Patterico's Pontifications

9/30/2009

Applebaum Demands Correction From ME??

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:28 am

Anne Applebaum writes me an e-mail titled “please correct your posting” in which she demands that I link her defense . . . which I already linked. Here is my reply to her (I added the hyperlinks for this post):

I did link to your entire comment, Ms. Applebaum. I didn’t quote it all, but I linked to it and conveyed all your points fairly. (I had previously told readers in a different post that you had mentioned your husband’s position in a recent column, for example.)

As for your demanding a correction to a post of mine that is not incorrect, you have a lot of nerve, quite frankly. You have made multiple errors in your two posts on this issue, you have been told about them, and you have failed to correct any of them. For example:

  • You referred to allegations of misconduct in Polanski’s “trial” when he had no trial, but rather pled guilty.
  • You said Polanski is not a Polish citizen when multiple sources have reported his dual citizenship with Poland and France.
  • You claimed that his victim testified that she called her mother for permission to have her picture taken in a jacuzzi, when she testified to no such thing (she testified merely that she called her mother before getting into the jacuzzi).
  • You told your readers there was evidence Polanski did not know the girl’s age, but did not tell your readers that he swore under oath (at his plea hearing) that he knew she was 13 at the time.

I thought you folks in Big Media were proud of your record for accuracy. That’s four errors in two posts. I know that you read my post wherein I noted your error in claiming he had a “trial” — because you quoted my post. Why, then, is your error still uncorrected?

You ought not write me and demand that I correct an accurate post. Rather, you should correct your own numerous inaccuracies. And then, I would suggest that you reconsider your stunning suggestions that a 13-year-old girl and her mother are the ones truly at fault for the drugging and anal rape of a child.

More at Hot Air.

86 Responses to “Applebaum Demands Correction From ME??”

  1. Frankly, Applebaum should be canned. She is dishonest if not mendacious.

    Also, I grew up in an area where Polish jokes were du rigeur (Sp?), but the Poles supporting Polanski are reinforcing the Stupid Polack stereotype.

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  2. Well, Patterico, I’m glad you wrote to her. But she will never correct what she wrote, nor apologize.

    Because it’s different when she does it. She is an expert, don’t you know! And sophisticated and nuanced.

    Eric Blair (184ac1)

  3. And besides…your comments to her were not quite as offensive as child rape. That is how important her comments are!

    Sheesh.

    Eric Blair (184ac1)

  4. Anne has an axe to grind. I don’t know why. It’s strange that she has been aggressively dishonest in her stories, and stranger still that she would attempt to claim your fair posts were inaccurate.

    That she didn’t disclose her MASSIVE conflict of interest seemed unprofessional and lazy at first… now it appears to be deliberate. Her husband wants this man to go free, and she is using her paper to get tremendous lies about this rape out in the public eye. She knows that the is playing a game of timing and she and her husband have gotten their version into the minds of many.

    I don’t even have to ask, but I hope you pay more attention to her for the rest of her career. You spend a lot of time scrutinizing the LA Times, and it has made a difference.

    Dustin (0bdb72)

  5. I am beginning to wonder what Female Polanski supporters really think of being raped anally. Do they think it is mainstream sex or something on that order?

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  6. She’s sort of a freakishly sleazy woman. She must not have a friend to tell her to tone down the freakishly sleazy.

    happyfeet (6b707a)

  7. Do they think it is mainstream sex or something on that order?

    They consider it successful seduction, apparently…

    Scott Jacobs (445f98)

  8. I thought that our society did away with the “blame the victim” defense back in the ’80s. Does Ms. Applebaum feel it should be brought back to life in this instance because the rape at issue occurred in the ’70s?

    Bru (a6da0b)

  9. If nothing else will convince the doubters that the MSM and our alleged “cultural elites” are hopelessly and permanently out of touch with the vast majority of Americans, this column and the braying of Polanski’s supporters proves it beyond a shadow of the doubt.

    Dmac (5ddc52)

  10. The WaPo is better than the LA Times, but you’d have to be crazy to accept at face value everything you read in its pages.

    b (df882e)

  11. Show of hands …

    How many here would want their 13 year old daughter (or Anne Applebaum) in a jacuzzi with a guy who has a supply of R2-Do-U, EZ Lay or Super K ??

    Neo (7830e6)

  12. There are a few undercurrents here. Apparently, anal sex is not uncommon in Islamic countries so that girls who do participate are still technically virgins for marriage. Maybe some of all this is coming from an undercurrent of Islamic sensibility. Of course this involves teenagers but marriage between older men and 13 year old girls also occurs. Plus, in some of the radical parts of Islam, including Iran, the phenomenon of one night “marriages” followed by divorce the next morning is seen. Europe is getting Islamicized and maybe this is some of it showing up.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  13. [...] Patterico’s Pontifications: Leftists and Conservatives Can Agree: Polanski Is a Child Rapist Who Should Face Justice and Applebaum Demands Correction From ME?? [...]

    Hollywood to host 2014 Pedophilia Olympics to honor Polanski? « VotingFemale Speaks! (962ecf)

  14. Dr. K. what you wrote is certainly true, but this is much older and more general, I think: the famous get different rules.

    Divine rights of art-teests.

    Again, we saw some of it here during the Kennedy funeral essays.

    Eric Blair (184ac1)

  15. I added an update to the post noting that she had linked a story about her husband’s actions, linking my post about her fact-challenged defense. Maybe that’s what she wanted.

    Now maybe she can get to work fixing her errors.

    Patterico (fe66de)

  16. I’d like to point out that, had that “rape your daughter” comment been made by Polanski, not some random commenter, she’d have happily handed the child over.

    Or so I gather from her defense of Polanski.

    Scott Jacobs (445f98)

  17. You should be honored that a classically trained professional journalist with the highest ethical standards even bothers to acknowledge you, a mere blogger.

    Huey (b957d9)

  18. #8 “I thought that our society did away with the “blame the victim” defense back in the ’80s.”

    The feminists had to bring it back to excuse Clinton. They attacked several of his victims that way.

    Machinist (79b3ab)

  19. You told your readers there was evidence Polanski did not know the girl’s age, but did not tell your readers that he swore under oath (at his plea hearing) that he knew she was 13 at the time.

    How could he not know her age after he sought her mother’s permission on signed disclosures to photograph the girl, disclosures necessary because of her age?

    How stupid are the elite, really?

    Topsecretk9 (ab69ad)

  20. I wonder how applebaum and goldberg would react if they learned Obama’s daughters were Polanski’s weekend guests, and Polanski had a large supply of ‘ludes, Dom Perignon, and the jacuzzi all warmed up. Now, play that ball where it lies Hollywood perverts!

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  21. Remember how Wile E. Coyote would always run off the edge of the cliff and sorta defy gravity for a moment until reality set in?

    I’m guessing Applebaum doesn’t remember it.

    Karl (f07e38)

  22. Patterico @ 15:

    But she asked for a correction… unless you wrote something that was actually not accurate, then she was being dishonest and aggressive to do so.

    I think it’s obvious that Anne did not concede anything… an editor inserts her links, and so she’s yet to acknowledge her husband’s influence. In her world, Anne is above the need to link. What she says doesn’t require evidence because she’s in the Washington Post. It’s offensive to point out her relationship to the Polish government because she’s super amazing and above it all.

    All those rules are difference, somehow, for a blogger. You need to link everything Anne will ever say that might mitigate her case in some slight way. You cannot seriously contend you don’t speak for your coworkers, either. You do not get the benefit of the doubt. Anne is above doubt.

    Looking at her horrible attitude towards you, it’s clear she thinks being elite = some kind of cancellation of normal mores. That explains why she is so aggressively forgiving of a child rapist, and finds his case ‘salacious’, cares if the kid’s mom knew she was in a jacuzzi, etc etc. Anne’s own behavior and her tolerance of Polanski are symptoms of the same disease.

    Dustin (0bdb72)

  23. Anybody who supports Roman Polanski in this affair is a scumbag just like he is. But I’m guessing they come by their scumbaggery honestly as children of the “If it feels good do it” Sixties.

    glenn (757adc)

  24. You told your readers there was evidence Polanski did not know the girl’s age, but did not tell your readers that he swore under oath (at his plea hearing) that he knew she was 13 at the time.

    Another point. In one breath Applebaum blames the victim for her anal rape because she called her mom — so says Applebaum — to get permission to be photographed in the jacuzzi. If Polanski was unaware of her minor age, why then would be calling for jacuzzi consent?

    Topsecretk9 (ab69ad)

  25. The WaPo editors are crapping their pants about an editor tweeting, but not a massively inaccurate and dishonest columnist. Nice to know their priorities are in the right place.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (6c59c1)

  26. just wondering how many people were convicted and sentenced for rape of child in 1977.

    if ms applebaum is defending one, she shouldn’t just stop with polanski, unless the criteria for her defense is being famous, rich, and a Polish sex offender.

    once polanski hits the slammer, he can direct a new picture…

    one about a famous director trying to avoid being raped in prison, without the benefit of alcohol or qualudes.

    mark l. (69baf1)

  27. In poker terms, Anne Applebaum has drawn a two, three, four, five, and seven, and instead of folding the hand she has inexplicably chosen to go all in.

    [note: fished from spam filter. --Stashiu]

    JVW (29582f)

  28. I’m thinking this sounds a little to much like, “How dare you question my moral authority.” Or something.

    I thought the Dems and Progs were all about doing things FOR the children…not TO the children.

    Steve B (5eacf6)

  29. tsk9, it is pretty obvious he knew she was very young. The lies are so frequent that it’s annoying to have to correct all of them.

    One thing is clear: she said ‘no’ and he kept touching her putting his mouth on her privates, putting his penis in her vagina and anus, and even climaxed into her anus. All along, she keeps saying ‘no’. Anne knows that. She calls this ‘the salacious details’.

    Once you know that, why does it matter if the mom got a call about a jacuzzi, or if the girl was 13 or 14 or vaguely teenaged? Why does it matter that the judge was an asshole? Why does it matter if the girl said she didn’t want him to face justice (this too, is a lie… she wants him to face justice). Why should we go on and on correcting millions of lies?

    She said “no”. Polanski fled, and must go to prison for a period of years.

    Dustin (0bdb72)

  30. It is odd that so many people who will never be in a position to take advantage of it still get a cheap thrill out of contemplaing droit de seigneur.

    Richard Aubrey (a9ba34)

  31. I would opine that picking a fight over verification of facts with a DA is not very wise, kind of like filing a civil suit when you are the one with everything that needs to be hid from disclosure.

    Is Ms. Applebaum ignorant of our host’s credentials? Is she arrogant enough that she doesn’t think it is necessary to know who she’s picking a fight with? Is she that desperate?

    Not enough people remember Jim Croce. (“Don’t mess with people strange to you…”)

    MD in Philly (d4f9fa)

  32. If it wasn’t for the fact that she is defending a child rapist, I would say that you are piling on by posting about her email, that you should have just sent the private response and let it go.

    But under the circumstances I would give no quarter.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  33. Patterico

    It is obvious Ms. Applebaum is clueless of your well known and respected reputation as a media critic. Had she checked with anyone at the LA Times, she wouldn’t have done what she did.

    She treats you as an imbecile. She’s the one who comes across as the imbecile.

    Corky Boyd (4e8f68)

  34. Ms. Applebaum and her husband are being paid, in cold hard cash, to defend Polanski. That is the only logical explanation. Well, ok … there is another possible logical explanation. Ms. Applebaum and her husband are filthy, disgusting animals, with the power of speech and the ability to walk on two legs, without an iota of human sensibility.

    Which one is it Ms. Applebaum? And, BTW, where do you and your husband bank? And we were to look at your lifestyles, would we find that you live within your salaries?

    nk (df76d4)

  35. @Patterico #15

    “Now maybe she can get to work fixing her errors.”

    I hope that you’ve notified her supervisors of these errors. These are egregious and appear to be deliberate misstatements of fact and omissions.

    It is her editor’s responsibility to correct her errors of fact – so you should notify them also. The Washington Post is being made to look like the last bastion of pederasty in America.

    Anne Applebaum is making them look like a nest of sicko perverts.

    someguy (79ea5f)

  36. Sure she’s wrong, but she’s “impassioned” so all her mistakes are okay.

    Patricia (c95a48)

  37. This is just not a fair fight. It’s like watching a Division One team play a weekend pee-wee team.

    Ken (c97a0c)

  38. MD (#30) and Corky Boyd (#32) — Patterico’s reputation is irrelevant here; Ms. Applebaum can be forgiven for not having heard of him, just as most readers of this blog seem not to have heard of her before a few days ago.

    What matters here is not reputation, but facts. Ms. Applebaum has grounded her defense of Polanski’s turpitude on a series of misrepresentations. I have defended her on this blog from accusations of a conflict of interest, but there is no defense for her distortions of the record — or her disgusting implication in yesterday’s post that Polanski’s victim shared responsibility for what he did to her.

    Ms. Applebaum has a responsibility to, at minimum, correct her misrepresentations of the record.

    Abner Gromble (bb5a4d)

  39. I just can’t get over this depraved wench saying that it’s “bizarre … that a U.S. judge wants to keep pursuing this case after so many decades.”

    It’s a diseased and sick sick woman what asserts that wanting to bring a child raper to justice is some sort of pathological desire.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  40. A sick and pitiful chambermaid to an influential little Polish man. That’s probably not what she saw herself being at her age. She must be very, very bitter.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  41. If people want to whine about injustice and unfairness in the legal handling of the case, they should ponder the main reason Polanski was given such a light sentence in the first place.

    The whole reason that we was even allowed to plea down despite such a damning case against him (with everything from physical evidence of intercourse to the drugs to photos) was supposedly to spare the victim the trauma of public exposure and a trial.

    Think about that. After violating her once, Polanski essentially got off light… by exploiting the threat of violating her some more (his defense team had already floated strategies of attacking her lack of virginity and other such supposedly “mitigating” blame-the-victim circumstances).

    But then he went and fled the sweetheart deal he made, ensuring that she eventually would face lifelong public attention in any case. The victim got the worst of both worlds.

    That’s a miscarriage of justice too: and one that’s far, far worse than a judge talking ex parte to a prosecutor during sentencing.

    Drew (d587d9)

  42. Re Karl @15: Good metaphor. It also describes Obama in particular and “democratic” socialism in general.

    Noesis Noeseos (30eb53)

  43. zomg.

    check out this comment at Hot Air…

    I weep for the soul of people. God should never have given mankind free will. He knew this was what people would do with it and he demonstrated it as well.

    ThackerAgency on September 30, 2009 at 10:56 AM

    The sentiment you just expressed is satanic. The thought of you weeping crocodile tears for any soul but your own is just laughable. You worship at an altar of lies.

    alliebobbitt on September 30, 2009 at 12:09 PM

    okey dokey. I’m so glad these people have a place to go what’s where I’m not.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  44. Comment by Ken — 9/30/2009 @ 9:12 am

    Or watching the Illini play anyone… :)

    Scott Jacobs (445f98)

  45. [...] far, far behind. Patterico has you dead to rights, and pounding the table and shouting won’t do you a darn bit of [...]

    Moe Lane » Quit while you’re behind, Anne Applebaum. (da2344)

  46. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that, despite what Polanski pled to, and despite what he “admitted” while doing so, that Polanski at the time he was committing his crime, actually did not know or suspect that the girl was under 14 years old.

    So what? He certainly knew she was UNDER 18! And that means he committed statutory rape.

    So, Polanski committed 2 crimes, statutory rape and fleeing the jurisdiction before before being sentenced for a LESSER crime. Apparently, committing the second crime, according to his defenders, creates an automatic pass for both crimes.

    By the way, this is a class thing. While not all of those condoning Professor Gates’ ungrateful and boorish behavior support Polanski, I bet all of those who now support Polanski also did support Gates.

    Ira (28a423)

  47. Not know she was 13? Didn’t she have to sign a release for the photoshoot, a release that declared her age?

    steve miller (c56ca1)

  48. Ms. Applebaum represents the very essence of what’s wrong with our system right now. Don’t you know she’s one of the elite? She’s from Washington. She hob nobs with other elites. They’re smart, they’re witty, they’re, dare I say it, artistic. And apparently they’re without scruples and morals. Now, Ms. Applebaum should just acknowledge the conflict, correct her mistake and slink away, hoping we forget about this or move on to something else. But, in the case of all elites, I doubt that she’ll have that much sense.

    Rochf (ae9c58)

  49. MD (#30) and Corky Boyd (#32) — Patterico’s reputation is irrelevant here; Ms. Applebaum can be forgiven for not having heard of him…
    What matters here is not reputation, but facts…
    Comment by Abner Gromble — 9/30/2009 @ 9:36 am

    I stand by my point. Yes, it is facts that matter. And yes, Ms. Applebaum can be forgiven for not having heard of him, until she decided to engage him in debate. Before I pick a fight with someone, rhetorical or otherwise, I do not consider myself so invincible that it matters not with whom I am quarreling. If I see someone make a point concerning medical facts that I believe are wrong, I could pop off, assuming the person didn’t know what they were talking about, or I might want to know if the point was made by a researcher in the field who knows more about the subject than I do.

    Yes, it is the facts that matter. And when entering a debate over just what are the facts, to be forewarned is to be forearmed.

    MD in Philly (d4f9fa)

  50. Why, she has probably had dinner with the President of France!

    This is all elitism gone insane.

    Eric Blair (c8876d)

  51. There are several indicators that Polanski is a serial pedophile.

    First, there is this case.

    Second, there was the Vanity Fair libel case. Vanity Fair reported that polanski groped another teenage model and propositioned here. Polanski sued… in England. The general lack of justice in English libel law should be known to all — it’s a favorite of terror-sponsoring Saudi princes. The victim, like the victim of the LA rape, came to terms with him and testified for him. He was able to testify by video, put on crocodile tears and won a judgment from a jury. On the grounds that the charge damaged his poor ickle reputation. Huh? What reputation has a convicted perv got?

    http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/750/

    A case in which venue-shopping and sharp lawyering trumped justice, so it’s no surprise he and his allies seek the same result here.

    Third, he gave an interview to Martin Amis while a fugitive. I quote: “Judges want to fuck young girls. Juries want to fuck young girls. Everyone wants to fuck young girls!” He is experiencing what statisticians call “restriction of range” and what commentators call “a Pauline Kael moment.” No doubt he does, and his social circle does. Maybe Anne Appelbaum’s husband, the Polish Pedophile’s Polish Politician Pal, does, and she helps hold them down, or at least mixes the rohypnol smoothies.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/michaeldeacon/100011795/roman-polanski-everyone-else-fancies-little-girls-too/

    Fourth, it’s not pedophilia exactly, but consider these numbers: He was 31 years older than the 13 year old. He’s 33 years older than his current wife. He married her when she was 23 and looked even younger (she was the scrawny, chestless, prepubescent model type).

    Conclusion: as they say in the joint, dude has “short eyes.”

    Question: what are the odds he’s molested his teenage daughter? I’d say, just about unity.

    Hey, but Woody Allen, another famous director (and pedophile who did his own stepdaughter), says that Polanski is a Great Artiste and ought to be cut some slack. A little perversion in the night didn’t do Woody’s career any harm… and it seems to have brought the pathetic wretch Mackenzie Phillips back into the spotlight she lusts for. So if Polanski can just beat this annoying, niggling little felony rap he’s already pled to, why then he may be looking at a career renaissance. (Although that suggests that he is a Great Auteur who deserves a comeback, and I’m not buying it. His films are the work of a nihilistic, sick creep).

    But Hollywood’s always down with nihilistic, sick creeps. Even Roger Simon of Pajamas Media wants to cut Polanski some slack. Hey, you can’t make a movie without sodomizing a few kids, I guess.

    Kevin R.C. O'Brien (f90602)

  52. The kinder, gentler JD would like to note that Anne is a twisted propgandist and sophist, who appears to enjoy beclowning herself. People that enjoy anything having to do with clowns should be avoided at all costs.

    JD (1cc534)

  53. All this commotion is not helping Polanski, I think. It will make it harder and harder to let him slide away. French public opinion is turning as they hear details and that should worry some people. Maybe the Europeans are not as limp on these issues as some thought. Remember, Europe has had some atrocious pedophile scandals in recent years that involved politicians and so on. THis is not over and the trend is not good for Polanski.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  54. Arrgh ! Close links !

    [fixed it Mike. --Stashiu]

    Mike K (2cf494)

  55. maybe she is offended at being called center right…?

    quasimodo (4af144)

  56. Doing the Google “Wayback Machine”: from Time Magazine, Mar. 28, 1977 (The Nation: Roman Polanski’s Tawdry Troubles; unattributed): “Polanski, whose reputation for dating teen-age girls is well known in Hollywood, seemed remarkably unchastened by the impending legal action that could ruin his American career. Three days after his arrest he appeared at a fashionable restaurant accompanied by a girl who looked not a great deal older than the age of consent.”

    And this: “Polanski Admits Sex with Girl, 13″, Pittsburg Post-Gazette, Aug. 9, 1977: “At first, Polanski’s attorney, said he would claim the sexual encounter never happened and the girl fantasized it. But the attorney said that Polanski changed his mind primarily because of actress Anjelica Huston’s decision to testify against him. Miss Huston, daughter of director John Huston and Nicholson’s longtime roommate reportedly said she arrived home while Polanski and the girl were in a bedroom. The district attorney’s office agreed to drop Miss Huston’s prosecution for cocaine possession when she offered to testify.”

    MikeHu (e9e89c)

  57. Thanks for your coverage. I’ve quoted it extensively in my blog post on the Polanski debacle:

    http://forensicpsychologist.blogspot.com/2009/09/polanski-debacle-and-polands.html

    Karen Franklin (c3faed)

  58. Both then and now, there are so many disturbing aspects to this old case. But the most mind boggling to me is this: that notable people with apparent “reputations” to uphold are actually stepping up and putting themselves on the line to publicly defend Polanski, instead of quietly lowering their faces and looking through their fingers in embarrassment over what their friend did to a child. There really ARE two Americas.

    elissa (824779)

  59. Patterico:
    Do you not realize that you, as a member of the great unwashed, are not worthy of being in the presence of Ms.Applebaum, let alone to criticize her remarkable writing.

    Well, I’m glad I got that out of my system.
    She’s a media, celebrity whore, who wouldn’t know a fact if it crawled up her arse.

    AD - RtR/OS! (7148a0)

  60. In a battle of facts, Anne came to a gunfight armed with a dull knife.

    JD (682dfa)

  61. I just do not understand how folks are just not getting it. It doesn’t even matter if this girl consented, which she clearly did not as the transcripts show. Remember the “To Catch A Predator” series with NBC’s Chris Hansen? Those girls posed online as willing participants and even in some cases, it can be argued that they egged on the perps. It doesn’t matter. They all went to jail and are forever filed as sexual offenders because they broke the law. The law states a 13 year old cannot consent. Period. We are a nation of laws. He committed rape. Period. HE GOES TO JAIL.

    Alan Davidson (a78193)

  62. In her book, Tatum O’Neill talks about going to Polanski’s house with a 16 year old Melanie Griffith, and he showed porn movies to them.

    CC (d8c88a)

  63. i think Acorn just found a new president for their company!

    Yike. Seriously, what is it with the left and rape these days?

    A.W. (e7d72e)

  64. A bit OT but Wash Monthly has now jumped the shark.

    Your comment submission failed for the following reasons:

    You are not allowed to post comments.

    Please correct the error in the form below, then press Post to post your comment.

    They have closed the last leak in the bubble.

    Back to Polanski.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  65. Next time I argue with my wife, Patterico, I’m calling you in to present my points! Well said.

    ras (20bd5b)

  66. 61, yeah, but they didn’t entrap an Oscar winning director.

    Let me be clear, that was angry sarcasm aimed at the brain dead left who support Polanski.

    If Dan Rather found forged documents of George W. Bush doing the same thing to a 13 year old girl, you know every lefty in the universe would insist he be hounded to Hell and back.

    PCD (1d8b6d)

  67. Nothing excuses this creep, but … why was this girl not chaperoned, if not by her parents, by another grown up? If this was supposed to be a photo shoot, surely someone else could/should have been in attendance. Even beauty contestants have chaperones. I would never have let my daughters go alone, but then, I am not a Hollywood mom.

    A little off the subject but, no mention of a father. What’s up with that? Possibly I missed it.

    I still hope Polanski gets 40 years for fleeing. If he survives that time, hopefully he won’t be able to chase teenage girls anymore.

    PatAZ (9d1bb3)

  68. “At first, Polanski’s attorney, said he would claim the sexual encounter never happened and the girl fantasized it. But the attorney said that Polanski changed his mind primarily because of actress Anjelica Huston’s decision to testify against him. Miss Huston, daughter of director John Huston and Nicholson’s longtime roommate reportedly said she arrived home while Polanski and the girl were in a bedroom. The district attorney’s office agreed to drop Miss Huston’s prosecution for cocaine possession when she offered to testify.”

    I’ve never seen that before, but I’ve always suspected that that was the case.

    When you stop and think about it, the prosecution really didn’t have much of a case, other than the girl’s unsubstantiated claim (no DNA evidence in those days) that she had sex with Polanski. Polanski probably could have denied everything, and pulled it off, while Ms. Huston maintained a discrete silence…if only Huston hadn’t been arrested for cocaine possession when the police came to search Nicholson’s house.

    Life’s a bitch, ain’t it?

    Dave Surls (719891)

  69. what is it with the left and rape these days?

    I’ll hazard a guess. It’s not just rape: they are so intent on proving themselves superior to you in every respect that it has now become a knee-jerk reaction for them to oppose whatever “the commoners” support, cuz if they too supported it, they’d just be ordinary, and that would never do, no never.

    As for the Hollywood types themselves, to the above add self-preservation: they want a double standard so strong that, no matter what, they are exempt from justice, presumably out of necessity.

    ras (20bd5b)

  70. Next time I argue with my wife, Patterico, I’m calling you in to present my points! Well said.

    No,no,no,no,no.

    The LAST thing you want to do when arguing with your wife is to prove beyond all doubt that she is wrong. What you want to do is let her think that she is right, but that she is magnanimously letting you have your way anyway. You’re happy, she’s happy.

    In the other direction lies nothing but long distress, heartache, and peril.

    No matter how right you actually are!

    Terry (c4498b)

  71. Comment by ras — 9/30/2009 @ 12:49 pm

    You can be right, or you can be happy.

    Pick one.

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  72. I am with Terry on this one. You might win an argument like that, once. Once. And you will pay for that many times over for doing so. Not that I speak from experience, or anything like that. I still have yet to experience my single victory.

    JD (c3a7b7)

  73. I still have yet to experience my single victory.

    I know.

    I’ve met you. :)

    Scott Jacobs (6aff37)

  74. Terry & Scott & JD,

    What was I thinking? Yikes. Thanks for the slap upside the head when I needed it most.

    Patterico,

    Never mind, I’ll spend your retainer on a winter holiday for the missus and I instead, but thanks anyway.

    ras (20bd5b)

  75. ras – Don’t mention it. I could not leave a brother out there just asking to be thrust into one of Dante’s flaming rings of hell.

    JD (c3a7b7)

  76. great post. keep exposing this incompetent and questionable “journalist.”

    Anita Busch (fc416d)

  77. Nice to see you around, Ms Busch.

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  78. One person in this whole sordid affair that has not gotten much attention is the victim’s mother. What woman in her right mind leaves a 13 y/o girl alone with an older man who they barely know? I do not know if she is alive but she deserves a ton of scorn. Talk about negligent.

    BT (78b929)

  79. well sure but if this girl had a good mum then it just would have been some other girl I think. Child molesters are very goal-oriented people.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  80. It’s like watching a Division One team play a weekend pee-wee team.

    I was thinking more Bambi vs. Godzilla:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpBkc2jK-6w

    Dmac (5ddc52)

  81. That’s a miscarriage of justice too: and one that’s far, far worse than a judge talking ex parte to a prosecutor during sentencing.

    Comment by Drew — 9/30/2009 @ 9:46 am

    I just listened to John and Ken (KFI) interview the Deputy D.A. (Mr. Wells) that handled the case. He was also the one who stated in the documentary that he had indeed talked to the judge privately and that’s is where the misconduct was supposedly rooted in.

    Today, however, in the interview he freely admitted he lied about it. He said he had never, ever talked privately with the judge.

    When asked why he told the lie then to the documentary interviewer, he said he wanted to spice it up. He also stated they had assured him the film would never be shown in the US, so he figured he was safe.

    Now, however, things haven’t gone the way he thought they would, he’s ‘fessed up, and waiting to be called on by either the prosecutor or defense for a formal statement.

    Talk about throwing a monkey wrench into an already messy situation.

    Dana (863a65)

  82. Seems Ms. A has found out that things aren’t as they were.
    You can’t just say stuff any longer.
    If you’re wrong, if you’re dissembling, if you’re screwing the pooch, you WILL be called on it.
    I imagine it’s disorienting.

    Richard Aubrey (23cdc7)

  83. OHMYGAWD! There’s actually accountability in the Information Age.

    What a revoltin’ development this is!

    AD - RtR/OS! (7148a0)

  84. On Applebaum: what he said.

    Meanwhile, trying to better understand what Dana (#81) was talking about, since I haven’t seen the documentary, I came across this AP story that explains the Wells situation in more detail. Unfortunate.

    Abner Gromble (bb5a4d)

  85. I didn’t know A. Huston was in the house. I thought she just knocked and then left.

    Patricia (c95a48)

  86. I just can’t get over this depraved wench saying that it’s “bizarre … that a U.S. judge wants to keep pursuing this case after so many decades.” happyfeet

    I agree. One only needs to look at the pursuit of Nazi’s responsible for the concentration camps and the Holocaust to understand that some levels of evil need to be pursued to the ends of the earth and across decades until some measure of justice is achieved. A concept that Polanski, Applebaum and her husband should be all too familiar with.

    in_awe (a55176)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3337 secs.