, He's a Fine person

Surprisingly, when I ask if she hates Polanski Sam shakes her head.

“No, not at all,” she says. “ He seems like a fine person. I think his daughter is amazing. I hope his family’s happy. I never hated him. I hated a lot of people – somehow he’s not on the top of that list, I hope he’s well.”

Do you believe it was premeditated?

No. I’m sure that there were plenty of teenage girls happy to have sex with him. I was trying to act like I was 21. ‘Sure give me a pill’ (the Quaalude – JOT). He decided, ‘She looks willing. Let me test that out’.

Polanski gave a version of events in his memoir published in 1984. How did you react to that?

I took exception to it. It’s just unkind. It wasn’t wrong or inaccurate so much as that he portrayed my family like we were low class. I didn’t want to have sex with him – he may not have remembered that, but it’s the truth. But it was more the way he talked about my Mom and my stepfather and where we lived.

He also doesn’t mention in it that you told him ‘no’.

I said, ‘No’. But it came out more like (weakly), then it was like, ‘I guess we’re having sex.

Was it painful?

No. None of it was. None of it was as bad as people make it seem.

Were you emotional or crying?

No. After I got in the car, I cried a little bit. But during it, it was just somebody having sex with me.. It wasn’t mean or horrible. It’s not like people want to make it. He wanted me to enjoy. So, it wasn’t like the type of experience that people feel like it should’ve been. I wasn’t resisting. I’m sure he thought I was probably 90 percent cool with it.

Is Polanski a paedophile?

I don’t think so. I looked up the definition: pre-pubescent. That’s children. That’s sick. Like, five year olds, eight year old, ten year old, 12 years old. Children who are children. That is a really serious messed up thing. If somebody’s doing that they’re sick. Maybe somebody’s creepy and they go after teenage girls, and it’s shitty and it’s wrong, but it’s not paedophilia. Don’t throw in 17-year-olds, and me. I don’t think we should throw people in there for the sensation of saying that word. It takes away from the actual crime. There’s child traffickers out there. Let’s not pretend that we’re hunting down paedophiles by calling Roman Polanski one. Let’s hunt down paedophiles.

For people who don’t know the background, the judge initially put Polanski behind bars to have him assessed for ‘psychosis’. A deal was then struck, but the judge reneged on it and started talking about locking him up and throwing away the key?

He admitted what he’d done, he’d said he was sorry – maybe you can give him probation or counselling? We were all scared. We were all victim of this judge behaving bizarrely. So, he (Polanski) went home to France, which I would’ve done too under the circumstances. Nobody knew what the judge was going to do. What if he sentenced Roman to 50 years and he died the next day? I was glad he (Polanski) left. I was relieved he left the country.

Have you ever watched his films?

(Laughs) Don’t laugh at me. The Fearless Vampire Killers was my favourite movie as a young person. I have it. I saw it on TV as a child. If I had known that that was him when I met him, I would’ve been like, ‘That’s the best movie I ever saw. It’s scary, yet it’s funny. It’s brilliant’. But I didn’t realise that until years later and then it was like, ‘Oh my God! I can’t believe I didn’t know that was him and Sharon Tate, and I’d never put it together’. I like The Ninth Gate. I know people don’t like that. I didn’t like Chinatown. I didn’t like Rosemary’s Baby. I didn’t like Tess. His movies are sad and dark

Quentin Tarantino, who is making a movie about the Manson murders, landed in hot water when stuff he said about Polanski on the Howard Stern Show 15 years ago, resurfaced. “It was statutory rape… he had sex with a minor. That’s not rape,” he said. He has since apologised?

He called and then wrote an apology, which was nice. He was just trying to be controversial on the Howard Stern Show. I asked about the new movie and he said it was not like it sounds, so I was relieved. And we both enjoyed Roman’s The Fearless Vampire Killers when we were young. We had a good chat. No hard feelings from me. I have listened to all kinds of terrible and untrue things about my mother and I, since I was 13, so I have a pretty thick skin and a good sense of humour.

Some Hollywood stars like Whoopi Goldberg said it wasn’t “rape rape”.?

I laughed. It was like, ‘Oh God! You can’t say that. She’s going to get shit’. But I knew what she meant. She meant it wasn’t a violent (rape) like the way I thought about it when it happened, like, ‘That can’t be rape! That wasn’t violent or brutal’. Technically, yes, it’s rape. Legally, yes, it’s rape. I think by the standards of those days, the fact that I really didn’t resist, if I was a year older, it would’ve been different. Rape back then was like violent and hurtful. You’d think of that as somebody just pressured you. Times are different now. But she meant, ‘It’s not like he’s a monster’ (laughs). I understood that. I didn’t take offence.

There are others who have claimed they were raped by Polanski?

But when you have to put up a website, imetromanpolanski.com to get a few teenage girls to come out and say, ‘He had sex with me. I was 16’. ‘I was 15’. I’m the only one he raped. We went to court. I proved it. A lot of them don’t even say they had sex, they make these vague like, ‘He victimised me’ or, ‘He abused me’. What does ‘victimised me’ mean? Did he rape you or not? So, there’s no details. I always figured that he probably had sex with lots of teenage girls. I don’t think that he denies that he did.

Would you say he’s as bad as Harvey Weinstein?

No. Someone wrote an article comparing the two – it was really offensive. From what I hear, Harvey Weinstein was systematically harassing, manipulating, like having people followed with private investigators, paying them off, and making them sign agreements. Like, that’s a whole different thing. That’s predatory behaviour. That’s somebody who’s using their power to hurt and intimidate people. That’s just far beyond Roman making his mistakes and having sex with girls who’re too young. If somebody feels really hurt by him, I don’t mean to disregard that they feel really hurt by Roman. But Weinstein – wow! That seems way more serious, like years and years of bad behaviour. He seems like a really bad person and I don’t think Roman’s a really bad person.

In short, Samantha admits the following (from the above interview):

She acted like 21 YO, saying to him (sure, give me pill).

She didn't resist.

Roman thought she was cool with it.

Sex for her wasn't traumatizing and Roman didn't hurt her

Samantha admits that Roman book wasn't wrong but she's only pissed off about how he described her family life style as low class.

She think Roman is a fine person

She doesn't consider him pedo because she wasn't pre - pubescent.

She was happy and relieved when she fled the country and escaping prison.

She wasn't upset with Whoopi' rape rape comment because she knew and understood what she meant

She watches his movies regularly even though she's not a fan of his work.

R13 Trump won’t pardon Polanski, not because of his crime, but because PolanskI wasn’t born in America

R9, what would have been so bad if something had taken place?

R70 here. I should qualify that my question was based on my own desire to be with men from like 10 years old on.

"Samantha Geimer : Roman Polanski is Not a pedophile, He's a Fine person."

Oh go FUCK yourself in the ASS, troll. And by the way, if Samantha Whats-her-face thinks Roman Polanski is "a fine person" than that is indeed irrefutable proof that she's a bonehead.

Samantha seems totally brainless. I don't think she has any daughters, but if someone said to her "if a 43 year old man wanted to fuck your 13 year old daughter would you be ok with that?" she'd probably say something like "I guess so...if they both wanted it. 13 year old girls need freedom and independence...if my little girl wanted sex with an older guy, who am I to say no to that?" Yes, I think she really would say something that astonishingly stupid.

R72 Why are you trashing me? Samantha is the one who said these words, From her interview at R65 R66 R67 R68

R73 I agree.

"Why are you trashing me?"

Because you're a dipshit troll.

R76 You mean Samantha? because she's the one who made these statements about Roman.

No, I mean YOU, R77. You're a sad, lonely little troll who keeps repeating what "Samantha" said "about Roman." Since Samantha is mentally challenged, what she says doesn't count for much. SInce he got her drunk and stones and plugged her holes when she was a little girl, her kind words towards him indicate she's quite a dim bulb. "Roman" is perv rapist. "Samantha" is a nitwit. End of story.

R78 I take Samantha's words about her experience with Roman over a hysterical twit like you.

R79, you and "Samantha" have shit for brains.

Brace yourselves for Roman's Polanski side of the story about what happened (from his book "Roman" in 1984). BTW, For those who say Roman's story is false. Samantha said Roman's account was Not wrong or inaccurate but she was only pissed off at him portraying her family life style as low class.

I'm gonna post it soon.

R81 REALLY has a lot of time on his hands. I think "social distancing" has been the story of his life. No doubt nobody ever wanted to have anything to do with him.

Sharon Tate's sister: Polanski won't get fair trial in US

The sister of Roman Polanski's murdered first wife says he won't get a fair trial in the "broken" US justice system

Speaking on NBC's Today Show, Debra Tate defended the Oscar-winning director.

"There's rape and then there's rape," she said. "It was determined that Roman did not forcibly have sex with this woman. It was a consensual matter."

"I do believe that our system is extremely broken on [multiple] levels," she said.

She said that several years ago she had sought to persuade Polanksi to return and face justice.

"I was under the impression that there was misconduct in the political genre itself and that based on that perhaps he could get a fair trial here," she said. "Since then, speaking with the district attorney's office, I agree that Roman could not necessarily be dealt with in a fair manner here in the US. I think that this matter better be served in France."

At 3:23

Samantha admits she was willing to have sex with Roman and didn't resist him.

Freakshow at r84, who cares? He was 43. She was 13. He shouldn't have fucked her whether she wanted him to or not. It was illegal, sleazy, and disgusting, whether she minded or not. End of story.

R85 The world doesn't only revolve around your opinion, my dear.

It was very common for older men particularly in Hollywood to have sex with teenage in the 1960s and 1970s. That's a Fact.

R85 Why are you obsessed replying in a thread about 40-year-old case?

Anjelica Huston speaking the truth:

“Well, see, it’s a story that could’ve happened 10 years before in England or France or Italy or Spain or Portugal, and no one would’ve heard anything about it. And that’s how these guys enjoy their time.

“It was a whole playboy movement in France when I was a young girl, 15, 16 years old, doing my first collections. You would go to Régine or Castel in Paris, and the older guys would all hit on you. Any club you cared to mention in Europe. It was de rigueur for most of those guys like Roman who had grown up with the European sensibility.”

"My opinion is: He’s paid his price, and at the time that it happened, it was kind of unprecedented. This was not an unusual situation.”

Alleged victim defends Polanski and criticises ‘opportunistic’ protesters:

Polanski’s past came under renewed scrutiny when despite fierce protests he won the best director prize at France’s Cesar Awards for his film An Officer And A Spy, leaving some attendees to walk out of the ceremony.

Portrait Of A Lady On Fire star and nominee on the night Adele Haenel and director Celine Sciamma both left the room.

Polanski, 86, did not attend, saying he would face a “public lynching” by activists.

Mrs Geimer, 57, questioned what Haenel and Sciamma achieved by leaving February’s awards show.

She told the PA news agency: “Getting up with a few others and walking out, it just seemed to me, and I can only speak for myself, very opportunistic.”

The Hawaii resident, who said she has not seen An Officer And A Spy, criticised the protesters in France and accused them of “demonising” Polanski.

She said: “If you want to change the world today, you do it by changing the world today and demanding people be held accountable today, not by picking someone who is famous and thinking that if you demonise him for things that happen decades ago that somehow that has any value in protecting people and changing society.”

Mrs Geimer, a mother of three adult sons, added it was unfair on Polanski’s wife and two children for protesters to be “demonising” him for “things that happened in the 1970s”.

She said: “That’s kind of abusive to his family and painful for them as well. I don’t support it.”

Mrs Geimer, a semi-retired bookmaker, revealed she “occasionally” speaks with Polanski via email, and confirmed they spoke amid the Cesar Awards controversy.

The filmmaker told her the situation was “horrible,” Mrs Geimer said.

For anyone attempting to portray Geimer as some sexually sophisticated not-quite-legal nymphet who was totally cool with having anal sex with a troll-like man in his 40s I suggest reading her deposition in which she states that Polanski performed ‘cuddliness’ upon her. Yes, this obviously super savvy 13 year-old was unfamiliar with the term ‘cunnilingus’. So put that in your pedophilic pipe and smoke it, Humbert Humbert.

Samantha Geimer : I was a sexually active teenage

R89 r90 Nobody Cares

R93 Nobody cares about your comments.

[quote] [R85] The world doesn't only revolve around your opinion, my dear.

It was illegal. That is a fact, not a matter of opinion.

Nobody Cares

The opinions of the "alleged" victim and Angelica (a woman who was there and who lived in that circle during that time) , matter more than the opinions of random hysterical trolls.

R95 "Illegal" but was Very common and even normal during that time.

Anjelica Huston really ought to keep her fucking trap shut. She was there at the scene and chose to do nothing. It’s a very bad look for her, especially how she minimizes it now by saying ‘oh, you know, the 1970s were just so different’ or ‘Europeans don’t have taboos about age’ or whatever the fuck bullshit so she can sleep at night. Clearly defending and enabling her despicable and utterly amoral friends takes precedence over looking out for the well-being of a 13 year-old child.

Nobody cares

R99 But It's True though " ‘oh, you know, the 1970s were just so different’ or ‘Europeans don’t have taboos about age’

R100 But you care enough to keep visiting and posting in this thread.

R99 "She was there at the scene and chose to do nothing"

Because this was a normal thing among them. It's not like Polanski was the only one having sex with a teenage.

Shelley Winters: There was a 'witch-hunt involved ... Roman was persecuted because, being foreign, talented and opinionated, he was an easy mark.'

Catherine Deneuve: "a very young girl can look much older than she is, and that was the case here'

Jacqueline Bisset: 'a lot of these kids are really hip - they know exactly what they're doing',

Andy Warhol :"As I looked around at how young the girls were, all I could think about Roman Polanski, how the poor guy could make a mistake because these young girls could be as young or as old as they wanted to look."

Quentin Tarantino:

“I don’t believe it’s rape, not at 13, not for these 13-year-old party girls,” said Tarantino. “He had sex with a minor, that’s not rape. To me when you use the word rape you are talking about violent, throwing down, it’s one of the most violent crimes in the world. Throwing the word rape around is like throwing the world racist around. It doesn’t apply to everything.”

“She was trying to take care of her mom who is pissed off at her,” said Tarantino. “Her mom is now on her, now she has to say he did this, he did that. Now that she’s an adult she has a whole different story.”

It's been said a million times before but I guess it needs to be said again. It didn't matter if she "didn't resist." It didn't matter if she willingly took the Quaalude, took the champagne, removed her top, got into the jacuzzi. If she had shown up at his front door stark naked and said "FUCK ME!", it wouldn't have mattered either. The only thing that mattered was that she was 13 and he was in his forties. That made it rape. And there is no, NO justification for child rape.

And it REALLY doesn't matter what Hollywood twats like Shelley Winters, Catherine Deneuve, Jacqueline Bisset, Andy Warhol, etc., say about the matter. They're idiots. Their views count for nothing.

“I don’t believe it’s rape, not at 13, not for these 13-year-old party girls,” said Tarantino. “He had sex with a minor, that’s not rape. "

Sounds to me like Quentin Tarantino has committed a few (or may more than a few) child rapes himself, the repulsive perv.

Nobody cares

R106 Their opinions (even if you don't agree with them) show that it was a very common and an accepted thing among them.

"Their opinions (even if you don't agree with them) show that it was a very common and an accepted thing among them."

That doesn't make it right, you idiot. That doesn't make adults having sex with children acceptable behavior, you imbecile.

As Polansky said, isn't his probation on this thing over yet?

Samantha Jane Geimer@sjgeimer

13 yr old teenagers get tried as adults if they're brown & poor, but I get cast as a pitiful little white girl. I was a sexually active teenager & I'm not going to apologize for it. So sick of people selecting words to make what it sound worse that it was.

Geimer doesn’t need to apologize, but she’s teetering on the brink of being a pedo apologist. Sexually active teenagers can still be raped or sexually assaulted.

R113 The problem with Samantha that she willingly had sex with Roman. She said it's just sex and had no problem with it and resented her mother for calling the police that night (after she overheard her daughter telling her boyfriend that she had sex with Roman), She feels that as long as she was consenting and willing, there was no crime committed.

The problem with you, freak OP, is that you don't understand what statutory rape is (though it's been explained here 1000 times), or that crimes are defined by the law, not by one person's feelings about what constitutes a crime.

"She feels that as long as she was consenting and willing, there was no crime committed."

Then why did she sue him? If there was no crime committed, there was no ground to sue him.

R116 She said the fallout (media scurrility) was traumatizing to her Not Roman having sex with her.

Samantha Jane Geimer@sjgeimer: funny that the suit was more about the fallout than anything he did directly.

"She said the fallout (media scurrility) was traumatizing to her Not Roman having sex with her."

THEN WHY DID SHE SUE HIM? The "fallout" was none of his doing. Why sue a blameless man? And if there was no crime, there would be no grounds on which to sue him. There was a crime alright, no matter what she says now. What she says doesn't carry much weight. She seems mentally challenged.