Johnny Depp: Roman Polanski “is not a predator”

People's Choice Awards 2010 - Show

This is interview is in reality several weeks old, but I have some ideas as to why it’s only getting play now. When Johnny Depp was in Serbia (at the unveiling of his strange life-sized statue), Depp sat down for several interviews. It might have even been a press conference for all I know. There’s a one-minute video of Depp answering one particular question (below), and it seems like it might have been a press conference. However, the UK’s Independent is running with the story right now as a one-on-one interview with Depp. Okay, here goes: Johnny Depp defends Roman Polanski. Not just defends him, but spins a conspiracy theory that “Somebody has made a deal with someone. Maybe there was a little money involved” to see that Polanski was arrested in Switzerland. What the hell, Johnny? Here’s the relevant part of the interview (the full piece is here):

In Kustendorf, there is a door painted to give the illusion that it is a jail, with George W. Bush behind bars. Depp sidestepped questions as to whether he was an anti-globalist or an anti-capitalist. He was withering about Bush, enthusiastic about President Barack Obama, but would not be drawn further. However, he wasn’t shy in voicing his dismay about the arrest of film-maker Roman Polanski on a 30-year-old statutory rape charge. In 1999, Polanski directed him in The Ninth Gate.

“Why now?” Depp asked rhetorically. “Obviously, there is something going on somewhere. Somebody has made a deal with someone. Maybe there was a little money involved, but why now?” Polanski, Depp continued, “is not a predator. He’s 75 or 76 years old. He has got two beautiful kids, he has got a wife that he has been with for a long, long time. He is not out on the street.”

[From The Independent]

My theory for why it took two weeks for this to be published in a major publication: because he’s Johnny Depp, and his fan base is enormous, and people love him and no one wants to hear that he’s defending a child rapist. I’m tremendously disappointed, and I’m not even a CB-level Depp fan.

Depp, however, was utterly charming in the rest of the interview. I know the Polanski stuff left a bad taste in your mouth, so try this quote of Depp’s, about his respect for the audience: “The only reason that we’re here is because of the people out there standing in the cold who want to have a piece of paper signed or to go to the cinema.” He also lists some of his favorite writers: Baudelaire, Edgar Allan Poe, Charles Bukowski and Jack Kerouac. Depp says: “I am such an addict of books. I’ll read two or three at a time. I am like a fiend. I can’t get enough.” Hey, Johnny? If you like to read so much, you should try reading Samantha Geimer’s statement about how she was drugged, raped and sodomized. You know, since you enjoy reading so much.

And in case you thought The Independent was exaggerating, here’s the video of Depp answering the Polanski question:

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

96 Responses to “Johnny Depp: Roman Polanski “is not a predator””

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Mommy says:

    So since he’s married he’s harmless? ok, got it.

  2. JulieNewmar says:

    Johnny shussssshhh… just stand there and look good and shut up.

  3. Danielle says:

    He did the crime and never served the time because he has money. He raped a child and got away with it. What could be more messed up?

    Hey Johnny, go join Sienna nad Jude for your shut the hell up lessons. Class is filling up.

  4. Gwen says:

    I usually like Johnny but this is really undefendable 🙁

  5. Jess says:

    Ughh…Do I have to boycott you too??

  6. Rianna says:

    When the subject is controversial Johnny shut the hell up and voice your opinion to your wife in bed at night where there are no press microphones. Oh and Johnny? John Wayne Gacy had a wife and kids too but no one is defending him….

  7. Malorie says:

    I think he´s not justifying Polansky, he´s just asking “why now”. It should have been done before. He´s right that, though Polansky commited a crime, he´s NOW not in the streets raping anyone.
    I think he´s not defending him, just suspecting that “now”, for some reason, for someone, was very convenient.

    By the way I´m totally against what Polansky did, that should be very clear.

  8. SammyHammy says:

    I usually say that JD can do no wrong. He has just proven me incorrect.

    I love JD, but he is so misguided. And him, the father of a girl not a whole lot younger than RP’s victim!

  9. Praise St. Angie! says:

    my image of him has been forever tarnished with that interview.

    so f-ing disappointing.

    the man drugged and sodomized a 13 year old girl. I don’t care HOW long ago it was, the man fled from justice and you can bet if that 13 year old was Depp’s daughter, he’d change his tune.

  10. Ursula says:

    I like Johnny, nothing can change that. I could find a video of him kicking puppies and I will still love him. Knowing Polanski at a personal level, he probably knows a different side to him. That said, child rape is child rape. Polanski has got to serve time. I don’t care if money changes hands in the process. If someone made money off the deal, good for them.

  11. yeng says:

    to an extent, it is a defense. if not now, then when? because he has children and a loving wife, polanski should get a free pass? regardless of “why now,” polanski still carried out a deplorable act. that can’t be erased.

    i am disappointed. johnny depp standing by polanski does not make him a bad person, so, i still admire him. maybe his heart is too forgiving or he’s biased because polanski is considered an auteur in the industry or maybe he feels he should stand by his fellow artist. however, with this one, i will have to disagree with his view. if i were a father with children, especially daughters, i would have a hard time finding any excuse for why polanski should slide by.

  12. Jag says:

    How do we know that Polanski hasn’t still been raping children? After he dies, there may be tell-all books published about what he’s done to innocents. We’ll never know. He should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And as for his age, 76 isn’t a crypt keeper, if the man is still directing movies. Just look at Eastwood in his 70’s. Polanski has plenty of spring left in his step to be thrown in jail, imo.

    Johnny, your blind faith is disappointing.

  13. lastwordlinda says:

    That’s right Johnny, Polanski is not a predator because he didn’t have to go looking for the girl. Her ambitious mother brought her to him to try and further the child’s acting career. If JD thinks Polanski is so harmless, I guess he wouldn’t mind if Polanski babysat his little girl.

  14. Jill says:

    I thought Depp was intelligent, but I won’t make that mistake again. He made a run of the mill defense based on superficial observations. Pathetic.

  15. Rosalee says:

    So he finds it acceptable that a 4o+ year old man can have sexual relations with a unwilling child?

  16. ruru says:

    Hey, I like Roman Polanski’s movies. Rosemary’s Baby is one of my faves. I feel bad for him losing a wife and child to the Manson family. With so many supporters, he must be a great guy to work with.

    But none of that excuses what he did. Send his ass to jail.

    (and seeing some my favourite celebs defend him is making me sad)

  17. isabelle says:

    I agree with JulieNewmar: Johnny, shut up and be beautiful.

    I do wonder, by the way, how Johnny would react if this were to happen to his own daughter…

  18. Phowie says:

    This is a lesson to all of us that it’s better to remain silent and be thought of as stupid than to open our mouths and remove all doubt.

  19. Zoe says:

    Honestly, I’m tired of people letting Polanski off the hook and saying the jury was tainted or that he isn’t a predator or had a bad day and we should all get over it. It doesn’t take a jury to know that a 13 year old was given a drug and alcohol and raped. Polanski even plead guilty then ran like the coward he is. I can’t believe people keep defending this monster. An event like this isn’t a bad day or someone making an innocent little mistake. This was a brutal crime that altered a young woman’s life forever. This guy is absolute scum regardless of his talent and needs to be behind bars where he’s belonged the past few decades.

  20. lucy2 says:

    Oh JD, I so want to love everything about you, but you’re making it so very difficult.
    You would think after all the initial backlash against those “supporting” him, no one else would be willing to talk about it to the media. And honestly, I don’t think they should. There are times when a “no comment” or “that’s not my place to discuss” work well, and this is one of them.

  21. bite me says:

    and get wait to see how the tabloids will manage to drag angelina jolie into this since they will be doinga movie together

  22. ,,,, says:

    I am going to catch a lot of heat for this comment but whatever. I do want to preface what I am about to say by stating that I believe Polanski should go to jail and that what he did was all kinds of wrong, obviously. There is no question about that.

    However, I have also read the girl’s entire testimony to the court and she willingly took the Quaalude. She admitted to the court that she knew exactly what it was because she had taken it before with friends. NOW, should he have even offered it to her? HELL NO! But from what I gathered from the testimony (and I could be wrong) he didn’t force it down her throat. He asked her if she wanted to take it and she said yes.

    While I believe Polanski is completely, 100% in the wrong, at fault, and should be punished for what he did, I also blame this girl’s parents. She went out and modeled for Polanski once or twice before this incident and during one those “modeling sessions” he asked her to remove her top. I want to know why this poor child didn’t feel comfortable telling her mom that. I fully believe that the rape could have been prevented if there had been a little more parental involvement. Why didn’t her mother accompany her on the photo shoot?

    I know that children who are sexually abused often keep it a secret and think that it is their fault, but from what I read in her testimony Polanski didn’t tell her not to tell her mom or threaten her. She also could have refused to model for him again. Now, I am not saying this is her fault. I don’t think it is in anyway the victim’s fault. I am just asking where were her parents and why didn’t she feel comfortable being honest with them about how she felt and what was happening?

    With all of that said, I think the most important thing in this case is the victim. She has asked the court numerous times to dismiss the damn case. She is tired of it being dragged out in the media and as a victim, she wants to get on with her life and not let this define her. Now that I can respect and for that reason I think it needs to be left up to the people involved and the courts and the rest of us, Johnny Depp included, need to butt the hell out.

  23. CadieBelle says:

    So done with Johnny – very disappointed. AND he lost his hotness – he’s getting that bloated dirty look – yuck

  24. javelin says:

    When people start throwing the phrase “child rapist” around it makes it hard to form an objective opinion. There was a time in history, not all that long ago, when 13 was considered of marrying age. It really depends on the lifestyle and upbringing whether a 13 year old is more adult or more child. The fact that Polanski was attracted to her because she was physically mature suggests he is indeed NOT a predator, as he is attracted to women, not girls. And since the victim spoke out about her desire for the police to drop the matter, I wouldn’t say it’s unreasonable to suggest that the arrest was orchestrated by money and egos. I would say that Depp, as a former wild-child, can empathize with Polanski’s situation of being haunted by a poor decision that he made in what seems like a former lifetime. Perhaps the majority don’t share that empathy, but his opinion is certainly a valid one and there is no reason to start a whiny chorus of “Shut up”s.

  25. Tess says:


    Agree with all the others who wonder how his tune would change if his daughter were drugged and sodomized.

    Well, maybe he’d make allowances if the predator was an acclaimed director.

    Another example of special rules for special people. Not his daughter, not his Hollywood peer. They get one kind of justice. The little people get another kind.

  26. embertine says:

    javelin, I see what you’re saying, but here’s a few points to consider:
    1. The age of consent is there for a reason. It may not be an exact match for every individual, but it’s a line of best fit for the population as a whole.
    2. It would still be bad if he drugged and raped an adult. Rapists are still predators, even if they are not ephebophiles.
    3. There is a reason that we longer allow girls to get married at 13 without their consent. We used to deny black people the right to own property too, but we don’t do that anymore.

  27. Praise St. Angie! says:

    “The fact that Polanski was attracted to her because she was physically mature suggests he is indeed NOT a predator, as he is attracted to women, not girls.”

    I understand the point you’re trying to make there, but I just don’t fully agree.

    him being attracted to a fully mature woman’s BODY may be true, but he knew how old she was, and knew that it was illegal to engage in sexual relations with someone of that age. there’s a reason that there’s an age of consent. the law sees a 13 y.o. as a child, not having the mental capabilities to make proper decisions about sex. so it doesn’t really matter what her body looked like. Polanski knew she was 13, and therefore it was statutory (or child) rape. sorry if people don’t like that term, but that’s the reality of the situation.

    as the “adult” in the room, Polanski should have kept it in his pants, regardless of how adult his victim may have looked.

  28. celeducat'em says:

    like everyone here, so disilusioned to hear a once admired johnny defend a child rapist as the victim of a ‘deal’ made.. wonder how many conspiracy theories he’d jump to if it was his own daughter sodomized..and p.s. roman was never ‘on the street’ when he was convicted the first time and most crimes like this are by known people to the children. lame!

  29. yeng says:

    the girl may have looked mature, but polanski was aware of the girl’s age, and knowing that should have been enough for polanski to suppress his libido. and predators do not prey on underage girls alone, they can go after any woman/girl of any age, shape and form. and the victim in this case had indicated wanting to dismiss the charges to stop the years of publicity; the focus on the case would only continue to traumatize her. it was self-preservation on her part.

    i’m sorry, but the rape of a young girl can’t really be intellectualized. regardless of how “mature” she looked, she was still 13 and didn’t have a fully developed brain as polanski’s adult one. if all 13 year olds have the mental capacity to make “sound” choices, then governing bodies probably won’t have any problem letting them drive legally, drink legally, etc. in other words, polanski knew what he was doing and that girl could only do so much in that scary situation.

    if money did play a role in dragging polanski to court and in to jail, then so be it. after all, it was his money that allowed him to flee to france and avoid extradition.

  30. yeng says:

    i see others pointed out what i wanted to pointed out 🙂 good to see.

  31. Me says:

    I agree with Malorie. Johnny is asking WHY NOW, when Polanski has had free movement in this territory for years AND NO ONE HAS EVER ARRESTED HIM. So who’s going to blame the authorities for ALLOWINIG THIS? Now everyone’s marching the flag but for what or whom? A justice done way too late serves no one. Only the now grown up woman in quetion is being victimized again, no one else. Does she want that? NO. She’s filed paperwork for dismissal of the case several times over the years. BTW How many people who’d met Polanski before his arrest were thinking at the time “Righ, I’m dealing with a rapist, sodomist and an overall despicable criminal, I have to report him and make sure he’s busted and serves time for his serious crimes” and behaved accordingly? No one. Does that mean that Europe is full of ignorant people happy to have such a person in their community? No. It really is not that simple. Therefore I agree with Johny and must conclude that this whole thing now and here is a complete farce.

  32. Phowie says:

    @,,,, I read your comments and first of all, you are right, at the root of this whole situation was a total absence of parental guidance. That being said I really don’t think that we can rationalize that a 13 year old girl is capable of distinguishing a quaalude from any other narcotic or barbituate. And you are right, he didn’t force it down her throat, he washed it down with champagne. Now, I can’t be sure but I think that giving drugs and alcohol to a minor has to be breaking some kind of law, regardless of parental involvement. And then proceeding to sodomize them while filming it all for posterity just smacks of mental illness issues. Yes, she may have said to the court that she no longer wants to press charges and is willing to ‘forgive and forget’. However, what kind of message does that send to all the pedophiles lurking out there? That if they can skip town and lay low until they reach a certain age the statute of limitations will kick in and wipe the slate clean?

    I think people need to stop judging based on the context (Hollywood, modeling, etc.) and try and look at it differently. What if it was a 13 year old babysitting at her neighbors and daddy suddenly arrived home with some pills, booze and a movie camera and asked her to take her top off? Who of these two people should be the one who should know better? How many 13 year old girls are mature enough to manage that kind of situation with an adult male?

  33. Mark says:


    “he is indeed NOT a predator, as he is attracted to women, not girls.”

    Sure, that’s why he dated Nastassja Kinski when she was 15 and he was 50…

  34. mhjmc says:

    I’m with julienewmar 🙂

  35. *Lee* says:

    I’ve wanted to believe that maybe some of what he said was misinterpretation, but I guess not. Johnny Depp is human just like the rest of us, not any smarter or dumber.

    I’m wondering if he just meant to say that he was wondering why right now, at this moment, was the right time to arrest him. That’s actually a good point, it has been years, was it just fortunate circumstance? Was it a distraction technique? Who knows?

    In no way, shape, or form am I suggesting that Polanski doesn’t deserve it, he’s a vile, sick, blight, who should have been locked up years ago. But maybe the point is, what brought on the urgency?

  36. ,,,, says:

    @ Phowie – I said he should go to jail. I said that the situation “needs to be left up to the people involved and the courts.” Therefore, if the courts still want to follow through with the case, despite the victim’s request for dismissal, that’s fine with me.

    I also said that I don’t blame the victim at all and didn’t expect her to rationalize the situation or “know better.” I feel for her because it appears as though for whatever reason she didn’t feel comfortable speaking with her mother about the situation and thus keeping it from progressing AND that is the mother’s fault, NOT the child’s.

    And lastly, I said that Polanski is in the wrong and should not have raped her (obviously) or given her the drugs and alcohol. I was never arguing for him. I was just saying that I believe that the parents, particularly the child’s mother, are just as guilty for not watching out and protecting their child.

    Also, I don’t see a need to view the situation differently, or in another context. It happened how it happened and thus comparing it to another hypothetical situation doesn’t really matter to me. Even if she was modeling, you don’t ask a 13 year old to take her top off. Last time I checked, that’s child pornography. And again, I never said she should have “known better” and kept her top on. I was saying that something prevented her from telling her mother that he made her take her top off and it made her uncomfortable and she doesn’t want to model for him anymore, and again, that’s the fault of the mother.

  37. Sarah says:

    I’m a huge Johnny fan and this is very disappointing. I thought he had more sense than that. I’m tired of all these celebrities defending him because he’s a “genuis director”. Bullshit. He’s a child rapist.

  38. Iggles says:

    @ ,,,,:
    “With all of that said, I think the most important thing in this case is the victim. She has asked the court numerous times to dismiss the damn case. She is tired of it being dragged out in the media and as a victim, she wants to get on with her life and not let this define her. Now that I can respect and for that reason I think it needs to be left up to the people involved and the courts and the rest of us, Johnny Depp included, need to butt the hell out. ”

    I have to disagree with you here. The bottom line is this case is justice. Polanski raped a child which is deplorable. He then fled the country so he wouldn’t be sentenced for his crimes.

    After all these years, every time the case is brought up the victim’s name is dragged through the mud. Polanski’s wealthy friends lash out at her or are dismissive of her terrible ordeal. No wonder she wants the media circus to stop. But this thing will never end until Polanski is brought to justice. Hopefully then she can find some peace. I blame Polanski for dragging this case out and causing more stress in the following decades for the victim. I blame his friends for excusing what he did. I blame France for aiding and abiding a fugitive.

    But I don’t blame the victim. But the court of law is not beholden to wishes of the victims. For example, in domestic violence cases many times the wife will recant her story or push for charges to be dropped. Should we listen and allow him to walk free so he could kill her next time? No, if we have evidence the courts move forward with the trial — as seen in a recent case with NY1 reporter Dominic Carter.

    And what about cases of murder where the victim families’ “forgive” the killer? Do we let them walk free because the family wants to drop the case? No. Murder is murder.

    Then why in cases of assault or rape would such a claim be acceptable? Let me be clear, I feel for victims who want to move beyond the cases by dropping the charges. But where there is evidence the courts have a right to prosecute the case. Justice, though a great many times uneven, must be pursued. These perps should not be allow to walk.

  39. javelin says:

    Yeng & St. Angie,
    I agree that he should have known better, and should have suppressed his libido. But I don’t think his poor decision indicates that he is a predator of children.

    I agree that age of consent laws are reasonable, but they also give claim to the notion that physical maturity (and the desires it entails) may be present in those not fully grown, however unsettling that notion is to modern sensibilities.

    Also: What I hate about the Polanski story is that there are SO MANY real child predators and child abusers out there– check out if you want the nitty gritty– and I can’t see why the police force would devote precious time and resources to hunting down a non-predator when they could and should be protecting those who really need it! There are real children’s lives at stake– think about Jaycee Duggard’s case– and the Polanksi situation is yet another illustration of inept police work.

  40. ,,,, says:

    @ Iggles – I think you’ve misinterpreted what I wrote. I never said that the charges should be dropped and forgotten simply because it is the wish of the victim.

    I said that it should be left up to the victim AND the courts. And as I said to Phowie above that means that if the courts still want to move forward despite the wishes of the victim, then so be it. I never argued for complete dismissal.

    However, from what I have read, and it could all be wrong, the victim has moved on and found peace and it’s the constant rehashing and revival of the case in the media that is causing her turmoil which is why I said that everyone should just butt out and let the parties involved and courts decide what needs to be done.

    He was convicted, he fled like a coward, and it’s now been 30+ years. I don’t see her breathing a sigh of relief because he’s going to be sitting in a jail cell now. I doubt she laid awake every night for the past 30 years thinking about it. And again I could be wrong but I doubt she cares anymore and I think that’s completely healthy. It wasn’t her fault, she can’t take it back and there is no reason to let it haunt her for the rest of her life. She isn’t going to let him and what he did to her rule her life and how she feels, and she damn well shouldn’t.

    With that being said, the courts can still decide to press forward, I am fine with that. If you do the crime, you should be prepared to do the time regardless of the wishes of the victim. I get it. I am not arguing it.

    However on another note, I don’t think that a victim’s family forgiving a murderer means they want the murderer to walk or not be punished. I think forgiveness is just a way of moving on with life and doesn’t mean that the family doesn’t think what happened was horrible and wrong or that the convicted doesn’t deserve the due punishment.

  41. Kim says:

    Well Johnny, Lilly Rose will be 11 in May according to google . I hope she isn’t an early bloomer.BTW the man that raped me at 12 was married w/ 4 kids and a church deacon. But I was fully developed so I guess that means he wasn’t really a child predator since I had a “woman’s” body.

  42. Popcorny says:

    Of course Depp would think and assert it may have to do with “money” -after all, that’s pretty much the motivating factor in his response.
    It’s far more than just merely misguided to align yourself with (let alone defend) the actions of a man who drugs and rapes a 13 year old.
    So, whether Johnny is posturing for gain or because he truly believes it’s all “much ado”, he’s a scumbag.

  43. orion70 says:

    While I certainly question why JD would choose this particular subject to speak out on, particularly as he has children himself…. there is some degree of truth within the statement, in the sense of risk.

    There are variants of child molesters, and within that group, those that are a high risk, and those that are low. Eg, incest offenders, while their crimes are abhorrent, are less likely to repeat, than say, the diagnosed pedophile who hangs around playgrounds looking for victims. Some crimes are situational in nature, others are compelled by serious psychological disturbances (in a different way, yes I know there is something wrong with anyone who can find a child attractive) I have never seen any comment that RP has ever been diagnosed with a paraphilia.

    That said, Johnny Depp is certainly not qualified to make statements about what does or doesn’t constitute high risk; you do not have to be out on the street and many sex offenders are married with children, that’s not really a mitigating factor necessarily, especially if there is a paraphilia present.

  44. jeannified says:

    I understand what Johnny is saying in so far as it’s been 30 years…why now? I DO agree with him that perhaps some money has exchanged hands, or that Switzerland was finally willing to help the US, due to the US perhaps getting into their list of US citizens who have Swiss accounts. (I heard that theory a while back, with regard to the Roman Polanski thing.) I understand Johnny’s questioning of the whole thing, as far as intellectually.

    Still…Roman Polanski committed a heinus crime and karma has caught up to him. Now the REAL test will be to see if he’s actually extradited to the US! I somehow wonder if a snafu will crop up at the last minute, and he will end up getting to go back to France. If he does, I’ll bet he never leaves France again!

  45. wow says:

    Ok, JD. If Polanski isn’t a predator, then let him do the exact same thing to your daughter that he did to the other girl.

    Yes, he is an amazing director. No doubt. But even with artistic talent – I still see a child molester who got away with it for the longest.

  46. SammyHammy says:

    javenlin said “But I don’t think his poor decision indicates that he is a predator of children.”

    I have to disagree with you on that. The fact that he drugged and raped a child, in my mind, makes him the definition of a predator.

    And the thing is, child molestors generally don’t have one lone victim. They almost always leave a trail of devastated victims in their wake. Although she is the only one we know about specifically, it is probably a safe bet that there are many other victims of his out there. I wonder if any of them will come forward when (if) he is extradited and put in jail.

  47. daisyfly says:

    “There was a time in history, not all that long ago, when 13 was considered of marrying age.”

    There was also a time in history when the average person lived to only the age of 35 and the childbirth mortality rate was 1:5.

    “It really depends on the lifestyle and upbringing whether a 13 year old is more adult or more child.”

    When a thirteen-year-old child is over-sexualized and acting more like an adult, there’s a reason for it and it’s usually not a good one.

    “The fact that Polanski was attracted to her because she was physically mature suggests he is indeed NOT a predator, as he is attracted to women, not girls.”

    You know, that very same rationale could be used with all the men out there who dress up little girls in lingerie, put makeup on them, and then make them perform ADULT acts.

    “And since the victim spoke out about her desire for the police to drop the matter, I wouldn’t say it’s unreasonable to suggest that the arrest was orchestrated by money and egos.”

    Many women whose husbands beat the ever-living crap out of them ALSO beg the police to drop the matter, say that nothing happened, etc… It doesn’t negate the crime.

    “I would say that Depp, as a former wild-child, can empathize with Polanski’s situation of being haunted by a poor decision that he made in what seems like a former lifetime. Perhaps the majority don’t share that empathy, but his opinion is certainly a valid one and there is no reason to start a whiny chorus of “Shut up”s.”

    When Depp can say that he plied a thirteen-year-old girl with alcohol and drugs, and then forcibly raped and sodomized her, maybe his “empathy” will be well suited. Until then he’s just throwing a blanket onto a forest fire.

  48. Cheyenne says:

    Coming from someone who has a daughter fairly close in age to Polanski’s victim, Depp’s statement is somewhat surprising, to say the least.

  49. lrm says:

    i didnt read all the comments,but what malorie said was perfect. There can be two realities at once: IF JD is saying hey,this is weird timing (like most politically motivated events if you haven’t noticed),i bet there was a deal…that CAN co-exist with the reality that polanski committed the crime.
    Americans are very black and white,it seems. yes,i am american,and i’m always amazed at how emotionally charged situations mean that somehow,we are not allowed to discuss nuances and details of a situation.

    Regardless,polanski is repsonsible,but yea,perhaps there is a purposeful timing to this,too. both may be true.

    Not that the timing part should take away from polanski being responsible.

    Malorie said:
    I think he´s not justifying Polansky, he´s just asking “why now”. It should have been done before. He´s right that, though Polansky commited a crime, he´s NOW not in the streets raping anyone.
    I think he´s not defending him, just suspecting that “now”, for some reason, for someone, was very convenient.

    By the way I´m totally against what Polansky did, that should be very clear.

  50. Boo says:

    Look, Johnny is hott, but seriously…there’s a reason he plays crazy so well. I’m just saying, as much as I like looking at him, and I believe the stories about him being a total sweetie to his fans, he still strikes me as a guy who likes his drugs and has some freaky ideas about the world. And unfortunately this support of Polanski isn’t even that “crazy” in terms of what his peers are doing.

    And I’m getting really sick of people saying the public or the police are dragging this case out in the public eye, against the wishes of the victim. A, this is a crime against the people. There’s a reason this isn’t left up to the victim. And B, the one person who could put this whole subject to rest is Polanski. He’s the responsible party and the one who could just accept his punishment and put this whole thing to rest. But God forbid he take responsibility for anything, big or small….

  51. Lady D says:

    Capt. Sparrow you just broke my heart. You shoulda stayed in the locker. To defend Polanski is unconscionable.

  52. juiceinla says:

    Heart. broken. Why Johnny why???- What on earth would you do if some one- no matter how brilliant, talented or “Genius”- did that to your daughter?

    Would the passage of time make it “ok”?


  53. naye in VA says:

    hold on hold on hold on. has anyone ever seen TO CATCH A PREDATOR? you get locked up for even ACTING like you want to have sex with someone under 18. they are PREDATORS. they ROUTINELY ARE ATTRACTED TO GIRLS NOT OF LEGAL AGE> Polanski is ROUTINELY ATTRACTED TO GIRLS NOT OF LEGAL AGE. pedophile YES. girls are looking older and older every year. I was a D cup in 10th grade and i was fourteen (yes thats correct)at that age when men were looking all willy nilly i dont know what i would have said to a famous 40 year old director who offered me some champagne and told me to take my top off for ART. i was stupid. too young to make decisions like that and my parents sure as hell wouldnt have left me to make them. Jsut becuase she said YES to the drugs doesnt mean he should have given them to her. Thats another law he just broke. this was a stupid selfish man, and i think if he were truly reformed and repentant HE WOULD HAVE TURNED HIMSELF IN YEARS AGO.

    i do agree with JD that the timing is weird BUT no that he is no longer a threat.

  54. v says:

    there’s a really good film about the Polanski case. It changed my mind on the whole thing. Roman did serve time for his crime, he made a deal with a judge and served some 90 days or something… that judge was crooked and took back the deal and left Polanski out to dry. I’m not justifying his actions with that child, but he was a pawn in a much bigger political game involving the judge on his case. do some research. I would have fled from justice too.

  55. Iggles says:

    v – You justification for him running away rings hollow to me. So what that the judge was going to sent him away for longer? If the judge was improper he could of filed an appeal. Since he pled guilty there’s no way he’d be put away for 10 years or more anyway. Bottom line is he chose to run and play the victim after HE VICTIMIZED a child. He’s the perp. Let’s not get it twisted, as Polanski and his friends want.

  56. hatsumomo says:

    Hmm..that didn’t take long.

  57. CAUTION says:

    I feel like it’s kind of cruel to say that this is a crime of the people, as if the victim’s feelings don’t matter, when she is the one being made the relive the actual experience every time it is brought up and thus relive the pain of that time in her life.

  58. asiont says:

    he’s not defending polanski, he just wonders about the whole matter and there’s nothing wrong in it since the arrest thing is just weird…

  59. naye in VA says:

    thank you IGGLES, so what? 90 days for raping a little girl. v they give people years for that honey. years. maybe, the judge was like i just gave this extra famous dude 90 days for raping a girls 30 yers his junior. Maybe i need to go re-think that. I certainly would have. people get 90 days for driving on a suspended license. Lets be real. would you want your daughters rapist back on the streets after three months? thats not even enough time to move out of the county. Polanski is a straight up HO. You go to JAIL for 90 dyas, you go to PRISON if its over a year, and im sure he heard about the Cali prisons and how they feel about child abusers.

  60. Popcorny says:

    “Wondering about the timing” -as if that’s a valid concern. That’s an excuse to “defend” a pedophile.
    The case has languished pretty much, off and on, for decades due to the hardship of extradition matters.
    The US has never backed down and it was clear if US could get him they would (hence Polanski’s avoidance, measures and precautions).
    It wasn’t a front-burner matter so there were plenty of “missed opportunities”, so the timing is just an alignment of someone noticing the case anew AND Polanski’s whereabouts and “availability”.
    So, now they got the bastard and some want to make the child-rapist himself a victim? Of justice? Check yourselves.

  61. Brooke says:

    Why is this debate is so polarizing? People who can’t string together Mensa-caliber adjectives like “indefensible” suddenly wax poetic demonizing Depp because he asks THE valid question in this entire sordid business: ‘why now?’. It is neither a defense, nor a justification.

    The judicial system is as easily bought and sold today as it was back then, so why was he let off at the time but is now arrested? Let’s recast this die as the payday it was. Sounds like someone ran out of settlement money, perhaps?

    Be honest – I read the court transcript as I presume all of you did. The girl was what, 13? And said that the encounter with Polanski was (i) not her first time drunk; (ii) not her first time on quaaludes; and (iii) not her first time having sex (she describes the anal sex rather calmly for one taken against her will doesn’t she?). Her testimony that she refused the sex, when taken with her complicit behavior and complete lack of vehemence on the stand, sounds coached. It says to me that (a) her mother had an idea of what she was getting her daughter into [witness the presence of Anjelica Huston in the living room – the man obviously had the deserved pedophile rep at the time]; (b) she wasn’t concerned as long as she got Hollywood connections out of it [the girl was already experienced, after all – she could handle it]; and (c) she had the fallback option of characterizing the interlude in a way that would at minimum ensure a payoff, in case the career did not develop.

    Her mother was right – the girl has never had to work a day in her life. But the markets have been hard the last couple of years; maybe she lost enough to need another payment and has gone back to the well? This sounds like an attempted re-blackmail gone south.

  62. steve says:

    STFU Johnny…and tell me, would you feel the same if he’d done this to YOUR DAUGHTER???

  63. Trillion says:

    The motivation to pursue this case does not appear to be coming from the victim so it’s not an issue of settlement running out.

  64. cara says:

    sounds like a A-typical free lovin’ lib. Better your kid then mine mentality. Funny how he shields his kids from the press. Maybe it has something to do with what he learned from his dear friend Hunter Thompson. Just go the The Lawrence King affair at and you’ll see right there how Johnny seems to regularly defend those who view children as sexual objects, ect, as long as they are not his.

    Johnny, glad to see your latest bloat. No more $$$$ from me. Jaime Fox on the other hand, his response to this debate still resonates with me and he will have my $$$ support.

  65. 2Cents says:

    I’ve never commented on this site before, but this post just really struck a nerve. I don’t think that Depp is justifying what Polanski did at all — in fact I agree with some of the posters here that he is asking one of the most important questions as to why our criminal justice system fails — WHY NOW? Why has it taken so long for this case to come to light if everyone feels so strongly about what he did? We don’t have a statute of limitations for nothing and last time I checked, homicide was the only charge that didn’t have one. Evidence becomes lost and damaged, witness testimony becomes shaky — this SHOULD’VE been taken care of in 1977 when the charges were brought against him, not three decades later in a pathetic attempt at serving justice. And Popcorny, that’s not an attempt at “defending a pedophile,” that’s how this country works and as citizens were all guaranteed specific rights, law abiding citizen/pedophile/drug addict/gang member/thief/insert your pick here.. whether you like it or not. I’m angry here at the system, not at Depp for his ignorant statements or even at Polanski, because I’m sure having your wife, unborn child, and friends brutally murdered and stabbed to death by the psychotic Manson family messes with your head JUST a little bit. And to make it clear, I’m not justifying or excusing what Polanski did either — sexually assaulting someone, regardless of their age, regardless of whether she took the Quaaludes before or willingly, is a horrific, vile, and disgusting thing to do. With that said, I think this situation could’ve EASILY been prevented given the warning signs, but I’m not going to belittle her situation because it’s still disturbing regardless. What troubles me the most is that everyone’s on here fighting about a rape case that occurred in the 1970’s that the victim wants nothing more than to have dropped because the media ruined her life, yet there are 4 year olds who have pedophiles tucking them into bed at night who go by the name of Dad. Reality check, people. Let’s focus on what we can prevent instead of what we cannot change. I’m sorry if I offended anyone, but this is just my own personal opinion.

  66. gia says:

    Wow, Johnny…and how would you feel if it were YOUR daughter?????? It doesn’t matter what he is NOW, it matters what he was THEN, and he has to pay.

    BTW, sure there’s money involved somewhere…that’s par for the course.

    I’m way, way disappointed.

  67. Bete says:

    Finally the world sees the dumb moron within Johnny Depp.
    I’m so sick and tired of people (ie Brooke in this comment string) trying to transform a 13 year old girl into a Lolita. As far as I know, that book was fiction and adult men have more self control. Besides, that girl also had a controlling stage mother behind her, pushing her daughter toward Polanski.
    Those who don’t have self control are predators and,in Polanskis case, pederasts. Go and research how old his current wife was when he bedded her. She was under the legal age of sexual consent but Depp, as usual, is a moron.
    If one of his daughters was raped or molested and their rapist fled legal charges, due to his ‘fame’, he wouldn’t like it. He better be careful not to tempt fate.
    Johnny is more appealing when he shuts his mouth.

  68. Jules says:

    Surprise, surprise. Another Hollywood star turns out to be a moron.

  69. Bek says:

    I’m really at a loss for words. Some of you seem to know a lot about the way the justice system works, yet you overlook something so critical about it. All you need to do is turn on your television to see that it takes most cases years upon years to come to conclusion. It’s called COLD CASE FILES, and thousands of victims and their families sometimes wait out the majority of their lives for some justice. You wanna know “why now”? Because it’s better late than never. If not, let’s do away with all the thousands of files stored away in EVERY investigation office. People with money have a tendency to come away clean. It’s disgusting. And if this guy is taking a fall because somebody somewhere decided to play their hand, then so be it. It’s not the point, really. A hollywood “artist” might actually have to pay for his crimes. THAT’S A GOOD THING. And speaking to those of you hell-bent on placing some blame on the victim or her mother, you need a headcheck fast. I was a victim of the same abuse for a long, rounded YEAR. I was a couple years older than her, in fact. He never told me to keep quiet, and my parents never suspected they couldn’t trust him. I justified it all in my mind, until the day he told me he hoped his wife would die so we could be together. People under 18 yrs of age are called kids for a reason. It’s hard to deal with the emotions of an adult. He moved away and no charges were ever pressed. Yeah, I’d be embarrassed if it were all going to come back to light again! Especially if the rich and snobbish were out to defend him. But secretly, I’ve always dreaded the thought of running into him. He MAY or MAY NOT be hurting other people presently, but does that matter, people? Seriously, grow a heart.

  70. Bek says:

    @Kim–from one to another, I’m really sorry.

  71. crash2GO2 says:

    @Bek & Kim, both of you have spoken the truth here and it is much appreciated.

    JD needs to have his head examined, and I’m rather secretly glad that I’ve never really found him ‘hott’. ’cause damn, he’s not.

  72. Cat says:

    JD is an idiot. I mean, he asks a valid, interesting question of ‘why now’ and follows it up with a defense of a pedophile. Way to cross out your smart-sounding intro, Mr. Depp. And how, may I ask, does he define predator? If someone commits murder. they’re a murderer. If someone rapes a child, they’re a predator. It doesn’t require repeat attempts.

    I’m ashamed of those of you who are defending Polanski because the girl had taken drugs before. Are you saying it’s ok if a young girl is caught by a rapist, since she should’ve known better than to take drugs? Or girls who take drugs and alcohol are “asking for it”? It sounds like prejudice against a girl who wasn’t perfect so she deserved what she got.

    And this case IS important to predators and victims everywhere- it’s so highly publicized and everyone will hear about the results. If Polanski gets off, won’t that send a message to predators everywhere? And their victims?

  73. Ben says:

    Also, for people apparently so understanding I’m amazed at how many who are against those defending Polanski turn and wish the rape on their children.

  74. Peach says:

    You’re argument is absolutely revolting. Look, if I got drunk and high tomorrow I’d be lying if I said it was my first time. And I’m no longer a teenager.
    But that still doesn’t give a man the right to drug me and forcibly penetrate me.

    Blaming the victim much?

    Furthermore if you read the court transcripts like you claim to then you would be well aware of Polanski’s statement that we are “just jealous because everybody wants to fuck young girls.”

    Polanski admitted to raping a child. How much more black and white can it get?

    And also: I live in Paris. Maybe Johnny doesn’t see Polanski as a threat because he doesn’t share the honor of his city with him. But I do. And I want him locked up. This man should not be able to pass my niece on the street and oogle her like the sick, disgusting, twisted perv he is. Nope. Lock him up. Throw the key away.
    Child rapists are not welcome here.

    And just as an aside: Here in Paris that’s the majority of opinion. Sure some intelligentsia stick up for the old rapist. But you’re average citizen with children (little girl children) don’t want this guy anywhere near them.


    Child rapist.
    Lock the sick fuck up.

  75. yeng says:

    bek & kim, i’m sorry to hear those happened to you, and thank you for speaking the truth. @ bek, you articulated your thoughts very well.

  76. L says:

    Excuse me but was he ever in the streets? I don’t think it happened in a street, it happened in a studio right? WELL he is still in the studio. What a dumb excuse.

  77. Debbie says:

    Reading thru the posts I agree This is a strange comment coming from a Father.

    I wonder if it happened to one of his kids, What his honest reaction would be

    I bet you would see him running around with an axe wanting to kill,

    I get sick and tired of celebrities who think that they are above the law, and just because they are famous get treated differently for various crimes.

    If I had my way no matter who it was I’d treat them harder. And believe me You would see a lot of them doing time.
    There are laws to protect the young, and NO one should get away with what he did. And he still thinks he did nothing wrong,

  78. ogechi says:

    Johny my love

  79. ,,,, says:

    @ L – It didn’t happen in a studio. It happened in Jack Nicholson’s house when Jack wasn’t there but I believe Angelica Houston was.

  80. cara says:

    ***** NOTE JD finds it to be a VIOLATION of his children for THIER PHOTOS TO BE TAKEN,that’s his kids being violated, but forcible vaginal and anal rape, ahh…..that’s just Hollywood.

    I must say I am shocked and so F-ing pleased to see how many came out screaming on JD expressing this view. Kudos to society.

  81. nnn says:

    Why are people so surprised about Johnny stand ?

    I know everyone is changing and so but Johnny Depp has been overly sainctified without never been questioned about his dirty past unlike many others!

    Johnny used to be not only a druggies who like cigarettes and alocohol but he owned clubs where drugs and alcohol were running like pancakes, where sex through young strip dancers were served. He is the one who introduced the famous ‘Pussy Cat Dolls’ in his club, with very young dancers who were barely 18.

    The young generation of starlets like the ones you see today (Lindsay Lohan, ect) used to gather there and booze and have their fix. That’s where River Phoenix, got his last fix before collapsing and dying.

    Johnny has a history of self destruction (he even admitted that if he hadn’t met Vanessa he was sure that he would have died of an overdosis) but also an environment he created for others where youth, cheap sex and rock and roll was the norm.

    After Phoneix passed away, the media becam more aware of this and that’s when he went to Europe, met another controversial former child star Vanessa (who at 15 had lived with her 27 years lover Florent Pagni, was already a heavy smoker by the time she turned 13 and had that controversial very graphic sex scene completely stark nakked with her juvenile body with a 50+ years old overweight actor in “Noces Blanches”, a movie which depicts the taboo love between a young teen and her teacher….very sick and disturbant even for very liberal france).

    So even if people do change and people do mature, people also have selective memory and i have never understand why JD, among many others benefitted from that overly sainctified new image after allowing drugs in his clubs, drugs that have killed one of his youngest pals and a very promising actor.

    So i am half surprised that he has that stand and i am sure that Vanessa has the same stand, after all she was living and had no problem to rave about her intimacy with her 27 years old boyfriend when she was hardly 15 looking like a 12 years old.

    I am more disgusted by the same stand from actresses like Monica bellucci.

    Polanski is a monster who should pay for his crime. That type of crime has no limit in time for punishment. Intellectualizing it is already giving him some kind of legetimization. He is a criminal he should pay for his crime. End of story !

  82. Blint says:

    I get that he was entrapped and yeah “why now?” I even kind-of understand why he fled – the judge was off his nut and was seriously violating his authority. He’d have to for both the defense and prosecuting attorneys to ask for his removal. He’d also served his time and offered a large sum to the victim after a shrink determined he wasn’t a predator or a pedophile. At that point by law he ought to have been released, and hopefully scared straight, with no further violations in Europe. Were any reported?

    I understand all that.

    But even if there WAS behind the scene wrangling (seems like there had to have been), he still fled and did something repugnant and frightening. Something that most people wouldn’t do. Had he not fled the ordeal would have been long behind him, although I think it’s asking a lot to expect everyone to get past it. He’s a public figure and even if he’s a reformed public figure, he has to expect public repercussions for this offense. It saddens me that Johnny doesn’t understand that aspect or neglected to mention it if he does.

  83. Greta says:

    I’m surprised no one has mentioned the Manson murders. When the news of this case hit the press, I was neither surprised nor outraged. My first thought was this man was destroyed by the horrifying death of his beautiful wife who was also pregnant, I believe, at the time of her torture and murder. Also, the scene back then was very accepting of “free love” and drugs used for consciousness raising, by everyone. The adults had collectively lost control of their hippie children. Between the wanton sexuality and use of drugs and the sympathy for the man, he was let off more easily than a man would be today.

  84. MooMooMoo says:

    Oh Johnny, I feel alot better about the fact that I’ll never be with you now.

  85. kermit says:

    @nnn These is very crucial info you provided. I remember Johnny from way back. He was a cutter, he smoked at 12 years old, he dropped out of high school, he was a very womanizing 20-something along with the likes of Matt Dillon. I crack up when people are so outraged over Miley Cyrus or Taylor Momsen or even Lindsay Lohan, Mischa Barton, or Amy Winehouse and praise how wonderful Johnny is. Yes, Johnny is a talented actor, but that doesn’t speak to his real character. He was far from a saint as a younger man and displayed all of the arrogance of youthful folly as the current crop does now. Like any other human being he has demons, insecurities and moments of stupidity and hypocrisy just like anyone else. Get past people’s looks and image, we are all flawed. And talk of Johnny should be just pretty and not speak is ridiculous. Sorry. Johnny Depp on this video clip speaks strangely, I guess its part of living in France but he doesn’t speak like someone from Kentucky who spent his early adulthood in the United States.

  86. Blint says:

    Sorry but there are reasons people like JD so much and that’s in no small part because of his acting (BEFORE the Pirates franchise). He also identified he was turning into a mess and left Hollywood (the industry-mill not the location entirely), putting his career on the line.

    All of this is widely known.

    He did have a string of girlfriends, some co-stars but the glare and tinsel made it a struggle. According to him, after he left, he was able to fall in love and live a better more rewarding life. How often do you see him in phony candid shots or hear about him at splashy events, unless it’s directly related to his work obligations? He’s admirably private and protective of his kids keeping them out of the limelight. In the past 12 years there’s rarely a dopey tabloid story about him or his family, although they live most of the year in LA. There’s a reason for that.

    All of that is why this is so disappointing, not because people thought Depp was a perfect human being in every way.

  87. kermit says:

    @Blint point well taken. Here’s the thing. We don’t know any of these people personally and what we get is an image of them. A public persona. Johnny has cleaned his act up and avoids scandals but perhaps his Polanski take is more the real Johnny than the image projected. Some of us may not want to deal with good-imaged people as friends if you really knew them. I see past image and the allure of good looks. Limit it to a fantasy, fine, but that’s as far as it perhaps should go.

    My second thing though is judging the young star/starlets of today. In today’s ridiculous level of exposure, the net, the blogs, the cameras everywhere and it’ll get worse as cameras get smaller and attached to more devices, young people given too much money and probably too much praise, put on pedestals and sometimes without any proper mentoring or parental guidance, will act like fools. That doesn’t mean that they are necessarily. And, in the end, when and if they mature, they may turn it around and have fine public images a la Johnny. That’s why I say cool it with judging the Miley Cyruses, Taylor Momsens, and indeed the Lindsay Lohan’s out there. They are YOUNG, and many people famous and not do not get it together until their late 20s and even older. Some young folks have it together, some can seem to and are image savvy, some have no clue. Some behave, some don’t, some get seduced and pulled in destructive directions that they either get out of later or ruin their lives staying in. That’s the way it is in the world regardless of fame or wealth.

  88. Blint says:

    I don’t have fantasies about anyone I don’t know. But since public exposure of personal details, even at the sacrifice of children, is a way to stay relevant and create a fake intimacy with the public, I can applaud celebs who choose not to do it. Not all choose the same way, or put their careers on the line. But I never harbor the illusion that I really know someone from a distance.

    Disappointing is not the same as crushing.

  89. TaylorB says:

    She was 13 years old, drugged, plied with alcohol, and above all she said ‘no’ several times (though once should be enough), even pretended she was sick to get out of the situation.

    I have a question for those who say ‘well she was physically mature looking’ would you feel the same way if he had done the same thing to a 13 year old that had not yet developed, flat chested, no hips, no pubic hair? Does this mean that if a girl develops early (through no fault of her own) she is ‘fair game’ and the laws don’t apply? I have to wonder if JD’s daughters develop early if his opinion about them being sodomized by a 35+ year old man at 13 will be acceptable. Perhaps, but somehow I doubt it.

    As for the ludes, well she was 13, and at 13 I suspect we all wanted to ‘be cool’ and if someone asked us if we wanted to try something be it a smoke, pot, booze, lude etc. many kids try and ‘be cool’ and say they have done it before, kids do that… that is a horrible defense for Polanski and that lawyer should be ashamed… for multiple reasons.

    The only reason I can possibly understand anyone saying that Polanski isn’t a predator is because his pervey old butt is in a walker and he couldn’t catch up to a snail. He still needs to pay for his crime, and not in some Swiss chalet. Even if it only for a month, he needs to go to jail and show that he is sorry.

  90. missy says:

    johnny stay in france!!!!

  91. Jenna says:

    For one thing, Johnny was saying that he sees Polanski as completely harmless. He’s not condoning child rape.

    Two, I think he’s correct in asking, “Why now?” Obviously someone let it out that Polanski would be in Switzerland or set it up. Otherwise, Polanski wouldn’t be in jail.

    Three, have any of you people even listened to the girl who was raped? She hates that this is constantly being brought up, and she said that she feels that Polanski has served his time.

    Four, Polanski only fled from the US because he entered into a plea bargain, and then the prosecutor illegally spoke to the judge about giving him more time. Furthermore, Polanski DID serve time, but he was released sometime during the sentencing, and that’s when he fled.

    Finally, whoever made the comment about John Wayne Gacy needs to take some psychology courses or something. Roman Polanski is NOT a sociopath!

    If you knew ANYTHING about sociopaths, you’d know that they have families and the like to appear normal.

    Of course, I know someone’s going to be like, “Well, then how do you Polanski’s not a sociopath trying to be normal?”

    Because he doesn’t act anything at all like one, and he especially doesn’t act like John Wayne Gacy. He raped a 13 year old girl, he didn’t rape and murder like 20 teenage boys.

    And perhaps the biggest reason why comparing him to some sociopath pisses me off is because another sociopath KILLED his wife and unborn child (y’know- Charles Manson and the Tate-LaBianca murders? Sharon Tate was his wife).

    Yes, I think that Polanski should serve some more time, but I think it shouldn’t be so publicized, and I think it’s rather ridiculous to go off and hate someone just because they don’t completely agree with you.

    Furthermore, to say that a celebrity should shut up about controversy, or to shut up and stand there looking pretty, is degrading. Johnny is a human being too, and if he wants to say something controversial, then he can.

  92. Jenna says:

    P.S. To all of those people saying, “Johnny- what if this was YOUR daughter?”

    You know what that sounds like to me?

    “Johnny, you said something that I don’t agree with, so I think your daughter should be drugged and raped so you understand my point of view!”

    You people are disgusting.

  93. me says:

    When this happen. The girl was still a young child. In my eyes 13 don’t know who they are and still learning who they are. They still learning and growing. The comment about a child getting married at age 13 is wrong. In so many levels. Back in the day it was expected to get married and raise a family. So you think that a 13 year old judgment taking a pill is right. Who is the adult in this. Maybe in her mind she saw it different. Than adult would! So I guess you going to say it is OK to drug anyone? Or that man can married more than one woman. Don’t matter if these men try to marry underage girls. Yes some woman are at the legal age but what about the ones that live the life style and learn the only experience from their family! That comment is from back in the day. When Men think it is OK to married young girls! This girl got drug and got rape. This girl is grown but didn’t have a voice at the time to say no because she was drug.Do you think she wants to relive this nightmare and she might have doubts about going through such a public display.

  94. Emma says:

    Doesn’t he have a little girl? I’m sorry, but if someone did the things that Polanski did to my little sister, I would be ready to kill him. I can’t even imagine if it were my own kid. And as someone who is notoriously so protective of his children! I can’t believe he would say something like that! Can’t he put himself in the shoes of the parents.

    And even if he can’t, he should just shut up. I hate it when celebrities try to tell us little people how to think.

  95. sally says:

    um to all those who are bashing depp, i just want to say that johnny HASNT defended polanski for the crime. He did not say that it is okay to rape a child. He said WHY NOW, which i totally get because this could have happened a long time ago. Also johnny said that roman polanski is not a predator NOW. He didnt say anything about his previous behaviour and i think ke knows polanski a lot more than we do, so he has probably never seen that side of him. However, i think polanski has comitted a horrific crime and he should be in jail for that. But stop bashing JD because he hasnt said anything for polanski or anything against the girl.

  96. Dani says:

    Wow, I had no idea that he was one of those who added his name to this reprehensible list.
    Even worse are the people attempting to defend his comments.

    Yeah, I fancy Johnny Depp too, okay. He’s hot, charming, talented…

    Still doesn’t make his support of Polanski okay or even remotely acceptable.

    There are some very conflicted people here.

    “What Polanski did was wrong but…”

    “I don’t support him but…,’

    There should be no ifs and buts about.this case at all. It doesn’t matter if the law was different way back when, no sex with a minor is consensual. It is ALWAYS rape. It doesn’t matter if she strips and does a pole dance. Even if she says yes a thousand times. A MINOR CANNOT CONSENT.

    It is the adult’s RESPONSIBILITY to draw the line and not take advantage of a person deemed to young to consent.

    Roman Polanski failed at that basic tenet of human decency. He was (at that point) never held accountable for his actions. Most like him aren’t due to the often untentional victim blaming and misguided empathy.

    Dont you realise that every time you end your condemnations with ‘but this, but that’ you are shifting blame and taking some of the responsibility off the shoulders of the SOLE person who chose to take advantage of a situation presented to them?

    What is most sad is that the child who was raped barely had a name. It was always ‘the victim’ ‘her’ ‘she’. While people were so concerned with defending Polanski’s rights who was defending SAMANTHA’S?

    It’s easy for JD to defend his friend because he doesn’t see a child who was raped but an almost nameless victim.

    “The victim had already done drugs, drank, had sex before” She was already *tainted* right? Who cares if one more dirty old man decides to have a go?

    “And the victim wants it left alone” Not surprising after so many powerful people have failed her and blamed her, but justice has its place. Justice is there for when the victim is too weak, weary, afraid or threatened to stand up for themselves.

    People really need to ask themselves why their first gut reaction in this case was/is to identify and empathise with the abuser instead of SAMANTHA.

    I dont think you or JD are bad people…but something is fundementally wrong when the support os offered to the abuser in whatever form.

    ‘Why now? is not the first thing a father of a young girl should think to ask or say.

    ‘About time’ would be the reaction of anyone with an ounce of sympathy for SAMANTHA.