lunedì, settembre 28, 2009

The director maintained that Geimer was sexually experienced and consented

I wonder if I'd have more sympathy for that kiddy fiddling frog if I liked his shitty movies any better, but even Chinatown left me cold. I'm pretty fond of Charlie Chaplin, after all, who also ditched the States for Europe after banging teenagers. Somehow it doesn't seem like the same thing though. Call me naive but I believe Chaplin's kiddy-fiddling ways never ran to acting like he was the victim of a Lolita and a puritan conspiracy when he got into trouble for giving a thirteen year old Qualudes, stuffing his cock into all of her orifices while she told him not to, and then running off to Europe because he didn't know what the big fucking deal was after he'd told the law, yeah, sure, he'd done it, and what's more the girl hadn't been unresponsive. Damn those Yankee prudes!

But it's alright, Hollywood types are flocking to his defence, using big words like "philistine collusion" that I'm pretty sure they're not aware of the actual literal meaning of, because let's face it - actors aren't paid to not be absolute fucking morons who don't know when to shut up, which is part of what makes the US's cultural and political dialogue so fucking simple-minded. And the French government is leaping in too; why should one of their more successful citizens be thrown to the lions because of ancient history? Sadly the cinematic tastes of the French cultural elite don't outweigh the 'scary' way California doesn't have a statute of limitations on skipping the country when you've pled guilty to drugging and raping a 13-year-old. God, I hate the French political class. Fucking chinless misogynistic dysfunctional emasculated elitist losers.

Have these semi-literate fucktards actually sat through Bitter Moon? The mediocre little turd should have been locked up for that moronic waste of the time/space continuum alone. Only in a culturally impotent vaccuum like western Europe could a man who managed to make sado-masochism gloomy, stupid AND boring get any cultural traction, certainly enough for national ministers to have a little hissy fit when he gets arrested for kiddy-fiddling. Hyperbole aside, just tell me what other culture he could have managed that in. You can't because there fucking isn't one. Fucking hell.

13 commenti:

Baywatch ha detto...

At the risk of sounding like I'm defending the licentious froggie kiddie-fiddler, I'll just say that 1) I adore Rosemary's Baby, 2) the victim sued and was paid a settlement years ago, 3) the victim also wants the charges dismissed...

Baywatch ha detto...

and it's been awhile, but i recall Repulsion being pretty good too...

Mistress La Spliffe ha detto...

Once you've moved out of the eye-for-an-eye stone age and then pled guilty to feeding a 13-year-old cock and Qualudes I don't know why anybody would suggest it's up to her.

Like any other crime where it's whatsisface versus the people, rape's an offense to society, not just the victim, and the fact it isn't treated as such (very blatantly, in the media treatment of this case, which seldom fails to mention that the lucky little Lolita got closure and a cash settlement from the civil suit) is absolutely fucking nauseating.

Rocky ha detto...

cock and ludes AND Champagne.

Baywatch ha detto...

natch, if it was my 13-yr old daughter, i'd feed him his balls.

but still, citing Bitter Moon? that's an unkind cut.

Mistress La Spliffe ha detto...

It was an unkind cut for meto see his name in the headlines and be reminded of Bitter Moon, a cinematic reminder that bourgeois European francophones couldn't enjoy fucking their way out of a paper bag.

As for the champagne, I'll go so far as to hope the people who force their cocks into all of his (much more aged) orifices in jail provide him with such fucking luxe.

Sam ha detto...

I'm actually pretty angry that my taxes are paying for his extradition trial. Sure, abstractly speaking, the guy deserves jail time (of course, he admitted to statutory rape, not to rape, and no trial was ever held, so in principle he is innocent until proven guilty). However, the state of California wasted plenty of man-hours and will waste plenty of dollars trying to get him back here to stand trial. He has enough money to appeal this forever. California can't even afford to pay its employees. I feel this is a stunt being pulled by the LA prosecutor's office to try to hide the fact that he is doing a terrible job otherwise. I am angry that justice is being used for political ends.

Mistress La Spliffe ha detto...

There was a trial, which finished. He skipped out on sentencing. No presumption of innocence necessary.

And stat rape is rape, hence calling it "rape". Baywatch pointed out that if it had been his daughter, he would have fed him his balls. Great. And if it had been his son? If it had been you, when you were 13? How equipped would you have been to give consent to a 46 year old man in a position of trust?

This wasn't a peccadillo, this was someone doing something that would be rape in any extenuating circumstance, in a society that has decided people in their 40s fucking 13-year-olds, with or without consent (which in this case the girl testified she didn't give), counts as rape.

And if the California budget has hit the point where prosecuting and extraditing legally guilty, fugitive child rapists isn't worth it to fine upstanding types like you (and I'm not being sarcastic when I call you fine and upstanding) because those child rapists are rich enough to defend themselves, the state has got much bigger problems than a politicized prosecutor's office.

If you honestly feel that way, I'd stop being angry and start panicking. Throw your household into the car and drive away in a fucking frenzy, Sam, because apparently it's open season for the rich!

Anyways, sorry California obviously sucks so bad. I hope you live somewhere better at the next contract . . . any news?

Baywatch ha detto...

amendment: if it was my 13-yr old, i'd feed him a director's cut of Bitter Moon.

Mistress La Spliffe ha detto...

Through the hole it deserves, I hope.

Hilts ha detto...

the scene in The Tenant where the dude looks across the apartment complex and see himself on the toilet.

Sam ha detto...

You are mostly right. I am not angry about this case. I was (and am) angry about recent budget cuts, notably cuts to services for children with disabilities. This state is in a financial and constitutional mess beyond what you can imagine. I think it should serve as a warning to those who support direct democracy.

I obviously do not condone rape in the slightest, statutory or otherwise. I am disgusted at the thought even of legal abuses of power/maturity differences, there is no need to make an appeal to my emotions. The law, however, does not serve to punish what offends me. It serves to prevent future crime. I see it doing this in three ways : it can prevent someone from offending again, the fear of punishment can serve as a deterrent, and finally, the enforcement of punishment sends a strong message that society will not put up with this kind of crime. Ideally, also the law should try to provide for the healing of crime victims. In this case, these latter two goals are in contradiction : Ms Geimer has said she would rather not have this issue re-opened because it is painful for her, but we benefit as a society from trying to make the point that this is not a small crime that can be committed and then forgotten about. This is especially important because celebrities may feel themselves above the law. Unfortunately, the original plea bargain itself, the failure to pursue extradition seriously earlier and the high probability this case will drag on and turn into an OJ Simpson-esque farce probably damages any chance this has of sending a message.

You're right. I am angry that he was offered a plea bargain three decades ago, and I am angry that they didn't really put in any effort to extraditing him in the first 30 years. I am angry that the enforcement of the law is subject to such whimsical application... and I am angry at the financial mismanagement that this state seems gifted at.

Mistress La Spliffe ha detto...

I appealed to your emotions because you were drawing a distinction between rape and stat rape that I thought was unwarranted and unconsciously sexist, the logic of which was sitting on the wrong emotional base.

I agree with you in terms of the delays and the original plea bargain, though it was my understanding the victim and her family agreed to the plea bargain, and in North American law sentencing is the point where the victim's opinion is legitimately taken into consideration.

It was also my understanding the judge was considering, at most, sending him back to prison for another 42 days and then asking for his voluntary departure from the country - as he goes through the extradition and legal process in California my guess is that he'll serve several times that.

So in this case, the "whimsicality" of the law, and the big consequences of doing a runner after being found guilty, very aptly communicate the message that this is not a small crime that can be committed and then forgotten about.

I'm not congratulating the administration of the state of California on this one. I've heard the arrest happened because a low-ranked Swiss cop saw an advert for the festival (the Swiss, BTW, are great adverts for direct democracy, so don't hate on it too much while we're talking about them or else we'll have to conclude it's a problem with Californians, not the institution), realized where and when Polanski would be, and pushed the issue.

I can readily believe the whole thing was the DA's office wanting to avoid the scandal of seeming to do nothing at a time when they're unpopular, if the Swiss cop was willing to go public with the non-results of his report.

But even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day, and in this case the Californian and Swiss legal systems are telling the right time. If you were going to get properly angry about the mismanagement of your tax dollars there are much better targets for your wrath.