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

Yes Simone, what would someone do? Imagine that you walk by a room, the door is opened, there they are a child begging for him to stop. A grown man having his way with this child in a most painful and humiliating way. What then?

Do you keep on walking? Figure it is none of your business? Leave the CHILD naked and drugged, pleading with her rapist?

Does it really matter WHOSE child it is? Aren’t they all our children after all, ours to protect?

And all of the hog wash about him being upset and "clouded", is purely ridiculous. I have been plenty upset. I have been drunk before. But I have NEVER thought about raping and sodomizing a child of 13. What kind of excuse is that?

He needs to sit in a prison and feel as helpless and out of contol and scared as that 13 year old child did. At least he has made sure that he lived the life that he wanted to. Her, well that’s another story.

By True Grit on 10/06/2009 9:30 am

e-mail alert

Holy crap she’s upset! ^~~~~ but i do agree, i don’t care how talented he is, and what great he has done, he did something with malicious intentions, and not to mention got charged with sodomy! 13 year old! in addition to other charges! it is an outrage that he did not get what he deserves. i think of my children every single time something horrible happens, and what i would feel in those ppls shoes, and not to mention what that poor child felt, the whole world found out what happened to her, a truly traumatic experience.

By Maleney Thibeault on 10/05/2009 2:14 am

e-mail alert

WHAT?

"It brings out the dark, avenging side of America"

How dare you! If the laws of this country offend you, go back to France. The man raped a child, he didn’t jaywalk. Where is your common sense? Let’s just let all the rapists and pedophiles out of jail, if according to Hollywood types, they have a little talent. For that matter, let’s let O.J. out, he was in a movie or two and he was a talented football player. After all, he only butchered two innocent people. Maybe you could ask Ron Goldman’s father to forgive and forget because O.J. is old now. I agree with the above poster. If it were your daughter, would you be so liberal?

By Lin Cercone on 10/05/2009 2:43 am

e-mail alert

Just an FYI: O.J. Simpson was not convicted of murder and the Goldman case is not why he’s in prison.

By Karen R on 10/05/2009 12:19 pm

e-mail alert

Hey Karen:

Yes, I am aware of that fact, but I choose to believe its some sort of "divine intervention" or "Karma" that he was finally put in prison, lost his book deal to the Goldman’s and that somehow justice prevailed. I should have been clearer in my comparison to the stupidity of an "alternative" punishment for RP.

By Lin Cercone on 10/05/2009 12:51 pm

e-mail alert

Actually Karen R, OJ is in prison. He was also convicted of the murder in Civil Court.

By CJ McDonald on 10/05/2009 1:38 pm

e-mail alert

O.J. Simpson is in prison for weapons, robbery, and kidnapping convictions stemming from an incident in 2007 and unrelated to the 1994/1995 murder trial.

Civil court does not convict people of criminal charges. Civil court cases are about financial issues, require a lower burden of proof, and do not send people to jail or prison.

By Karen R on 10/05/2009 2:56 pm

e-mail alert

Lin, you have amply demonstrated the dark, avenging side of America. Candice Bergen is an American citizen. She was born here. She has common sense in places you never dreamed off. So instead of attacking her, why don’t you try to make sense of your ill-stated, unsupported, rambling "dark, avenging" opinion?

By the way, "liberal" is not a pejorative term, it is a term of pride and responsibility.

A jury acquitted O.J. Simpson. The jury trial is a cornerstone of our democracy. If you don’t like the way we do business here, why don’t you go back to whereever you are from?

One of the reasons many of us with good sense, reason, and intelligence don’t post on wOw as we once did is that we have little if any patience with this sort of nonsense.

By Mugsy Peabody on 10/05/2009 3:03 pm

e-mail alert

Speaking of "attacking", what kind of response is this Mugsy Peabody? Lin had a very accurate post, many agree with her. Just because you think that rape of a 13 year old is hunky-dory, doesn’t entitle that man to ignore the laws of our country. You know, the "cornerstone of our democracy" as you pointed out. Lin may ask you the very same question; "if you don’t like the way do business here, why don’t you go back where ever you are from?"

See, that doesn’t exactly work out for you, now does it?

O.J. was aquitted by Jury Nullification. That is what that was.

And FYI "liberal" used to be a term was acceptable until the left rendered it unusable. Now they prefer "progressive", every time that their unworkable experiments fail, they rename them. It is a rule for them, they think that it fools the ignorant masses. You know, the masses that they claim to represent.

But in the end, I have to agree with you Mugsy; Polanski needs to honor our system and our laws. Rape of a 13 year old child is illegal in America and has consequences. Consequences that are not up to him to decide. Consequences that all other Americans must be held to.

By True Grit on 10/06/2009 9:45 am

e-mail alert

Misreading my posts doesn’t change what I said. Lin didn’t have a "very accurate post." She attacked Ms. Bergen for asking some important questions. Such as, do we believe in redemption (a cornerstone of Christianity). We apparently do not. Do we believe in compassion, another cornerstone of Christianity)? No, simply no. We make no attempt whatsoever to understand why a man whose girlfriend and unborn baby were viciously carved up would lose it. I never said rape of a 13-year old is "hunky-dory," nor did Ms. Bergen. What we said was callously misconstrued to mean that by people of ill-will toward us both, apparently. Roman Polansky is not O.J. Simpson. Apples and oranges. But let’s throw them in there so it will be clear that Ms. Bergen is wrong in asking questions about the prison system, statute of limitations, fairness of the justice system, etc. You don’t speak for the left. The right wing talk show people and establishment decided to tell everyone what "liberal" meant and who is or is not a "liberal." It is bullcrap. As to you speaking for Americans? Not on my watch. You do a poor enough job of it speaking for yourself.

By Mugsy Peabody on 10/06/2009 1:39 pm

e-mail alert

By the way, Charles Manson is a good ole America boy, born in Ohio. As were Richard Speck, Jeffrey Dahmer, Timothy McVeigh and any number of other serial killers. Good ole American boys. To date, France hasn’t managed to produce one of these.

By Mugsy Peabody on 10/06/2009 1:44 pm

e-mail alert

Mugsy Peabody, why do you attack people. What "watch"? What are you watching? You misread what it is to be a Christian. Redemption and compassion is alive and well, but that does not EXCUSE him from the law of the land. They are not mutually exclusive.

There have been plenty of people that have been through horrific times, some where there and had to witness the deaths of their loved ones. To say that his actions were acceptable because of what happen to his wife, is to demean and belittle those that have survived such evil and did not in turn commit such a selfish, amoral and illegal act.

He made sure to stay away, so the issue of the statute of limitations is laughable! Please, he can go sit his preverted behind in jail like anyone else would have had to. And to compare Simpson with Polanski is very appropriate, they are both celebrities that have gotten preferrential treatment because of that celebrity. It is crazy! They are just an actor and a director for heavens sakes, they play make believe, for crying out loud!

I obviously do quite well speaking for myself, you responded after all.

I suggest that you do some research about the "liberal" vs "progressive" movement. Hilliary has some comments on that issue. There are plenty of articles on that as well.

Rape is never ok. Especially when it involves a CHILD.

By True Grit on 10/06/2009 11:52 pm

e-mail alert

While you are swaggering about patting yourself on the back for how very clever you are, True Grit, why don’t you look again at my posts and those of Ms. Bergen and admit at least to yourself that neither of us ever defended "raping a child." It is a total moral copout to pretend that we did. We were talking about something entirely different, i.e., appropriate sanctions for such behavior. Since our prison system is a costly and abysmal failure on all counts, perhaps there’s something else that can be done? But you don’t want to talk about that. You want to argue and swagger. So obviously you have nothing to contribute to an intelligent discussion of the original question Ms. Bergen posed. Particularly since you can’t even seem to figure out what it was. I was pissed because others also demonstrated amply their inability to look beyond their shallow, knee-jerk reactions to the name Roman Polansky to have a discussion about her questions, and attacked her personally, i.e., "go back to France," and such schoolyard nonsense.

By Mugsy Peabody on 10/07/2009 12:58 am

e-mail alert

Who’s from France?

By Simone St. Cyr on 10/05/2009 3:20 pm

e-mail alert

I am no fan of OJ, but I work daily to hold on to the many ideals upon which this country was founded. The criminal justice system is one that is difficult to embrace. However, the facts are the facts, and the evidence is the evidence. In the case of OJ Simpson, it seems as if the LAPD framed a guilty man. They did not let the facts and evidence speak for themselves. He was granted a trial in which a jury found him "not guilty." Note, I did not say "innocent."

In the case of Polanaski, he admitted to the lewd and lascivious acts with which he was charged.

By Robbin Moore on 10/06/2009 9:29 am