Contemporaneous Pictures of Polanski’s Victim, Or, Another Applebaum Lie
Unless she spreads even more falsehoods about Roman Polanski, I have said all I want to say about Anne Applebaum. Many of you have copied me on your e-mails to her editor, and I encourage you to share any response with me, which I will publish in this space. Other than that, I’m done with her.
. . . OK, I lied. I have one more thing to say.
In her latest e-mail to me, Ms. Applebaum said:
Yes, there is “evidence” that Polanski did not know the girls age – or that he was told but did not believe it: He has told people since that, anyway. Pictures of her from the time show a girl who could be anywhere from 12-25.
You don’t say.
Courtesy of reader Kate C. comes a link to a site that has a gallery of pictures of the victim from the relevant time period. All are, of course, non-nude — or I wouldn’t be linking them. I do not know whether any were taken by Polanski; the victim appears to be in a jacuzzi in two of them (you see only her head). Here is a typical set:
Click here for the rest.
She was just a little girl.
File it under “More Crap Anne Applebaum Said That Isn’t True.” But file it away in your own cabinet, would you? My file is overflowing.
Standard disclaimer here.
Thanks for putting up with it.
I used to live in Korea, and I really was a freaking huge fan of Anne Applebaum until now. I can now see that it’s pretty easy to condemn North Korean suffering, and Anne was no hero.
She made a mistake with a conflict of interest and a very zany article, and I would forgive that because we all make mistakes, but the way she has repeatedly been rude and dishonest about this is unforgivable. As a journalist, she’s just plain terrible. You can’t just tell the truth when it’s easy, Anne. I know your husband doesn’t want you to, but you must report the truth. This girl WAS drugged and she WAS raped and it IS wrong and it is beyond question. She was so young and you have done something awful.
I really appreciate Patterico’s typical backbone and determination, that he handles with class despite being obviously sincerely passionate about victim’s rights.
Dustin (bb61e3) — 10/1/2009 @ 8:45 pmIf that is the child, I can not see any reasonable person thinking she was a day over 15.
HeavenSent (01a566) — 10/1/2009 @ 8:50 pmThe scare quotes around “evidence” was especially mendoucheous of her.
JD (8b3caf) — 10/1/2009 @ 8:53 pmShe looks about 12. Her breasts aren’t yet formed. Sorry for being so explicit. Applebaum should be ashamed of herself.
Terry Gain (4045b4) — 10/1/2009 @ 8:59 pmHis legal team was gearing up to go with “the girl’s a slut- just asking for it” defence.
Imagine that.
papertiger (48b514) — 10/1/2009 @ 9:02 pmTerry, it is awful to have to think of this kid sexually. I suspect these photos may have been taken by Polanski, but hopefully not. Her eyes look kinda drugged in some of the pictures.
Of course, it’s not unlikely that this is how casting couches work. You get the girl to take some sexy photos, and she will try to ‘get in the mood’ so that she does a good job looking seductive. You add a little booze and some drugs, and the girl is easy to take advantage of.
It’s hard to think about… but if you were Polanski, and did this to scores of girls, when one says no, perhaps you think they will change their mind when they realize they are getting some kind of career break.
What’s so sad is that all the women who managed to get into their careers this way are not taking this golden opportunity to tell the truth. If they were feminists, they would. Instead of uniting to say that the casting couch sex is unacceptable, and naming names, they are lining up to defend the practice. Because they are concerned for their next big gig and big check. They are still whores, then.
Dustin (bb61e3) — 10/1/2009 @ 9:05 pmYeah, she was begging for champagne, ludes, oral, vagina and anal!!!!!! She got what she deserved!
(Is there any way to get Polanski into a real jail with real criminals who might meet him in the shower?)
He won’t get the ludes, champagne or vagina but oral and anal will be on the menu!
HeavenSent (01a566) — 10/1/2009 @ 9:06 pmCan we get Polanksi a date with Andrew Sullivan maybe?
HeavenSent (01a566) — 10/1/2009 @ 9:08 pmI may have mentioned his predilections before…
Gazzer (22ecdc) — 10/1/2009 @ 9:30 pmBefore
Gazzer (22ecdc) — 10/1/2009 @ 9:32 pmhttp://gazzersgabfest.com/?p=1950
Gazzer (22ecdc) — 10/1/2009 @ 9:36 pmBefore
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 10/1/2009 @ 9:50 pmThe post would be laughed at out of court if submitted to a judge.
Questions for Patterico:
1. How do you know these are pictures of the victim? Because an anonymous web poster says so?
2. How do you know when these pictures were taken? There is nothing on the site to suggest the dates.
I also note that the poster appears to be from Italy (perhaps Sardinia). Rather strange that such a person would have these photographs.
Also, not to sound like Beldar, this site’s resident rapist defender (cf his stirring defense of imprisoned federal judge Samuel Kent), but writing “She was just a little girl” is Glen Beck by way of Humbert Humbert. What Polanski did was a felony no matter what the age or looks of the victim. Your posting these pictures on such flimsy attribution and pretext is just fanning the perv interest in this case, which commentators like #6 and #7 are clearly getting off on.
Cyrus Sanai (3b1f29) — 10/1/2009 @ 11:14 pm“he was told and didn’t believe it”
You have *got* to be kidding me.
If this works as a legal defense, I think your job just got a lot harder.
“Sure, my neighbor told me I couldn’t take his car and drive to Mexico, but I didn’t believe him!”
djw (e7ac04) — 10/1/2009 @ 11:51 pmI look at the pictures and I see a girl who does look remarkably mature for her age. I’ve seen young ladies 18 years of age who looked younger than her.
That said, she was thirteen at the time. Thirteen year old girls vary in appearance. They can also vary in behavior; very often the same girl.
Appearance aside, behavior aside, ability to knowingly agree to sex aside, what happened to her was rape. She was drugged, Polanski used his size and his adult authority to force her into sex, she protested and repeatedly told him no. Nothing statutory about it, she was raped. She could’ve been 46 and it would still have been rape.
Roman Polanski would not take her feelings, her desires into consideration. He was the aggressor in this case, and I rather doubt he once so much as considered the possibility she didn’t want to have sex with him. It was not consensual in any way, and can not be considered a consensual act.
Thirteen year olds have more on the ball than you think. That does not give anybody the right to ignore their wishes and use them for sexual gratification.
Alan Kellogg (c3aa1e) — 10/2/2009 @ 12:05 amI don’t mean to be difficult here, but I teach 18 year old women every single semester, and have done so for about twenty years now.
Mr. Kellogg may see someone who looks older. I do not. I see a little girl.
I think any attempt to paint the girl as looking older or to try to “balance” that discussion does no such thing. Polanski knew very well her age (remember the release forms?). And he has made other statements demonstrating that he doesn’t care one iota about the age of the girls he beds.
That in and of itself is reason enough to think Polanski is a pervert. He was in his 40s, remember.
Add to this him pushing alcohol and drugs on the underaged girl, who told him “no” multiple times, and you have a child rapist. Pure and simple.
But this whole business of saying that she looks “older” will be used to justify Polanski’s actions. All that is necessary is to remember Polanski’s actions.
Eric Blair (184ac1) — 10/2/2009 @ 12:29 amI have to say I am a very terrible judge of age, especially when it comes to female women of the opposite sex. I blame my mother. I used to go to dinner and shopping with her every Friday and invariably people would mistakenly consider her as my wife or girlfriend instead of my mother. She looks young enough. So, my age-meter is badly off kilter.
And the girl in the pic looks 15 or 16 to me.
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 10/2/2009 @ 12:36 amBut EB’s redirect is very important. Polanski did a Polanski and there’s no getting around that. Shifting subjects only serves to hide the fact Polanski did a Polanski.
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 10/2/2009 @ 12:38 amMister Blair mistakes my purpose. A common event with him, mistaking the purpose of others. The point is, regardless of her apparent, perceived, or actual age, what Roman Polanski did to her was flat out rape. He forced her into having sex regardless of her desires. If that don’t constitute flat out rape, then rape doesn’t exist.
Her age is an aggravating circumstance, but even if she had been of legal age, it would still be rape. That is my message.
Alan Kellogg (c3aa1e) — 10/2/2009 @ 2:36 amI’m amazed anyone would say she might look 18. That’s preposterous.
You would not have sex with this girl, or you have a defect. She’s just plain too young. If she said she was 18, you would be incredulous. Sure, there are freaks out there and it’s possible, but you would not guess that she was old enough for driver’s ed or sex.
Alan’s right of course. These side issues are discussed to illustrate how horrible Polanski’s defense is, but it’s rape regardless. She said no. All of these side issues about permissions, virginity, age, appearance, drugs… well, they matter some, and Polanski appears to lose them all, but regardless of them, she said no and this was rape-rape.
Dustin (bb61e3) — 10/2/2009 @ 3:00 amI expect everyone in Hollywood to take core samples and count the rings of everyone they have sex with to make sure they are of legal age. After all, no one in Hollywood wants to have sex with underage girls.
MU789 (3f9d29) — 10/2/2009 @ 4:30 amIn Polanski’s memoir, he refers to her repeatedly as a “teenager,” reports her talking a lot about school (and of having a boyfriend), and never once — in his own CYA memoir — claims that he didn’t know how old she really was. He also said: “If there was to be a trial, the DA wanted it held as soon as possible. Sandra’s appearance in court would be bound to dispose of any stories about her looking like a thirteen-year-old. It would be obvious to everyone present that she was a physically mature girl who could easily pass for eighteen.”
Matt Welch (b25cb3) — 10/2/2009 @ 5:05 amThey scream at the “salacious” documentary evidence while implying all sorts of crap without evidence.
Another example of the left hiding behind a wall of politeness they have repeatedly breached themselves. There are far more examples than this.
It’s time for decent Americans to know the truth before decency is degraded another notch.
Amphipolis (b120ce) — 10/2/2009 @ 5:25 amBottom line, Anne Applebaum and any editor/reporter/columnist who agrees with her about Polanski should be fired immediately.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 10/2/2009 @ 5:37 amI don’t know what the legal standard in California was at the time, but the current standard in Ohio for the charge of unlawful sexual contact with a minor is that “No person who is eighteen years of age or older shall engage in sexual conduct with another, who is not the spouse of the offender, when the offender knows the other person is thirteen years of age or older but less than sixteen years of age, or the offender is reckless in that regard.” Polanski’s alleged comments, and Applebaum’s defense of them — “She looked young but I thought she was older!” — is the very definition of being reckless in regard to her age.
Phil (3bafb9) — 10/2/2009 @ 5:47 amWell I’m convinced. Lets lynch the sofab.
Any takers? I’ll go solo if I have to.
Whoopie Goldberg – (you think she reads the comment section?) – You know that scene in The Color Purple where the character she played is raped by her father, gets pregnant, and then after the baby is born she is warned never to tell anyone?
Was that rape rape?
Or was it grape rape?
Or was it grape ape rape*?
*(a little service from me to Whoopi, so she doesn’t feel like such a heel as she reflexively flops the race card)
What Whoopi only imagined, what she only played at long enough to become rich and famous for, the pretense of victimhood that she parleyed into a life of fame, fortune, and hot and cold running caviar – this girl actually lived it.
Ironic that the child, at the time Polanski raped her, was too young to see The Color Purple without a parent.
papertiger (830204) — 10/2/2009 @ 6:13 amWith Applebaum publishing these pictures, she is doubling down on stupid. She is not merely stuck on stupid, she wallows in it.
I guess the WaPo IS stuck on stupid for not firing her after this lastest stunt of hers.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 10/2/2009 @ 6:15 amAs a mother of a 9 year old, and an aunt of a 14 year old, I think it’s completely obvious that that girl is just a baby. Looking just at her expressions, she still looks like a little girl. I can’t imagine anyone mistaking that 13 yo with an 18 yo.
Sherri (ca3777) — 10/2/2009 @ 6:43 amIt really does not matter if she looked 13 or 18. The dirty perv knew that she was 13, and decided, hey, today seems like a good day to drug and rape a 13 year old.
JD (3f1cb1) — 10/2/2009 @ 6:51 amThe girl clearly looks like she’s in her early teens.
I just read through the entire transcript of the girl’s testimony and its absolutely damning. She repeatedly said no and asked to be taken home so it would’ve been rape even if she’d been thirty instead of thirteen.
It’s amazing that Applebaum thinks that the testimony about the phone call to the mother somehow minimizes Polanski’s culpability. It absolutely does not.
rsrobinson (dee21b) — 10/2/2009 @ 6:54 ameven if the girl had been 25 or 30, it was rape when he plied her with alcohol and drugs and she was still able to say “NO” … the man is a rape-rapist and deserves a very long term in prison.
quasimodo (4af144) — 10/2/2009 @ 6:55 am#28 JD:
As you say, it doesn’t matter how old she looked, in that Polanski went ahead and raped her anyway.
But it does put paid to the excuses made on his behalf that “she looked old enough,” because its obvious to me that she is a very young girl. As Sherri mentions above,
If I weren’t already convinced that Polanski was a disgusting pervert already, these pictures are enough proof.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 10/2/2009 @ 7:03 amComment by EW1(SG) — 10/2/2009 @ 7:03 am
Looking young is the turn on for pedos.
This is not a parody:
Pedo: I want someone young.
nk (df76d4) — 10/2/2009 @ 7:10 amPimp: I have an eighteen year old.
Pedo: Hey man, I said young, not ancient.
Pimp: Ok, how about a sixteen year old.
Pedo: …..
Pimp: But she looks fourteen.
Pedo: Well … ok.
quasimodo, naah, the 48 days, if served in San Quentin’s general population with proper notification of the inmates will suffice.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 10/2/2009 @ 7:13 amThe 800 – pound elephant in the room that our fearless investigative reporter from the WaPo fails to produce is how the girl actually acted in person, not what some grainy black and white photo purports to demonstrate what her alleged age appeared to other witnesses. Does anyone honestly think that a 13 – year old girl that looks like that could pull off the part of acting like a fully – grown woman? Polanski knew that she was a child, yet now expects us to believe that wishing she wasn’t makes it so.
Dmac (5ddc52) — 10/2/2009 @ 7:15 amThis is why we love JD.
MayBee (f57cc4) — 10/2/2009 @ 7:17 amHunh? This girl is probably below the median for physical maturity of 13-y.o.s. It makes Polanski even sicker, that he finds pre-pubescents sexually attractive. I’ve known 12-y.o. girls who looked adult (even if they act like kids) and the girl in the photographs is not one of them.
Andrew J. Lazarus (d9c837) — 10/2/2009 @ 7:22 amI was in the eighth grade in 77-78 in a fairly small, two town school district. Class sizes were between 200 to 250 students approximately half of which were girls. (Slightly more local boys went to the nearby Catholic school (mostly for athletics) than girls.) These pictures are of a young girl who would not have been in the top ten percent as regarding physical maturity. If I wished to I could name off at least fifteen girls from that class who would have been far more physically mature at that age. Judging by her testimony and the testimony of others as well as at least two of these pictures it is not clear that she was any more intellectually or emotionally mature than physically.
Have Blue (854a6e) — 10/2/2009 @ 8:39 amMayBee – I just call ’em like I see ’em. And anyone with half a brain knows that this was a disgusting bile rape rape rape. As wiser people than I have noted, not only is what she looked like irrelevant and a distraction, but glosses over the fact that he knew, and still chose to drug her, and rape her, over her protestations.
Anne – Still waiting on your description of the events, since you claim that him drugging and raping a 13 year old is not an accurate description.
JD (cc3aa7) — 10/2/2009 @ 9:08 amYou know that Polanski is a dirty little pervy rapist if me and AJL are on the same side of the argument. Did the earth quit spinning?
JD (cc3aa7) — 10/2/2009 @ 9:10 amThis discussion of whether she could pass for 18 is a red herring put out by Polanski’s defenders.
There was no confusion here. Polanski wanted to have sex with a child. There’s a whole sex tourism business that caters to this particular fetish.
TakeFive (7c6fd5) — 10/2/2009 @ 9:17 amWatch Patterico be blamed in part for Chicago not getting the 2016 Olympic bid because he shown European darling Polanski to be a child rapist.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 10/2/2009 @ 9:56 amOne might ask whether there is anything in the photo sets that establishes when they were taken. Perhaps I missed a marking of some kind.
This is not to defend Polanski or Applebaum, just asking if these photos might be from years earlier.
People magazine has an article in their online archive with a photo captioned “posing in L.A. in ’76”, which might be a better reference item.
The page for the article is:
http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20124052,00.html
The photo is on the page image at:
http://storage.people.com/jpgs/19971215/19971215-750-161.jpg
And that photo, well, it does no harm to your argument.
Sam (c71bb1) — 10/2/2009 @ 10:57 amI can not swear to it, but I believe these photos are from the sctual proof sheets of the photos taken by Polanski when he did this photo shoot. And I would add that if that is the case they are not great photos on either artistic or technical merit.
Have Blue (854a6e) — 10/2/2009 @ 11:07 amMark Steyn has an interesting post that takes AA to task, and adds a great tidbit about Robert Evans on Polanski.
JVW (d1215a) — 10/2/2009 @ 11:15 am[…] Contemporaneous Pictures of Polanski’s Victim, Or, Another Applebaum Lie Click the link and take a look at the pictures that accompany this article. Now think honestly. Do these pictures portray a child in her very early teens or mature woman who’s been there and done that? The choice was Polanski’s and he made his choice. Now let him pay for choosing lust over common sense. I’m a man and I know something about these things. When in doubt DON’T! […]
Today’s Tidbits (788229) — 10/2/2009 @ 11:20 amAnyone who thinks she looks 18 hasn’t been around many teens. These photos are from the 70s–she looks like Kristy McNichol in Family.
Kate (1d4ed6) — 10/2/2009 @ 3:37 pmI think the “she looked 25” meme actually started with Angelica Huston’s testimony before the grand jury. She agreed to testify against Polanski in exchange for the DA dropping cocaine possession charges against her. She arrived at the house while Polanski was in the bedroom with the child, raping her, and saw the girl when she walked out of the room to get in the car. Huston testified that “”She appeared to be one of those kind of little chicks between — could be any age up to 25. She did not look like a 13-year-old scared little thing,” Huston said.” I don’t believe she looks older than 15 in any of the pictures I’ve seen, and I think Huston was just trying to get rid of her cocaine charge and still help her friend. Huston is just about as low as Polanski, in my book.
mbs (3f5b58) — 10/2/2009 @ 4:50 pmReally, if she had looked 25, Polanski probably wouldn’t have been interested in her, he seems to go for the really young girls.
mbs (3f5b58) — 10/2/2009 @ 4:53 pmthis samantha geimer is seriously screwed in the head. she talks of how she’s not a poor little thing and feels sorry for roman. this is why the police don’t allow women to drop charges against an abusive husband.. because victims are mentally unstable.
just a couple of years ago, samantha geimer was on the red carpet, all smiles, at the movie premier of roman’s biography. even with forgiveness, who goes to the celebrate the life of a man who raped them? she is seriously f**ked in the head. this woman obviously has lost her marbles due to the trauma and roman needs to be punished for that.
birdy (a93e92) — 10/2/2009 @ 9:43 pmFormer model and mother of three boys (10, 13, and 17) here.
RE: those photos–That’s pretty much exactly the way I looked…when I was twelve or thirteen years old.
Anne Applebaum must reside in another universe to keep defending this cowardly child-rapist. What a disgrace.
litbrit (15d695) — 10/3/2009 @ 10:35 amHuston, like the rest of that Hollywood elite circle, thought and may well still think, that this girl was like a kleenex–made to be used and discarded. Considering how perv-y her father, director John Huston was, who knows what happened to her?
Kate (1d4ed6) — 10/3/2009 @ 10:55 amAnd Geimer might well be screwed up–she went through a traumatic experience when she was 13.
That is the face of a little girl. Not that it matters, because children can’t legally consent, and he wasn’t interested in her consent anyway. She faked an asthma attack, she begged to go home to her mother… but nothing would stop him. She had breasts, maybe some hip on her already… clearly she was ripe for the taking. This is how dirty old men think: her body is for his amusement. If there’s grass on the field, play ball.
There’s a certain sort of ugliness at work in age arguments like, “she doesn’t like a little girl to me!” as if a girl can be held liable for premature puberty. As if the stares and comments that come with it, the unwanted attention, are HER fault. As if a little girl doesn’t grow breasts unless she’s up to something unwholesome.
What surprises me is how these arguments so often come from women. Like Angelica Huston in the transcripts “she could’ve been any age to 25, she didn’t look like some scared little thing.” I have to think those women are the ones who were lucky enough to mature late. Those of us who bloomed earlier wouldn’t make such a mistake. Ignore the curves, look at the face.
Ornithophobe (88cb60) — 10/4/2009 @ 6:43 amDiscussion of how old the girl looked
is irrelevant.
In Polanski plea of guilt , he states that he
oph (850930) — 10/4/2009 @ 1:46 pmknew she was 13 years old before he had “sex”
with her ( see smokinggun)
oph, tell it to Applebaum.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/4/2009 @ 1:58 pmApplebaum is beyond saving. She is the Washington
Post’s problem. If a paper of record wants to keep
her ,it hurts their reputation more than Applebaum’s
IF the judge made an agreement, what might have made him
change his mind ?
Polanski perseuded the probation board that his
“sex” with the victim was a once off thing.
This was not his normal behavior. He liked women
not girls. (women = 18 )
The recommedetions in the probation report (smokinggun)
said that Polanski agrees not to associte with any
female under the age of 18.
While in Germany ,before sentencing, he is photographed
with Natisha Kinski
The judge gets copies of these photos. What is he to think ?
Polanksi has said in probation report that he likes women. Has Polanski
lied ?
Polanski has agreed not to associate with females under 18.
But here he is associating with a teenager (possibly 15 year old at the ).
If even under the duress of sentencing Polanski can not stay away
from girls what, is the likelyhood that he will while on probation.
So the judge has a problem. Polanski’s actions before sentencing
contradict the picture painted of him in the probation report.
——–
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-10-02/the-lost-polanski-transcript
s/full/
In other words, Polanski had figured he’d get out of court with no time
at all. Instead, he was ordered to report to prison for diagnostic on
December 19, 1977. The lawyers, interviewed after the hearing, said
they didn’t think Polanski would have to do any more time after the diagnostic.
But there’s no question that the transcript show that no such promise
was ever made in court, which is the only thing that counts.
Nevertheless, the lawyers might have been right if only Polanski
had kept a low profile. Was that so much to ask?
Apparently so.
On October 24, 1977, Polanski got photographed with his arms around yet another
teenaged girl, Nastaji Kinski, in a bar during an Oktoberfest celebration in West
Germany.
Polanski was told there’d be no further extensions and he had to report
to Chino State Prison on December 19, 1977.
Polanski did 42 days of diagnostic testing in Chino before being released on January
28, 1978.
During that time, Judge Rittenband, viewing the photo with Kinski,
had apparently come to feel that stint just wasn’t enough.
Polanski caught wind of the attitude shift.
On February 1, 1978, the day of sentencing, Polanski’s lawyer stood
up in court and said: “Your honor, I received a call from Mr. Polanski
advising me he would not be here this morning.”
———————-
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/1203081roman28.html
Probation Report
Recommendations:
11. Not associate withchildren under the age of 18
oph (850930) — 10/4/2009 @ 3:03 pmexcept in the precence of a responsible adults.
Letter of recommendation for Polanski that are mentioned in his propation report.
How many (who are still alive) have signed onto the free Polanski petitiom ?
Robert Towne
Jonah, in my weekend column, I quote Robert
Towne, the screenwriter of Chinatown, who
says he found it hard to concentrate during
writing sessions at Polanski’s place, what
with “the teenyboppers that Roman would run
out and take Polaroid pictures of diving off
the f***ing diving board without tops on.
Which was distracting. With braces.”
From Mark Steyn (Reporter)
Robert Evans
Read his book “the boy stays in the picture”
Mia Farrow
Richard Sylbert
Howard W Koch
Gene Gutowski
Dino Di Laurentiis
Thelma G Roberts
Bronislaw Kraper
Ruth Gordan
Source
oph (850930) — 10/4/2009 @ 4:39 pmhttp://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/1203081roman21.html
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/polanski-rape-world-2591230-one-roman
There cannot be a thirteen year-old who looks as if she were sixteen. Also, while Polanski was raping her she must have been screaming and crying in pain and shame. There is no way he could have failed to notice that he was hurting her. It was not just the man’s lechery but his cruelty that was so wicked.
My guess (which is all it can be) is that Applebaum’s original post was written under the assumption that the crime Polanski pled to was the crime he really committed. Also, it is preposterous that Applebaum couldn’t have known of her husband’s involvement in a petition to have Polanski released. Clearly from her second post, Applebaum is one of those people who will not admit to losing an argument, no matter what. Now she has foolishly undermined her own credibility.
Ian Coleman (5b3fc9) — 10/8/2009 @ 8:11 am[…] say, even if she said yes, it was still rape. As Patrick wrote in a different context: “she was just a little girl.” And heartbreakingly, her parents were forced to watch as their daughter was […]
14 year old girl raped then beaten to death under sentence from imam of adultery. file under imams are not holy men « (88a07c) — 3/30/2011 @ 4:22 pm