Victim to L.A.’s D.A.: Drop the Polanski case

Samantha Geimer tells the Los Angeles Times what she’s been saying for the last three decades:

The victim in the Roman Polanski sex case said she hopes the  Swiss government’s decision not to extradite the director to the United States to face sentencing for having sex with her when she was 13 brings the long-running case to a close.

Samantha Geimer, who has in the past publicly forgiven Polanski, told The Times she hopes L.A. County prosecutors will now drop the matter.

“I hope that the D.A.’s office will now have this case dismissed and finally put the matter to rest once and for all,” she said in an e-mail.


3 responses to “Victim to L.A.’s D.A.: Drop the Polanski case

  1. michellefrommadison

    If you understood the actual court records of his case and the reasons why he pled guilty, then you would understand why he could never actually be convicted in any court for the alleged offense if it went to trial. Lots of people back then pleaded guilty to charges they were never actually guilty of committing because the risk of trial could not always guarantee the correct result. It also certainly does not mean his guilty plea was an actual admission of guilt to the crime, it only means he pleaded to the best option he faced with that court.

    • I do understand the records of the case both because I have most of them, but also because I sat through every day of the court process.

      His plea was an admission of guilt, and in great detail. I have a copy of his statement in which he made a detailed admission to the specific elements of the charge of statutory rape. I also know many things about the case that were not admitted into the record because of the plea agreement.

      The question of conviction without a plea is a different issue. The victim’s family told the court she would not testify [the family was being hounded by paparazzi and they feared she would be harmed by their relentless pursuit], and the plea was reached on that basis. There is no question he could have been convicted today of the offense to which he plead guilty, given modern DNA capability for testing a crucial item of evidence.

  2. That ‘item’, Richard, could never have been admitted, since it was not taken off Geimer’s body directly afterwards – she fetched the ‘item/s’ from her room – it’s inadmissible ‘evidence’ today as it was then. The ‘item’ could have been from anyone, & the stains found held no definite semen proof to begin with. Any DNA testing today would not find any link to Polanski – since for one, the semen/ejaculate Geimer said he had deposited all over her back & inside her rectum was never found, & the stain itself was not where she said it should have collected if he had.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s