2009 - SEX, SEX AND MORE SEX

   
by Katherine Scardino


I thought I'd get your attention with the title to my post this week. What a year! How about that Tiger Woods, eh? What a man! I read a comment by Donald Trump, the icon of faithfulness, who said “Tiger Woods is going to be hotter than ever before.” Well, perhaps so. Being a married man and having an extramarital affair does seem to be de riguer this year. We've read the statistics about the large number of women in the United States who have been raped. One statistic from 2004, its reliability subsequently questioned, was one in four women. Even if it were one in 10 women, that's still a horrifying number -- especially if you are a woman in the United States. Each of you have 10 female friends. Look around you. Statistically, either you or one of your 10 friends will be raped in your lifetimes. Not a pretty picture.

But let’s be realistic. Are we, as a nation and a society, telling the male population that taking advantage of a woman, whether the extreme act of violence against a woman, or having a lustful, consensual relationship that makes your skin tingle -- while married -- is acceptable in our world? Do men not think they're taking advantage of a wife when they have sex with another woman? My comment to men who come to my office and start complaining about their married life is: you got yourself into this situation. If you're not happy, take action. Talk to her. Do something about it -- and that doesn't include having sex on the side. That’s the wimpy way of handling an unhappy marital relationship.

This year, we had a lot of men -- bad boys -- to talk about. Tiger Woods, of course, but then he's turned out to be a total jerk. But since my job is generally to look at both sides of a situation; didn't his wife know what was going on? For whatever reason (maybe 300 million or so of them), she must have decided she preferred to stay where she was. But for that impulsive drive down the driveway into a tree, we probably still wouldn't  know what all he'd  been up to. I still think there was a logical reason why Elin had that golf club in her hand. (Heh, heh...) Bad, bad boy!

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford gets my vote for the whiniest bad boy. Oh goodness, he flies to Argentina (on taxpayer dollars) to see his long-time mistress while telling his staff, and presumably his wife, that he was hiking the Appalachian Trail. Now, really -- what governor’s staff is going to let their boss go hiking mountain trails by himself, and who would really believe that anyway? What politician doesn't relish the security detail? The whiniest politicians are most likely to see an assassin behind every corner just waiting to knock off his attractive butt. As you can tell, I wasn't impressed with the Sanford story. If he wants to go see his mistress and leave his wife at home, go for it -- but have the cajones to tell Ms. Sanford. She is, after all, his legal partner and the mother of his children. Not nice.

John Edwards. Oh my gawd! Mister Nice Guy; Mister Good Husband and Father; Mister Religious Person; Mister Husband Who Stands Beside His Cancerous Wife: he's a fraud in every way. Actually, he's  scary. If he could convince so many people to believe they might  vote for him in a presidential election, just imagine what he could do with international politics. No, not much to say about John Edwards. He is bad to the core.

Then we had David Letterman. Okay, I admit it -- I like David Letterman, and frankly, I thought he handled the entire “expose” fairly well. He admitted his affair, and he joked about the scandal and about himself to his national audience. I'm sure his wife didn't find it amusing and told him so in an appropriate manner. However, I felt that he handled the indiscretion with a little style and hopefully, those two will work things out. I'm rooting for them.

And, now, a local scandal. One of our Harris County, Texas, county court-at-law judges was accused of official oppression. He didn't actually have sex with another woman, but career-wise, he might as well have had mad, lustful sex in the middle of the courtroom on a Monday morning at 10:00 a.m.  Sitting on the bench one day, he saw an attractive woman  -- a defendant in his courtroom. The judge got her telephone number, called her, and asked her out for dinner. She went. Then she alleged that he'd told her that he would get her a better lawyer if she didn't like her own and, she alleged, he said he wanted a long-term relationship with her. I suppose he gets some credit for not wanting a one-night stand. The District Attorney’s Office sent an investigator to interview the judge in his chambers. The judge talked to the investigator without knowing he was being secretly recorded. The defense tried to attack the credibility and  reputation of the woman. It didn't work. A jury found him guilty.

These are just a few of the many sexual incidents in the news during 2009. Not one was charged with an offense, except the judge in my jurisdiction.  He was tried and found guilty, but only on charges of “official oppression”. The other examples might elicit sympathy for the wife, or in some cases, even the bad boy. You may complain that I've only relayed sexually imprudent incidents committed by the male half of our population. Well, I thought about that -- and other than stupid, young Hollywood bimbos, I can't recall any significant news story involving a woman running off with another man and getting caught. Did I miss something? Hollywood gave us Roman Polanski, again, this year. Sex with a 13-year-old girl in 1977. Really. Was that before or after Woody Allen? Who have I missed??

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

Hollywood (In)justice - The Show Must Go On . . . Even When Celebrities Are Guilty

by Tina Dirmann

R. Kelly is not guilty.

Wow. Honestly, who could have seen that one coming?

Well, just about anyone, actually. As I wrote in my last blog posted May 20, exactly two weeks before the Chicago jury handed down their across-the-board acquittal on child pornography charges: "Ladies and gentlemen, I'd say get ready to see the latest celebrity charged with a crime walk away a free man!"

Oh, how I hate to use the phrase. . . . But, you know, I did. Told you so, I mean.

I'm not trying to gloat here. I'm actually sad that the inevitability of it all was so clear. Celebrity, once again, was the only piece of evidence a defense team need submit. Who cares if every other piece of evidence, including a videotape, showed Kelly having sex with a woman who looked an awful lot like his 13-year-old goddaughter?

Though I'm sure it didn't hurt that the R&B's fortune from fame allowed him access to the best defense attorneys money can buy. Even if the best they could come up with was to point out that it wasn't actually Kelly on the sex tape because a mole on the star's lower back region wasn't visible in the video. The defense put a video expert on the stand who declared that a small dot in that area--and obvious on film--was actually, get this: "digital noise," not a mole. And since there was no mole, well, it's not Kelly. Huh?

But the jurors, you know . . . They bought it.

One female juror, who asked to remain anonymous, said afterward, "At some point, we said there was a lack of evidence. There was nothing concrete enough to say it was him or her on that tape."

Even though there was the tape. With Kelly's apparent non-moled up twin on it.

I know, the "victim" in this case did deny it was her on the video. But the fact is, as any prosecutor who has worked with sex victims will tell you, it's often difficult to get them to say, publicly, they were abused. There's a lot of misplaced shame involved. And, in this case, the alleged abuser was the girl's famous, Grammy-winning, R&B star godfather. That's a lot to overcome. Perhaps the jurors, in their scant seven hours of deliberation, didn't have time to consider that fact. And apparently, they also didn't believe the girl's family members, who took the stand and swore it was, indeed, their 13-year-old relative having sex with Kelly.

A writer for the Village Voice, who ultimately lashed out at the unjust verdict, put it this way: "For entirely selfish reasons, it's natural enough to feel good when a favorite musician wriggles out of a predicament that would've kept him from making music for a long, long time."

It is? Is that why there were cheers--cheers--from courthouse clerks when the "not guilty" verdict was announced? I can't relate.

Isn't it ironic that R. Kelly's acquittal, on charges that could have brought him fifteen years in prison, by the way, comes just as HBO began airing its documentary "Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired," which basically chronicles the charges brought against Polanski (pictured right) for having sex with an underage girl. Also thirteen years old, by the way. In that case, the intense media glare scared the victim so badly, she didn't want to testify.

Prosecutors in the 1978 case were willing to deal, dropping a laundry list of charges, including rape and supplying a minor with drugs and alcohol, but left unlawful intercourse with a minor. Polanski pled guilty, but fled the country, fearful that a media-adoring judge would sentence him to hard prison time. I think most people agree the judge in the case was a man driven more by reporters and public opinion than his law books.

But in the end, Polanski did engage in sex, even sodomy, with a minor. He now lives in France, where he is celebrated as one of the most brilliant filmmakers of our time. He refuses to return to the United States, where he'd be arrested. Technically, he's still a fugitive.

Still, I wonder if Polanski follows celebrity court cases in the United States today. And as he watches stars walk away from charges ranging from murder to child pornography, if he considers what would've happened if his case had been in a California court today. A media-obsessed judge would be irrelevant. All he'd need to set him free is your average, celebrity- obsessed jury.

Tweet