What is Wrong With People?

by Holly Hughes

The more I hear about the Penn State pedophilia scandal, the angrier I get. A bunch of grown men sat around and did nothing for years, allowing who knows how many young boys to be sexually molested. 

It boggles my mind that a grown man walked in on the rape of a child and did nothing to stop it. Forget for a moment the whole question of who it should have been reported to. Just pause and think about what really happened back in 2002 in a Penn State locker room shower. Mike McQueary, a grown man, a graduate assistant at the time, has said he heard the sound of skin slapping on skin. He went into the shower area and saw a young boy, whose age he estimates to be around ten, with his hands pinned up against the wall and Jerry Sandusky was having anal intercourse with the child. In response to this assault McQueary turns and walks away. He doesn’t yell out or stop Sandusky from raping this little boy, he just simply leaves. He goes home and tells his father. Still, neither of them telephone the police. 

To this day, despite the indictment and charges levied against Sandusky, that little boy from the shower is still unidentified. No one knows if he is even alive today. Unfortunately, the statistics tell us that abused children often get into drugs, prostitution and other trouble with the law. McQueary tells his “boss,” Joe Paterno, who passes the information on to Tim Curley and Gary Schultz and nothing is done.

This case is a cautionary tale in many respects. Time after time there were multiple opportunities to stop this monster, Sandusky, from abusing children. As early as 1998, Sandusky was reported to authorities as having inappropriate contact with young boys. Despite the fact that Sandusky admitted to the boy’s mother, on tape, that he had showered with her eleven year old son and other boys and “wishes he was dead”, nothing is done. Despite interviewing another young boy who also reports that Sandusky showered with him, nothing is done. The District Attorney at the time, Ray Gricar, declines to prosecute this predator, and nothing is done. Thomas Harmon, who headed the campus police force at the time, closed the investigation and nothing is done. 

In 2000, a janitor named Jim Calhoun tells a co-worker and his supervisor that he saw Sandusky engaged in sexual activity with a young boy in the showers. The supervisor tells Calhoun who he can report it to if he wants. Again, another grown man, this time Calhoun, does nothing to stop the sexual assault of a child while it is in progress. No one, not Calhoun, his coworker or his supervisor calls the police and nothing is done. 

Another highly disturbing aspect is that all of these grown men (and more) knew Sandusky had six adopted children, took in foster children and ran a charity he had established for “troubled” youth. Did these men honestly think that those children were safe in Sandusky’s care? It is unconscionable to me that all of these men turned away and did nothing at the expense of every victim since the first reported one in 1998. Not one of them can honestly say they thought pedophilia was a one time event. Their behavior is indefensible. 

The average pedophile is said to have 100 victim over his lifetime, but I fear Sandusky is far worse than the “average” pedophile. This is a man who, thanks to his friends, had an endless supply of young boys to victimize. They enabled a child molester to continue unchecked for years. 

The Penn State officials, who had a mandatory duty to report suspected child abuse, never did so. Their answer was to take away Sandusky’s keys to the locker room. Really? Really? So, what’s the message there, “It’s okay to rape children, just don’t do it on our campus"? I have heard all the excuses. They didn’t want to destroy the integrity of the football program? Well, how’s that going for you boys? The janitor didn’t want to lose his job. How about his humanity? His compassion? His sense of decency? 

Having prosecuted homicides, hate crimes and high profile cases for ten years, I didn’t think there was much that could still shock me. I was wrong. The depth of this cover up at the expense of children is sickening. Even as I write this piece, more victims are coming forward. Sadly, there will be more victims unidentified than the number we will know about. 

As the Senate schedules congressional hearings and the California legislature proposes laws to prevent this from happening again I can’t help but think of the sad irony. It takes a tragedy like this for people to wake up and realize that we are failing the children of this country in horrifying ways. 

Frighteningly, it didn’t take a special hearing of Congress to prevent this particular tragedy. It would have only taken one of those grown men to “man up” and take a stand. To report this monster and expose him, before he abused all of his victims. 

Sometimes it takes a village, sometimes it just takes one good man. How tragic that we didn’t have one here.

Tweet

Denial In Naples: The Case of Steven Noyes

by Robin Sax

One would think that in the year 2011, given the advances in technology, communication, and social awareness, child sexual assault would not only be accepted as something that exists but should at this point be known as a crime that takes a particularly skilled type of perpetrator to commit. Yet, everyday very smart, caring people put theirs and other children at risk by not accepting the very harsh realities of child sexual assault. 

Today’s case of denial begins in the tight-knit Naples, Florida community at a school dedicated to Christian values where a young 9 year old -- herein referred to as Doe did as we hope any child would -- reported that her beloved teacher Steven Noyes touched her. Yet as the news spread throughout the school community, as is often the case, a loud group of disbelievers, naysayers, and deniers made their voices heard.  It is the children of those people that I am most concerned for.

What motivates those members of the school community jump to the teacher's defense? Why do people in these cases automatically disbelieve the victim and support the teacher? Is it possibly because the parents cannot stomach the image of a teacher being a sexual predator? Is it all about denial? Are these people naïve or are they cruel? Eternal optimist that I am, I'm betting on naïve.  So as we sit here and pat ourselves on the back about how far we have come when it comes to sexual assault, I say it's time to accept the facts:

• When society accepts the myths surrounding sexual abuse, it assists sex offenders by silencing victims and encouraging public denial about the true nature of these assaults against children.
• Even "really great" and "really nice” teachers can be sexually inappropriate. As a matter of fact, the "nicer" the teacher is the more likely that the teacher is using charm and kindness as a way to groom and seek victims.
• Statistics show that the number of false allegations of sexual assault are far less than the number of truthful allegations of sexual assault. Yet, the default mode is to disbelieve, rather than to believe, the victim.
• 1 in 4 women will be assaulted in the course of her lifetime. It is because of the blame, denial, and fear that many do not report the crime.
• Not everyone who comes in contact with a child molester will be abused. In truth, sex offenders tend to carefully pick and set up their victims.  Thus, while sex offenders may feel driven to molest children, they rarely do so indiscriminately or without a plan.
• Sexual assault survivors are never responsible for the attack, no matter what, no matter how much alcohol was consumed. Responsibility lies with the perpetrator; the survivor is never responsible for the assailant's behavior.

THE PEOPLE

Jane Doe  is an outgoing, kind girl, who still to this day doesn’t even get the sexual nature of a breast-touch, or even breasts as sexual body parts.  She had loved the Village School of Naples since she started there in kindergarten. 

Her parents are the kind of folks you’d want in your community and in your school-- trust me, you’d want them as your friends. They are church going, softball playing parents who take pride in their value-driven life. In fact, they chose Doe’s school because of its mission of, “educating the child’s mind, body, and spirit through Christian values in an ever-changing world.” 

Since the day they were made aware that Doe’s allegations had been reported to the school, they’ve felt anything but Christian values.  And the fact that Doe had to suffer the molestation wasn’t  enough; the teacher and the school decided to question Doe’s story. Interestingly it didn’t happen right away… no the questioning came right before the school was getting a visit for re-accreditation.  Hmm… coincidence? 

The teacher’s name is Steven Noyes, a one-time Golden Halo honoree, who has responded to the investigation by hiring a criminal defense attorney who hijacked the investigation. Noyes refuses to answer questions and refuses to take a polygraph--leaving the sheriffs who want to get to the truth no choice but to suspend the investigation until Noyes changes his mind. Thankfully there is no statute of limitations on child sexual assault, so if Mr. Noyes is faced with another case --therefore corroboration -- this case should come back to haunt him.

THE INCIDENT

The facts of the case are not much different than any other sexual assault.  That is, a a sexual assault that was reported early in the cycle of abuse like Doe’s.  After all, a perpetrator doesn’t just start with out with intercourse or oral copulation.  No--they start slow. They groom and groom to test the “loyalty” and vulnerability of their victim.

Just after Christmas 2010, Doe was in her homeroom class working on her math homework and got stumped on a long division problem. She asked her teacher for help. She went up to her teacher’s desk, and that’s when it happened.

As Doe tells her mother and father, the teacher began helping her with her first question. He put his hand under her dress and on her knee. Then, he reached his hand up her back and under her shirt, coming around the front to rub her chest. He kept his hand there while he helped her with three other math problems.

Afterward Doe didn’t protest. Instead she thanked Mr. Noyes and returned to her seat. She didn’t understand what just happened to her, but she couldn’t push one thought from her mind. When she went home that night, Doe says she still feels her teacher’s hand on her chest. It’s a horribly vivid sensation she can’t shake. As Doe’s mother was getting ready for our courthouse press conference, she told me “Doe still feels that hand--to this day."

THE AFTERMATH

The parents didn’t panic, but they simply wanted answers, direction, and support. They didn’t call lawyers or press instead they approached the head of the school, Ginger Sauter, a woman they’ve gone to church with for years, as a friend. Ginger told them, “this is all my fault, I shouldn’t have let him hug the children.”

Then things quickly turned from bad to worse. A criminal investigation began on January 21, 2011, two days after the incident, conducted by an officer from the Collier County Sheriff’s Department. On January 28, the investigator received a phone call – not from Stephen Noyes, but from his criminal defense attorney – who informed the officer that Mr. Noyes, “would not be answering questions, or submitting to a polygraph examination."

On February 1, the same officer paid a visit to the Doe’s home. The little girl bravely met with the investigator, even agreeing to wear the same dress she wore to school that day. She even allowed him to photograph her in it.

Then the officer informed Doe’s mom the investigation had gone as far as it could.  He told the family that he could find no other leads, no other child to corroborate Doe’s story, and with the suspect, ”not agreeing to speak to me,” there was nothing further he could do. And so, the case would be suspended.  So sad, how this suspension somehow provides some people with an excuse to think that this crime couldn’t have occurred. As if the abuse and aftermath was not enough, The Village School of Naples added salt to the fresh wound.

The school doesn’t sit the family down to discuss what to do next. They church pastor, closely associated with the school, does not come to administer spiritual support to the family, instead the Village School quietly expelled little Doe from school!  How’s that for child-centered education? The teacher was allowed to return to his job. Imagine. You did the right thing and they don’t believe you.  In a blink of an eye, you go from honor student, to expelled student.

THE LAWSUIT


Child sexual abuse has reached epidemic proportions in schools throughout our nation and has become an alarmingly frequent occurrence. The cases that are surfacing almost daily serve as a wake-up call to everyone in America to protect our children.

The teacher, Steven Noyes, is by all accounts "beloved” and has a clean record. The same scenario goes for the priests who sexually abuse children and all of the other people who choose careers working with children, only to groom them and then sexually abuse them. That’s the typical M.O. of a child abuser. And yet it is the priest, or the accused teacher, who often is believed over the victim.

The day of our news conference, as Doe’s parents nervously walked up to the podium of microphones to face those cameras, there was a taint of disbelief in the air, as though someone had convinced the reporters covering this lawsuit Doe had made-up this story. The questions from the press came fast and furious.

"Wasn’t there a complete investigation?"

"Didn’t they close the case due to lack of evidence?"

I answered one by one.

"No the investigation isn’t over, it was suspended when Mr. Noyes refused to answer the sheriff’s questions."

Some of the questions came from a man standing among the press core.  Well-dressed and well coiffed despite the heat, we learned he was criminal attorney Jerry Berry. Berry began shouting his comments from behind the line of cameras.

I invited him up so he could speak his mind.  He began to attack us--for filing a lawsuit, for holding a press conference, and worst of all the press seemed to go along with this approach. Yes, they wanted to know, why do you want to sue the school. 

This is the story of a father who believes, and is standing up for his little girl. It’s about a mother who wants to make sure no other child goes through the pain and suffering her daughter has. The goal in filing a suit is to get answers, to hold the school accountable; to make sure that this case is not simply swept under the rug.

It is our goal to have a safe forum for people to come forward as we know that there are likely other victims out there. My co-counsel Jeff Herman said it best, “Now we wait for the other girls to come forward. The ones who also know they were touched inappropriately, but suffered in silence."

Our suit describes what happened to Doe. Over the years, Noyes reportedly the “hugging” teacher essentially groomed his young victim. He showered her with affection, drew her close and built a relationship based on trust.

Doe’s parents told me they feel he groomed them too with signs of friendship over the years, all the while insinuating Doe closer and closer into his circle. They remain solid in their conviction they are doing what’s right. And their daughter gives them the strength to do it. After she won an award in her new school, she said, “see mommy, God rewards good people.”

I hope so. I really do.

Tweet

Is TSA Setting A New Legal Precedent On What Defines A Sexual Assault?

by Vicki Polin

Over the last several days, I've been paying close attention to our government's response to the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA's) newest measures of providing security in airports. Why? Because, for the last 26 years, I've been actively involved in educating the public on good touch/bad touch and helping individuals understand what defines a sexual assault. It appears that over the last few weeks, all that work has been thrown out the window by the TSA with its new aggressive and mandatory pat-down body searches.

What concerns me most is that the actions of TSA agents could be legally defined as a sexual assault. I don't care that the TSA supervisors are saying that's not the case. According to the laws of our land, it is. The legal definition of a sexual assault includes: "Any unwanted physical contact to one's genitals." Groping or fondling another persons sexual organs against their will is never OK. When anyone purposely brushes up on an individuals genitals against the intended victims wishes, it is considered a sexual assault. I'll be honest with you; my fear is that a new legal precedent is being set by the TSA. If we stand by and do nothing, this could end up with sexual assault laws being changed.

I am aware that in prisons and in some mental health facilities they do strip searches and force inmates and patients to squat while the individual is naked to ensure the safety of the individual and others in the facilities, which I at times have had an issue with based on the way it's done. Yet to do this randomly to those who are not criminals or declared a danger to themselves or to someone else is ridiculous. What comes next? Pat downs on city streets in gang-infested neighborhoods?

I'm not a lawyer; I am a psychotherapist who has been advocating for the rights of survivors of sex crimes for more than a quarter of a century. If we all sit back and do nothing, and if there is non-action by our legislators and or the rest of our federal government, this becomes very scary. By doing nothing, our government is stating that sexual assault is not a crime, especially if the perpetrator is one of their employees. If we start allowing TSA agents to sexually assault our citizens as well as visitors to our country, how long will it take before judges begin using this legal precedent in cases involving other governmental employees or agencies that receive federal funding, such as law enforcement officials, postal workers and or any other agency that receives federal funding. Think about it; it could also include school employees, camp counselors, hospital employees, religious, other nonprofit organizations, and more.

By sitting back and allowing the TSA to perpetrate sexual assaults against our citizens, what messages are we sending out not only to your children but to the rest of the world? America is a great country, yet we complacently allow our citizens to be assaulted by the government? We are all screwed if we allow that to happen.

Is this necessary for our security. No. The Israeli airline, El Al--which is known to have the tightest security of all airlines--would never allow this type of behavior. Recently on "Countdown with Keith Obermann," in a segment titled "If you touch my junk I'll have you arrested," Isaac Yeffet, the former security director of El Al, said he views TSA's current behavior as outrageous.

Judge for yourself. Here's Yeffet's interview:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Vicki Polin, a licensed clinical professional counselor, is founder and director of The Awareness Center, Inc., an international Jewish Coalition Against Sexual Abuse/Assault.

Tweet

Human Trafficking on the World Wide Web

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Tweet

Beyond Inhuman: The Gang Rape Phenomenon

By Robin Sax

How could such a horrific gang rape go on for two hours,  in front of a small crowd, without anyone calling for help? The Oct. 24 rape, beating and robbery of a 15-year-old Richmond High School girl left her in critical condition after dozens stood by and did nothing. Police suspect as many as 18 people participated in the attack while the girl's classmates enjoyed themselves at a school dance just yards away. 

Richmond, California, Police Lt. Mark Gagan said the kids “were obviously okay enough with it to behave that way in each other's presence." Even more disturbing -- if that’s possible -- is the presence of dozens of bystanders. “People came by, saw what was happening and failed to report it,” Gagan said.

The Richmond gang rape is among the worst of recent attacks. Of the large group watching the brutality, not one among them had enough conscience or character to so much as report the crime.

Dara Cashman, head of the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office sex crimes unit, said that those who witnessed the attack but didn't report it could face aiding-and-abetting charges -- “if it can be proven that their actions facilitated or goaded the perpetrators." Lt. Gagan speculated that a “mob mentality” took over that night and  became uglier and more hostile as word spread, drawing more witnesses. 

“More and more people came to see what was happening” according to one teen. “The original spectators drew more spectators, and not one bothered to call the police for two hours.”

On Nov. 22, passengers in an NYC subway car were frozen with fear while they watched a fatal stabbing. Not one picked up a cell phone to call, or even quietly text, for help. The stabbed passenger was pronounced dead on the scene when the train came into the station.

On Sept. 29, a Chicago honors student was beaten to death of a gang of other teens. He didn't belong to any gang, but his attackers mistook him for a member of a rival street gang. The boy was beaten to death in front of dozens of teenage witnesses. 

As in the Richmond gang rape and the NYC train stabbing, no one called for help. There was at least one student taping the beating, but only after it was over did he try to help the victim.  

The examples of teen violence go on and on. On Nov. 24, a 14-year-old Alabama girl helped arrange the gang rape of her fellow ninth-grade classmate and faces charges as an accomplice. Witnesses did nothing to help the victim.

This insensitivity begs the questions: How can these young kids be so brutally violent? Where are they learning such behavior? Why don't witnesses feel a duty to report violence occurring right in front of them? What is happening psychologically to teenagers, witnesses as well as perpetrators?

Regardless, it is our job as a society to put an end to it. How do we do that? What are we doing as a society to encourage violent behavior? We're ambivalent, negative, and accustomed to blaming the victim.

Many people automatically avoid getting involved, mind their own business, look the other way. We try to avoid jury duty, don’t want to pull over when we witness a car accident, and pretend not to hear when our kids badmouth other kids. 

We know, but prefer to forget, that kids model the behavior of the adults around them. If we want them to develop compassion, character, and responsibility, we must let let them see those qualities in us. We must show them that along with our rights as citizens come responsibilities to the other people in our community. And we must nurture their consciences by using ours, remembering that a healthy conscience is one of the features that distinguish humans from every other kind of animal.

Tweet

It Is Happening Today, Robin Sax Releases Second Book

by Women in Crime Ink

Bestselling author, former prosecutor, and Women in Crime Ink contributor Robin Sax has a new book. It Happens Every Day: Inside the World of a Sex Crimes DA is in bookstores now. With a foreword by famed defense attorney Mark Geragos, the book promises to be another big hit for Robin!

According to Department of Justice crime statistics, in 2008, 67 percent of sexual assault victims were juveniles and an astonishing 93 percent knew their attackers. This is far from news to veteran prosecutor Robin Sax. As an attorney who specialized in sex crimes against children, she personally reviewed at least five new cases every day.

What really happens when law enforcement decides to prosecute a child sexual assault case? In this revealing, informative, and disturbing book, Sax shows readers how the criminal justice system works, in terms you rarely hear about on the news. She candidly assesses what’s right about the system and what needs to be changed. Her hope is that, knowing the strengths and weaknesses of our current judicial system, we’ll all be in a better position to protect our children.

Dividing the work into three parts, she begins with “Behind the One-Way Mirror,” which deals with the investigation portion of child sexual assault. She defines exactly what constitutes sexual assault and then presents the ingredients of what makes a case “fileable.” She also explains why some cases never get filed.

In the second part, “Behind the Counsel Table,” Sax sheds light on the whole court process. She discusses a range of issues, including mandatory sentencing, plea bargains, unsupportive parents, using children’s testimony to prosecute the perpetrator, DNA evidence, the importance of corroboration, and the weaknesses of the jury system.

In the final section, “If We Could Change the Law,” she identifies aspects of the criminal justice system that should be changed. Besides her own perspective as a prosecutor, she shares the valuable insights of a detective, a judge, a therapist, a juror, and a victim, to learn how each would legislate if they were judge, jury, and lawmaker.

This gritty, in-depth discussion from an insider on the front lines of law enforcement’s campaign against child sexual assault makes an important contribution toward protecting society’s most vulnerable citizens from a crime that is reaching near-epidemic proportions.

It Happens Every Day is available in bookstores and online. For more of Robin’s books, see her web site.

Tweet

Hollywood: Check Brain Before Engaging Mouth When Defending Roman Polanski

by Stacy Dittrich

California Penal Code: Rape

261. (a) Rape is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person not the spouse of the perpetrator, under any of the following circumstances:

(2) Where it is accomplished against a person's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the person or another.

(3) Where a person is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known by the accused.
_______________________________________________________

Don’t quite understand the legal lingo? Here’s a partial transcript of Roman Polanski’s victim describing her “experience” with the famed director. Polanski pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, also known as statutory rape, in 1977. He posted bond, then fled to Paris, where he has spent the last 30 years enjoying the privileged life of a multimillionaire director and international celebrity. He was finally arrested on September 28, 2009 in Switzerland and is fighting extradition.

**Warning~the following is extremely graphic**

Excerpts:

Q: Samantha Gailey, how old are you?

A: 13

Q: You reside with your mother and your sister at a residence in Woodland Hills?

A: Yeah.
Q: At any time did Mr. Polanski offer you something to drink?
A: Yes. I think I said I was thirsty. And he went in the kitchen and this refrigerator, it was full of juice and wine and soda and all this stuff. And he got out -- he got a bottle of champagne. And he said, "Should I open it?" And I went, "I don't care," you know.
Q: How much did you drink?

A: I don't know. I had been finishing my glass and I was using it to pose in the pictures with. So I have no idea how much I drank.

Q: So after you had the drink of champagne, you went and took pictures?

A: Yes.
Q: After taking pictures in the patio area, what happened?

A: We went inside and he started playing with his camera again. I think he changed lenses or something. And then we took some more pictures right inside the patio door.

Q: Was that wearing the same outfit that you had on when you arrived, the blue jeans?
A: No. I didn't have a shirt on. I was standing behind a lamp.
Q: Was that at his request or did you volunteer to do that?

A: That was at his request.
Q: After taking those photographs, what happened?

A: He went to show me this Jacuzzi that Jack Nicholson has.
Q: After talking to your mother on the telephone, what happened?

A: We went out and I got in the Jacuzzi.

Q: So you went outside?

A: No, wait. We went into the bathroom before and he took this little yellow thing. I don't know what it was. It was some kind of container. And he had -- he walked in before me. When I walked in he had the container. And he had a pill broken into three parts. And he said, "Is this a Quaalude?" And I went, "Yes." And he says, "Oh, do you think I will be able to drive if I take it?" And I went, "I don't know," you know. He says, "Well, I guess I will," and he took it. And he says, "Do you want part?" And I went, "No." And he says -- oh, at that time I went "Okay," because -- I don't know.

Q: Why did you take it?

A: I don't know. I think I must have been pretty drunk or else I wouldn't have.
Q: How did he get you to take that tablet?

A: I took it with a swallow of champagne.

Q: What happened after you took the tablet?

A: I went into the kitchen, and I don't know why, but I thought if I ate -- I realized I was drinking and then I took that. And I then really got upset at myself so I started eating.
A: I said that I wanted to go home because I needed to take my medicine.

Q: What did Mr. Polanski say?

A: He said, "Yeah, I'll take you home soon."

Q: What did you do?

A: I told him -- I said that I wanted to get -- I wanted to go home. I said, "No, I have to go home now."

Q: What did Mr. Polanski say?

A: He told me to go in the other room and lie down.

Q: When he said, "In the other room," was there an adjoining room to the bathroom?

A: No, it was at the end of the hall. He went outside the bathroom. It was right a few feet away.

Q: What kind of room is that?

A: I'm not sure. There's no lights on in it. And it looked like a master bedroom. It had a bed and a couch and a TV.

Q: What did you do when he said, "Let's go in the other room?"

A: I was going, "No, I think I better go home," because I was afraid. So I just went and I sat down on the couch.

Q: What were you afraid of?

A: Him.
Q: What were you wearing at that time?

A: My underwear and a towel.

Q: At some time had you put on your panties?

A: Yes, I did that right away when I got into the bathroom.

Q: What happened when you sat down on the couch?

A: He sat down beside me and asked me if I was okay.

Q: What did you say, if anything?

A: I said, "No."

Q: What did he say?

A: He goes, "Well, you'll be better." And I go, "No, I won't. I have to go home."

Q: What happened then?

A: He reached over and he kissed me. And I was telling him, "No," you know, "Keep away." But I was kind of afraid of him because there was no one else there.

Q: What was said after you indicated that you wanted to go home when you were sitting on the couch?

A: He said, "I'll take you home soon."

Q: Then what happened?

A: And then he went down and he started performing cuddliness.

Q: What does that mean?

A: It means he went down on me or he placed his mouth on my vagina.

Q: What did he do when he placed his mouth on your vagina?

A: He was just like licking and I don't know. I was ready to cry. I was kind of... I was going, "No. Come on. Stop it." But I was afraid.

Q: Why do you believe you were under the influence at that time?

A: I can barely remember anything that happened.

Q: Is there any other reason?

A: No. I was kind of dizzy, you know, like things were kind of blurry sometimes. I was having trouble with my coordination like walking and stuff.

Q: How long did Mr. Polanski have his mouth on your vagina?

A: A few minutes.

Q: What happened after that?

A: He started to have intercourse with me.

Q: What do you mean intercourse?

A: He placed his penis in my vagina.

Q: What did you say, if anything, before he did that?

A: I was mostly just on and off saying, "No, stop." But I wasn't fighting really because I, you know, there was no one else there and I had no place to go.

Q: What did he say, if anything?

A: He didn't answer me when I said, "No."

Q: At this time were your panties off?

A: Yes.

Q: How were your panties taken off?

A: He had taken them off.

Q: When was that?

A: After he kissed me he got a hold of them and he pulled them off.
Q: At any time did he ask you when your period was?

A: Yes.

Q: When was that?

A: While he was having intercourse with me.

Q: Did he ask you about being on the pill?

A: Yes.

Q: When did he say that?

A: At the same time.

Q: What did he say?

A: He asked, he goes, "Are you on the pill?" And I went, "No." And he goes, "When did you last have your period?" And I said, "I don't know. A week or two. I'm not sure."

Q: And what did he say?

A: He goes, "Come on, you have to remember." And I told him I didn't.

Q: Did he say anything after that?

A: Yes. He goes, "Would you want me to go in through your back?" And I went, "No."

Q: Did he say anything else?

A: No.

Q: How long did he have his penis in your vagina?

A: I can't remember how long, but not a very long time.

Q: Had you had sexual intercourse with anyone before.

A: Yes.

Q: Approximately how many times?

A: Twice.
Q: What happened after he says, "DO you want me to -- " Was it go through your back?

A: Yes.

Q: What happened then?

A: I think he said something like right after I said I was not on the pill, right before he said, "Oh, I won't come inside of you then." And I just went -- and he goes -- and then he put me -- wait. Then he lifted up my legs farther and he went in through my anus.

Q: When you say he went in your anus, what do you mean by that?

A: He put his penis in my butt.

Q: Did he say anything at that time?

A: No.
Q: Did you resist at that time?

A: A little bit, but not really because - (pause)

Q: Because what?

A: Because I was afraid of him.
*****************************************

Oh, phooey! It wasn’t like a “rape-rape” as stated by that intellectual genius Whoopi Goldberg, when weighing in on the recent arrest of Roman Polanski on her show, The View. In fact, it was “consensual,” she says. Goldberg’s scholars at the Moron University need to update her on the definition of the word “no,” as well as her legal scholars at whatever law school she secretly attended.
Let's not forget, the victim, Samantha Geimer, 45, no longer wants to prosecute! Why waste taxpayers’ money on such a gifted, artistic pedophile? Sheer nonsense, they say. In fact, let’s just throw the Jaycee Dugard case out with the bathwater as well, since she was also a little wishy-washy about testifying against the man who held her captive for 18 years, brutally raping her along the way. Some of the other pedophile defenders in Hollywood include:

Harrison Ford
Woody Allen (Silence is probably best here...)
Natalie Portman

Debra Winger
Monica Belucci
Martin Scorcese
David Lynch
Jonathan Demme
Harvey Weinstein
John Landis
Tilda Swinton

Re-read the transcript of the nauseating assault above, and imagine if that were your child. And then try to wrap your brain around each of these celebrities defending the animal at fault.

I simply cannot.

In fact, I am utterly disgusted at their ignorance, their lack of information, and the message they're sending to victims of sexual assault (except for Allen, whom we wouldn’t expect any less from). I was so angry after watching Goldberg’s mentally deflated comments and reading the petition to free Polanski that all I could do was post the information here and let you decide.

Would you be angry if it were your child? Should the charges against Roman Polanski be dropped?

Former Sex-Crimes Detective Stacy Dittrich's new true-crime book,"Murder Behind the Badge: True Stories of Cops Who Kill", featuring the stories of Drew Peterson, Bobby Cutts Jr., Antoinette Frank and others, debuts in bookstores October 27th and is available for pre-order on line now.

Tweet