Candice Bergen | 10/05/2009 12:00 am

Candice Bergen: An Alternative Punishment for Roman Polanski

In response to: Should Roman Polanski go to prison?

The Roman thing is complicated as we all know. It brings out the dark, avenging side of America, yet it is a crime. It was absolutely a criminal, indecent, amoral act and should be acknowledged and in some way paid for. But he is a brilliant, gifted artist. He is a father. And he is 75. How much time should he serve? And why is he not allowed to be home in Switzerland under house arrest? With his kids? Why in prison? What should not happen is his being made an example of with a harsh sentence. There should be a resolution that factors in his contributions and his age. Prolonged house arrest?

277 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Puleez….So you think that everyone who suffers a terrible catastrophe has a right to go out and abuse someone’s child !!!

He is a pedophile and a rapist and this was not the only young girl he had sex with in his career.

By Effie Velardo on 10/06/2009 5:07 pm

e-mail alert

Puleeez….Are you seriously saying that suffering a catastrophe is an excuse for raping a child!!!

When I was young I lost two of my children and I was devastated but I would not have abused a child because of it!! Ev

By Effie Velardo on 10/06/2009 5:14 pm

e-mail alert

Are you freaking kidding me? He went a little crazy after the Manson Murders so he drugged and raped a 13 year old girl? You cannot be serious. Most people react to someone they love being murdered by going after or threatening the person/people who committed the murder. The DO NOT turn around that damage a child for life. He has no honor and neither do you.

By Pamela MacDougall on 10/08/2009 10:31 am

e-mail alert

Nope Wrong he didn’t pay the girl what he was ordered to pay. nothing honarable about that.

By Mary Graham on 10/08/2009 1:11 pm

e-mail alert

If we knew about "history". I am not sure I would call a tale of a sodomizing child rapist "history". I think sordid and disgusting covers that. So the child sodomizer rapist should get a free pass because he is a father? A widower? Lets get to the nitty gritty. Have you ever had anal, unlubricated sex? How do you think that child felt? Send him to jail. Candice Bergen - you are a huge disappointment on this article.

By Kairen D on 10/07/2009 8:49 pm

e-mail alert

This post is beyond disgusting. Ms. Bergen is asking a very intelligent question. That is, in subtext, if a man whose girlfriend and unborn baby are slaughtered in an unbelievably haunting spree of mayhem and he soon thereafter (decades ago) commits a serious crime (which is undisputed, and for which no one has offered any support for his lapse whatsoever), what is the point of spending limited tax dollars, which might well better be used for education and treatment of children who are so totally abused as to grow up into Charles Manson, on incarcerating him. What better could be done in this situation. So, off you go, la de da, standing on your simplistic, moralistic soap box, spouting bumper stickers about anal sex. It is this sort of inability to even look at difficult questions that has left this country leading the industrialized world in infant mortality, 23 or 24th in education, etc., etc. Read my lips: CANDICE BERGEN DID NOT SUPPORT RAPE OF A 13-YEAR OLD. Is this hard to understand? Yes? Okay. Let’s try it again. CANDICE BERGEN DID NOT SUPPORT RAPE OF A 13-YEAR OLD. When you grow up enough to figure out that life is, far from simple, a complex and difficult business, give us a call. Then maybe you’ll be worth talking with.

By Mugsy Peabody on 10/07/2009 9:33 pm

e-mail alert

Wow, Mugsy, you are so far out of touch with reality it is scary. We know Ms. Bergen did not state that she supported the rape of a 13 year old child. What you are missing is that this man, whose name you cannot even spell correctly, RAPED a 13 year old CHILD. What is the point of prosecuting this person? Perhaps if more PEDOPHILES were truly prosecuted and punished for their crimes, regardless of who they are, our children would be safer. And, btw, life is complicated enough without having to worry about our children being drugged and raped. Perhaps after you face reality and realize that if this person had RAPED and DRUGGED your child, you might be worth talking to because you would know that you would be screaming for him to be punished.

By Pamela MacDougall on 10/08/2009 10:41 am

e-mail alert

Cute. Dismiss my comments by pretending I don’t know what’s going on. This is precisely the problem with this nutty "stand on your righteousness" way of pretending other people who disagree with you are out of it and therefore you don’t have to consider what they say. Nice.

By Mugsy Peabody on 10/08/2009 11:50 am

e-mail alert

Mugsy, I considered what you had to say and found it reprehensible. You are defending a pedophile, period. To do that, you must not be in touch with reality. Why don’t you go volunteer at a rape crisis center for a week and see if your opinion on this matter changes. Polanski deserves to be in jail, period.

By Pamela MacDougall on 10/08/2009 12:30 pm

e-mail alert

Absolute bullcrap. I should have followed Ms. Bergen’s lead and realized with the first idiotic remarks made about her post that there is simply no point in trying to talk seriously with someone who is as determined as you are to twist and distort what is being said. I have worked at rape crisis centers. I have worked in prison reform. I have been raped. And none of this changes the fact that the american prison system is an expensive ghastly completely ineffective joke.

By Mugsy Peabody on 10/08/2009 3:46 pm

e-mail alert

This case disturbs me because everyone seems to view it as exceptional. People I normally expect to fight for women’s rights seem to be giving Polanski a pass, while those who frequently engage in victim blaming and rape-enabling ("boys will be boys", "he can’t be a rapist because alot of women would be willing to sleep with him", etc) seem to actually care about this case only because it’s a chance to attack ‘liberal Hollywood’.

I don’t think this case is that unusual however. People who know rapists often believe that they are innocent. The thinking goes that only a monster could do such a thing, and since I know this person is not a monster, they must be innocent, or at least there must be more to the story. But even the nice guy from the office, or your brother, or your best friend’s husband may be the kind of guy who believes that if a woman behaves or dresses a certain way, she no longer has the right to say no. They are clearly wrong, yet because we don’t see that side of them, we believe that side does not exist. We cannot reconcile that misogyny and violence exist within our everyday lives so we deny it, whether we live in Hollywood or Omaha.

I believe Polanski should pay for his crime, just as I believe all rapists should. I just hope those who are so appalled by the support of Polanski are equally appalled when the rapist is the handsome guy down the street or when the victim is a 25 year-old woman with a history of consensual casual sex.

By Anne O'Conner on 10/07/2009 6:51 am

e-mail alert

Community Manager - I agree with Mel Berg; why haven’t these crude posts been deleted? If a few posters want to go one-on-one, verbally-speaking, fine - do so - but not on wOw.

By Patricia Sprofera on 10/05/2009 4:40 pm