NOTE ON ONE OF MY POSTS

Due to someone deciding to use my story of my own rape for his own delusional rantings on the Roman Polanski board over at IMDB, I’ve had to make the post “Polanski Pt 2 … No Hard Feelings” password protected. I will not have my story used as some kind of fodder for someone’s own pleasure. The post was disgusting and vulgar. According to this poster, my story was concocted and therefore is perfectly acceptable to rip apart. This is in retalliation for my posts there on Samantha Geimer’s case.

I will state here: Samantha Geimer is now a public figure. She chose to go to the news media and to a tabloid show in 1997 to tell her story. She has chosen to make herself known and as such, anything in her case is available to the public under the Freedom of Informations Act or FOIA. Most of the transcripts, reports and any other rulings have been made public or have been made accessible through various media outlets. This means her story is available as any other court case to be examined. My story of my rape, however, is my own intellectual property and is not subject to being republished or reposted anywhere else without my prior written, verbal or given agreement. Therefore, at this time, I have taken it offline in order that this person cannot exploit my story to his own whims.

I will state here once and for all, I was raped on 21 December 1977. I am a rape survivor, however, I will not be victimized again. So to this one poster, if you have saved anything of my blog to repost someplace else, I will find it and have it deleted once more. You had no right to take my story and mock it. You had no right to take my rape and contort it to your own aims. My story and my case is not public. There are no public documents available for anyone’s perusal. Therefore my story is not for your musings.

I’ll have more on the Polanski case in the days to come.

10 Replies to “NOTE ON ONE OF MY POSTS”

    1. No, I’m not accusing Samantha Geimer for not being a rape victim because SHE has said it wasn’t rape. She has also been trying since 1997 to clear Polanski of the charges and to get the case against him dismissed. Sound like a rape victim to you?

  1. I read what was on the IMDB website by accident and all the other guy did was ask a few questions. Don’t want your story retold then don’t say anything, soon after it was deleted, can’t stand the heat, leave, don’t cry.

    You use your “victimisation” to your own ends, oooohh feel sorry for me, I am an expert because it happened to me.

    “Therefore my story is not for your musings”
    Then you shouldn’t have posted it, byt having said that you have stopped showing it good.

    1. Ah, a critic.

      As for my ‘using’ my victimisation for my own ends… I’ve never ever said my rape was anything else but what it was…. RAPE! Unlike Geimer whose level of victimisation comes only at the end of a piece of paper with $$$$$$$ attached to it.

      I will post what I like, as you have here and I’ve approved. And this is my blog, and nothing here that I say can be used without my permission. Oh by the way, your posting now becomes my property because it’s on my blog.

    1. Oh dear. Another commenter who believes it’s perfectly okay to cry rape when no evidence is provided. Why do you think Gunson had to take the plea? He knew he had no evidence against Polanski save for her word alone. Interesting too that Gunson has continued fighting not for Geimer, but for Polanski.

  2. Its ineresting how you cry that someone took some post you made somewhere about your rape experience and mocked it, when your entire blog is dedicatted to MOCKING Samantha Geimer.

    1. I have never mocked Samantha Geimer, I have called into question the validity of her claims based on her past and current actions. I have also called into question her claims as the …. now wait for it, EVIDENCE does not comport with what she states happened in her Grand Jury testimony. I have never ever called what happened to me anything but rape. She has said, “It wasn’t rape” and she has frequently stated that she was not harmed by Polanski, rather she was harmed more from the press and what Rittenband did to her. Now that’s interesting. Nothing else can ever be as bad as the rape.

      Here’s an interesting factoid for you. Both Samantha Geimer and Susan Gailey refused state paid for psychiatric help for their ‘ordeals’. One would think that they’d avail themselves of anything that would help their situation. Piggybacking on that fact, if you remember the film Black Hawk Down, a film directed by Ridley Scott and about the incident of 19 Rangers and Delta Force operators who were killed in the failed attempt on 03 October, 1993 to capture warlord Mohammed Aidid in Mogadishu, Somalia. There was a man by the name of John Stebbins. He is played by actor Ewan McGregor in the film with the name change to Grimes. The name change was needed because Stebbins had been accused and found guilty of multiple counts of sexual molestation and rape against his own pre-teen daughter. Stebbins was sent to Levenworth at hard time. His wife, however, decided to take the filmmakers of Black Hawk Down to court over their depiction of her ex-husband in the film as a hero. She lost her case aginst Scott, Jerry Bruckheimer and the film company and had to pay court fees…. But here’s the moral of the story, she accepted state paid for treatment for her daughter and for herself. Unlike Susan Gailey who it appears is at total ease to attend film premieres about her daughter’s supposed rape, Mrs. Stebbins had the opposite reaction to a film depicting her husband’s incident while as an Army Ranger.

      So you go figure it.

      So put on your big girl’s/boy’s panties and realize that there has to be EVIDENCE that supports statements made against a defendant. None of Geimer’s statements comport with the evidence. So in that, she is as a public figure, subject to scrutiny.

  3. looks to me you got what you deserved-
    you are slandering samantha geimer, so i guess someone decided to give you a taste of your own medicine

    –bitter was it?

    1. Well you see it’s like this, at least I’ve never campaigned to forgive my rapist. If Geimer didn’t like it, she should have told mommy “No!” when it came to going with Polanski the second time. Correct?

      As for the bitterness, since that person who believed he could comment on something I’ve always called rape, it can’t be bitter. I only think the poor sod who decided to do this has mommy issues and I’ll leave it at that since he clearly hates women. I as a rape victim have the right to call out a liar like Geimer and like Charlotte Lewis who clearly lied since with Geimer the evidence didn’t support her claims, and Lewis’ contentions come so far afield of the actuality of her own sordid past before Polanski. LIttle miss Teen Prostitute she was a full two years before the alleged Paris flat incident. So she blames Polanski solely for her own life’s issues a full two years before what Polanski supposedly did to her. Nice she can see that what happened in France, should have been handled by the French and not Steve Cooley in California.

      See that difference can you?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *