I’m really not sure where to start with this post. Having just spent the past couple of hours reading through Jean Malkovsy’s excellent analysis of The Girl: Geimer’s “Memoir” over at his excellent site Roman Polanski: The Ballad of Contradictions, a link that can be found to the right in the blogroll, I have come to the conclusion that Geimer has either slipped into some sort of alternative timeline or she’s completely lost her mind. Why? From the excerpts I’ve read (I refuse to buy the book since it might just damage my mental stability) over at Jean’s site, I can absolutely say she’s certifiable. As are her two co-writers, her lawyer Lawrence Silver, and ghost writer (and I’m not talking Polanski’s film) Judith Newman. See it seems all three have engaged in some kind of alternative history writing here. I read this analysis aloud to my significant other and adopted a rather patronizing voice when I read those portions that came from Geimer’s narrative. Why? Because I don’t find her the least bit credible. When I think of books where rape was discussed as a reality and with far more credibility than Geimer, I think of My Story by Elizabeth Smart and A Stolen Life by Jaycee Lee Dugard, both ladies who know what it is like to be raped and be in fear and danger for their lives. Having read these two books from cover to cover I can say I’m utterly amazed at the candor and strength of both young ladies. Unlike Geimer who cannot seem to find it within herself to tell the truth in her book.
The story Samantha Geimer tells is unbelievable. Unbelievable in the way that it fails to tell the truth of what actually happened and that all known facts including the forensic evidence comport with Polanski’s version of the events. Geimer likes to whitewash both her conduct as well as her mother’s in terms of making it seem as though they were mere victims of Polanski’s machinations. What she does not or will not allow herself is to admit what was evident: She and her mother were and still are born liars. What is astonishing is she fails to note that the impetus behind the writing of this book is the fact that Polanski can not discuss the events of that March afternoon without breaking the terms of the civil suit. Fortunately he did get his side of the story out in his autobiography that again, comports with the evidence. Samantha Geimer and Susan Gailey are nothing short of opportunists who parlayed a one night stand into a 34 year career. Seems according to Geimer’s 18 year-old boyfriend, Steve Kronblet, Samantha likes to play the actress. This is something she excels at…being just like her dear old mom who allowed drugs around her at a very young age as well as allowing her to drink at a young age, then cried rape when it was convenient in light of a failed attempt to gain an agent from Polanski. So they became vindictive. For those who believe I’m being harsh, I say this…the contents of this book are shocking how much she contradicts herself from her past statements. Having seen most of her television interviews as well as read most of what she’s said in the press since she ‘came out’ as Polanski’s ‘victim’, this book contradicts everything else she’s said. Only now is she calling it rape, an attempt from her co-author Lawrence Silver to gain the upper hand in the eyes of those who don’t know her proclivity to lie. Up until this tome she’s called it “only sex.” Only rape in the way of the Statutory element of the crime. However, she now calls it rape to not only sully Roman Polanski’s name further, but to also engender a knee jerk response from those in the public who have no doubt also failed to comport themselves with the truth. For anyone wishing to read the truth of this incident and a complete analysis of Geimer’s lies, one can turn to Jean’s blog for the facts of the case.
Hey, why not read through the entire blog. It’s full of the actual evidence, has transcripts and the analysis done on Polanski by the prison psychiatrist as well as the probation report who in turn, put some of the blame on the permissiveness within the Gailey home as a reason why this event came to be. Please do not be fooled by the ‘explosive’ content in this book. It is neither the truth nor is it her story. It is her concocted story. A bunch of fake slight of hand to try to explain away why she and her mother were not charged with perjury. Her’s is not the truth. The truth lies within the better written Roman by Polanski where he tells the truth. Pick up that book then read through the evidence at the blog above and then come back and call Samantha Geimer and Susan Gailey what they are: Liars.
She calls herself a survivor. What hubris. She cannot begin to know what it is actually like to be a survivor. What happened that afternoon cannot even be called a crime. That she writes to rape victims is a travesty. She makes a mockery of actual rape. My only wish for her is she would take the money she won in the civil settlement from Polanski and go quietly into that good night because compared to the stories of Elizabeth Smart, Jaycee Lee Dugard and Elizabeth Fritzl, Samantha Geimer’s is nothing but a need to continue that fifteen minutes of fame she and her mother began back in March 1977. All I can say to her is, get off the stage already! Enough is enough already. You’ve milked this story for everything you can, now just shut up and go! For someone who supposedly didn’t want to come forward or to have all this noteriety through it, she sure is in need of the fame. Why? Failed to become the actress she wanted. Polanski didn’t give her and her mother what they wanted and that was the entrance into the Natassja Kinski world of the starlet. Ever thought you weren’t worthy? It also surprises me when I see her posing for photos in such periodicals as People and such, she poses like a failed actress still believing she has a shot at some sort of stardom. Interesting that she uses Polanski’s photos within the book as well as on the cover. Technically it’s child pornography. These images should not have been seen due to the nature of their capturing. They are also part of a continuing litigation in terms of the ongoing criminal case against Polanski still snaking its way through the California Criminal Courts. Even that doesn’t stop her. Yet she feels perfectly fine in using those photos for her own financial gain. Another reason I despise her. Again it’s perfectly fine for her to exploit Polanski within the pages of this book, yet Polanski told the truth in his book and she and her mother sued him. But hey there Sammy, feel free to continue to exploit Polanski and your own idiocy. I won’t even post a photo of the book’s cover. That’s saying I give her some kind of relevancy alongside those books of Elizabeth Smart and Jaycee Lee Dugard. Both books are haunting in how they describe in detail the abuse and degradation they went through with their captors. k
And here is the other thing that just sticks in my craw about Geimer’s “tell all”, she claims she felt she wasn’t free to go! Yet Polanski drove her home! We are supposed to believe about Polanski that after having his way with her, he just drove this ‘poor girl’ home when she was bleeding and raped? Considering what I believe happened that afternoon at Jack Nicholson’s house and the aftermath in terms of her Grand Jury testimony regarding her actions afterward, she went home and sat in the product of a rape? She sat in her underwear with Polanski’s ejaculate, and in her words, “up the back,” this says something more about Geimer: She’s creative, yet not correct. There was no ejaculate “up the back” as she states. There were no fluids present where she says there should have been. There was only the stain in the gusset that has been tested to prove it came from a sterile man. I’d like to know if Boyfriend Bob was sterile. If wishes were horses, I’d love to have a whack at that stain. Obtain buccal swabs of Boyfriend Bob, Steve Kronblet and any other man she was having sex with including Polanski and have at an actual DNA analysis of whose stain that belonged to. If the answer is different than Polanski, then we need to turn our scorn on Geimer and Gailey for perpetrating a most egregious crime. Egregious in the amount of vitriol that has been levied at Polanski these many years since Geimer came into the collective consciousness. Turn that back on the Geimer/Gailey team and call them out for the lies they’ve told and continue to tell. Tell them they are not allowed to profit off of Polanski. Tell them they are perpetrators of the worst form of smut. Tell them to just shut up and leave the stage. Tell them they are not allowed to take the same stage as Elizabeth Smart or Jaycee Lee Dugard because what they endured for months, in Elizabeth’s case, and years, in Jaycee’s, and call themselves anything close to survivors. That word is reserved for those of us who actually want to see those to hurt us be punished for what they did. Not be all wishy-washy about when to call Polanski a victim or a perpetrator, because certainly the former applies.
In closing I’d like to put out a personal plea to Samantha Geimer. That is, stop it already! Stop trying to call yourself something you’re not. Stop believing you can even stand alongside those of us who want our victimizers imprisoned. We don’t want riches, we want actual cold hard justice. What you want is stardom. Well you got it. Time to go quietly into that good night. Time to pack it up and close the doors on that expensive piece of real estate in Hawaii and just be a quiet citizen because I know for a fact, when Roman Polanski passes into that great beyond, you’ll drag your sorry ass back into the limelight and comment on his passing. And for that I’ll renew my hatred of you. I know I’ll want to throw a shoe or the remote control at the television or ram my fist through the screen of my computer for how positively narcissistic you are to believe you deserve to stand on that stage once more. So do me a favour Sammy, just don’t. In all that holy, just don’t!