Serious Topic Alert! Reader Discretion is Advised.

I have spent more time thinking and reading about the topic matter of this column than any I have written thus far in this space. It contains serious matter and is on a sensitive topic. This digression from my normal topic matter will be just that, a digression, and not a change in theme...I just cannot resist. I have been rankled.

There has been a recent uproar in relation to an old case involving a Hollywood director that has led to the director's arrest just outside of Zurich. Some Hollywood folks, including Woody Allen and Martin Scorcese, have started and signed a petition for his release, drawing more media attention to the case. The case dates to 1977...

Roman Polanski is a film director. Roman Polanski also was something of an amateur photographer, and he used this hobby to entice the parents of a 13-year old girl to allow Polanski to bring her to his Hollywood friend's house to take some pictures. Then, in an undisputed recollection of events, Polanski plied the girl with a glass of champagne and a partial quaalude, then proceeded to do some things of a sexual nature to her. It was against her will.

None of the above is in question. All of this happened. The reason for the conflict some feel about this matter, about this arrest, about this entire sequence is what will be explored here.

To do so best, I will explore both sides. My viewpoint is irrelevant to this writing, but the argument is not only irresistible, it is imperative to understanding the different definitions of the word 'justice'. It is a case where the uproar is coming from the directions not anticipated, and the wish for remediation coming from those not expected.

First, the side of those wishing for Polanski's freedom and exoneration on these charges:

-Polanski agreed to a plea deal in 1977 that allowed him to be released after a 90-day mental examination in Los Angeles. His deal allowed him to complete filming a movie outside of the country, then return for the exam. He did return for the exam, and after 43 days, the court-appointed examiners determined that probation was a suitable sentence. When photos surfaced of Polanski attending social events during the time away filming before the examination, the judge, reputed to be a celebrity case-seeking jurist, sensed public embarassment, and revoked his agreement to honor the recommendation of the examiners. When sentencing was to commence after that withdrawl of the agreement, Polanski was nowhere to be found. The judge then issued a warrant, and bench warrants do not have a statute of limitations, effectively making Polanski a fugitive from the law.

-Polanski had no prior record, and has not committed any crimes of the sort (or any crimes at all that can be tracked) since.

-Polanski's wife, actress Sharon Tate, was murdered a few years before by the Manson family, and their sentences of death were commuted to life in prison, forever making Polanski a victim of the justice system in America.

-After 32 years of being tracked down and dragged through the sequence repeatedly, including participation in a documentary on the event, the victim wishes for no further action to be taken, if only to not re-open her deep psychological wounds. She is married with children, and has moved on with her life as best as she could after this terrible event.

-He is now 77, a pariah, and has spent 32 years in exile.

*Please note that this list does not include the aforementioned petition. The folks who wrote and signed this are, quite simply, out of line for commenting on the matter. So are the media outlets who gave this story legs by rehashing the events surrounding it. This matter should be discussed by those involved, not those rooting for a new movie to be made.

The case for making Polanski go to jail and serve a sentence that was never determined:

-It was rape. The victim was not only not of age, but has repeatedly claimed (with no rebuke by the defense) that she said 'No'. There is no dispute. That part of the case is closed.

Notice how only one point needs to be made for this side of the argument, and this is what I need to explore.

We have all been inundated with statistics of the percentage of women that have been sexually assaulted, in varying degrees, and with the percentage of these that go unreported. We also know the difficulty in coming forward about the offenses by the victims, as the combination of embarassment, victimization and old-school double standards of disbelief all combine to make the process of coming forward difficult. We also know that some lecherous douchebags take advantage of this. We, as individuals, all probably know someone (or multiples) that have been affected by a crime of this nature, and no one wishes for these crimes to go unpunished. One can hope that karma deals with the perpetrators, and one can hope the court system does, as well.

The question this brings is this: What defines 'justice' in this matter?

For the record:

-Polanski pled guilty to one count of unlawful sexual intercourse, acknowlegding he knew the girl to be only 13. He also admitted that champagne and sedatives were involved.

-The victim's family lawyer sent a letter to the court at the time, wishing for the sentence of probation to be agreed to, mostly to spare the child from testifying and being identified to the public.

-The plea agreement is on the record.

By the court's definition of it in 1977, he has more than served his debt to the public. By today's standards, he will be jailed for the rest of his life. With the climate surrounding these heinous crimes having evolved over the last three decades, there is no way Polanski would not see jail time. Any judge that agreed to the deal now that was made in '77 would never be allowed on a bench again by a growingly unforgiving public.

Should a man be penalized now on standards that have developed dramatically from when the crime was perpetrated? If so, why has Manson not been executed? By a fluke of federal law, Manson is alive and gets parole hearings regularly, as do his flunkies. This man has a very personal relationship with how the wind changes moods on crimes. Also because of the high-profile nature of Manson's crimes, he was allowed to make money that went to a trust that pays for his legal defense by telling his story. (The laws have since changed on a criminal's ability to cash in on his crime from jail...coincidence?) Some of the same people that helped commute all of those death sentences are pushing for child rapists to be eligible for the death penalty. Is that hypocrisy or evolution?

No justice is served by making the victim relive these events, and that is about the only thing anyone agrees on, yet some are willing to make her suffer more to get their own personal sense of 'justice' out of this 'outrage'.

The confilct arises when you speak with someone that has been victimized by some cretin in this matter. 7DB has some personal experiences with matters of this sort, having been around many survivors of these terrible happenings over the course of life, and there is no telling a victim of a crime like this that any sentence short of death by castration and infection is a proper dose of justice. The problem lies in anecdotal evidence making judgement calls in daily life. This is why society has laws and elects lawmakers, to prevent the lynch mob mentality taking over in situations such as these.

7DB guesses that the only answer is that there is no right answer. Although 7DB is an amateur, one could make a good case for a claim on Polanski's behalf that justice did not serve him, either in the loss of his wife or in the plea agreement 32 years ago. One should also say he raped a teenage girl, changing the course of her life forever, and that he has not paid any price of consequence for it. Both are true. If American Justice chooses to prosecute him on today's standards, however, we are doing a grander injustice to many more for a much bigger scope of time, and anyone with a knee-jerk reaction to this particular case is participating in a bastardization of the justice system we depend on as a society.

7DB personally endorses the idea of letting Polanski try to assimilate back into Hollywood. If he starts a foundation to assist victims of these crimes, maybe directs a movie with an empowering message to victims of this sort, finds ways to pay penance, that kind of thing...maybe he is allowed to die in America in five or ten years. If he does nothing, he can be tormented by the folks inclined to carry picket signs in front of theaters that show his work, and he can continue to be ostracized from society. There is no way, ever, that his name is said other than as:

Director Roman Polanski, convicted rapist.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From the personal exposure mentioned above, it is never too late to get help if you or a loved one has been a victim of crimes of this nature. The horrible nature of the crime is exacerbated by the healing process that is a continual process.

One organization I am familiar with is RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network). Seek them out at http://www.rainn.org or at 1.800.656.HOPE