September 30, 2009

Whoopi Goldberg is right-right

I wonder, did it ever occur to Whoopi Goldberg that not only is a 13-year-old victim of sexual assault legally incapable of offering consent, but the particular 13-year-old victim of film director Roman Polanski testified to having repeatedly denied consent.

So, yes, in consideration of both of those non-demonstrations of consent it was indeed, as Whoopi Goldberg would say, "rape-rape."

There is no hierarchy of rape and there is no legal dispute over Roman Polanski's self-imposed predicament.* Frankly, it's astonishing that Whoopi Goldberg would even suggest there is a moral one.

* At least, not in the jurisdiction from which he fled prior to sentencing, which is the directly relevant one. Whoopi Goldberg's attempts to raise the broader societal question of age of consent regulations are separate from this case, and immediately fall flat.


krshorewood said...

Anyone who took issue with pedophile priests should not be giving a pass to Roman Polanski, though one can take a lot of empathy with his private life.

On the other hand apologizers of the Catholic Church have no right to attack Polanski.

Confused enough?

Jamaicafest said...

I don't agree with those who say that Whoopi Goldberg was defending Roman Polanski. She was putting the case in a legal context. Polanski was originally charged with "rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance (methaqualone) to a minor." However under a plea bargain those charges were dropped in exchange for pleading guilty to "unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor."

illusory tenant said...

That's rape.

Andrew Golden said...

Nah, Polanski deserves punishment for his fleeing, and he should consider himself lucky it took this long to get extradited back here for the case. No one can really dispute that.

However, the real question I'm curious about is whether the voice of the victim matters here at all. The victim has come out repeatedly and said "Drop the case. Let it go. I don't want to relive this again." I mean, I know that many assault and/or rape victims on the state level here say that too, but it's not like the crime will be swept under the rug like it might be on the lower levels. How much credence should we give to the victim's request?