Debra Tate Says Roman Polanski's Rape of a Drugged, 13-Year-Old Girl Was Consensual

Debra Tate, sister to Roman Polanski's late wife Sharon Tate, went on television this morning to let everyone know that Polanski didn't really rape Samantha Geimer in 1977, telling Matt Lauer on the Today show this morning that "it was rape, but it wasn't rape."

Phew! Well, that just clears everything up, doesn't it?

I have this weird idea that a 13-year-old girl is still a minor and that she is not of an age to give consent to vaginal and anal intercourse while under the influence of drugs and alcohol during what is supposed to be a professional photo shoot. Debra Tate, on the other hand, pulls her card as a victims advocate and says that, in Samantha Geimer's case, she could. Seriously. If you don't believe me, here is Debra Tate's interview with Matt Lauer:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

What Debra Tate is not clear about in this interview is that her victim advocacy is primarily for families who have lost members to murder, not specifically sexual abuse victims, so when she claims, and I quote, "It was a consensual matter. I am a victim's advocate, and I know the difference", she loses all credibility. A victim's advocate generally does not ignore the victim's side of the story, and Samantha Geimer has been very clear that what Roman Polanski did to her was not consensual, going so far as to write an op-ed piece in the Los Angeles Times about the matter:

It was not consensual sex by any means. I said no, repeatedly, but he wouldn't take no for an answer. I was alone and I didn't know what to do. It was scary and, looking back, very creepy.

Children of 13 are just that, children, and grown up men are adults that should know better than to abuse a professional situation with a child by plying them with Quaaludes and champagne and then sexually violating them.

Samantha Geimer in 1978 and 2008

My favourite part of Debra Tate's interview, though, is where her rape apologetics also encompass pedophilia. "[Polanski] was evaluated not to be a pedophile, and, as I said, there's rape, and then there's rape", she says, insinuating not so subtly that if some psychiatric authority deems Polanski's drugging and sexual molestation of a minor to be non-pedophilic in nature, then it renders Samantha Geimer's involvement as consensual against all evidence and testimony to the contrary. Debra also thinks that the American legal system's pursuit of Polanski for raping a child is a sign that the "system is extremely broken".

Isn't Debra Tate just the peachiest most barfy, disgusting, hateful, blind, and unbelievable rape/pedophilia apologist you've seen this week?

Comments

[jodifur]

Isn't this the same woman who lobbied hard for her sister's killer not to be let out of jail when she was dying of cancer? When the murder happened 30 years ago? Not saying the murder was ok but how can she pick and choose what crimes are ok?

That is terrible.

[Nat]

For some reason, I'm always more disgusted when women say things like this. I mean, if we're not going to help each other out, who will?

[DianaCLT]

Completely and totally agree with Jodifur. I'm terribly sorry for what happened to her sister - but how can one advocate for some victims, while condemning (drugged, under-aged, non-consenting, terrified, impressionable) others? And misleading the public about her knowledge and expertise, to boot? Arrggh!!!

[jen from boston]

Can't view the video at work - tell me Lauer did not let her off the hook in the interview? Or did he let her own words her dig her own hole?

Also, we can put a moratorium on "rape-rape" crap.

[lori]

This story is just making me more and more nauseous. (the whole thing and this chapter in particular at the moment) How can anyone, let alone a "victim's advocate" qualify a rape as "rape or RAPE"? it's like a light switch, it's on or it's off. No degrees in between.

[coco loco]

tate is crazy. and whoopi-- what a disappointment. oy oy oy.

rape-rape. is that like pregnant-pregnant, or just pregant? like racism-racism, or just racism? loco-loco, or just loco?

[DianaCLT]

Considering we, the readers and writers of MamaPop, seem to be the only people on the planet that can call a rapist a rapist, regardless of his profession...can we start our own non-profit organization, speaking out against celebs who commit crimes and get away with it, where the average Joe/Jane would get prosecuted?

[mommymae]

do i really need to start boycotting all these film makers movies because they are standing up for him? they're really pissing me off. bastards.

[Julie @ The Mom Slant]

Aaaaaaand a big old F*CK YOU to Debra Tate too. She and Whoopi and everyone else who thinks Polanski is being persecuted can go live in France with the rest of the Hollywood f*cktards who keep threatening to move there. Good riddance.

[schmutzie]

One thing I think people are getting wrong with this who mess is their take on Whoopi. She did NOT excuse him for his crimes. I watched that episode of The View, and she was merely stepping in to clarify the actual legal issues with regard to the case. Her intent was not to minimize what Polanski did but to be clear about what he has actually been charged with. If anything, she highlighted how the legal system has treated this case far too lightly.

[Angela]

Well I'm just gonna have to say that this isn't just stupid, it's stupid-stupid. Or at least ignorant-ignorant. Maybe even verging on evil-evil.

WTF people, if THIS was not rape, then what would they call a 19 year old who had something slipped into her drink at a frat party who woke up with some guy in the midst of having his way? Is this not rape either. I mean in this case you don't even have the age issue (which is a HUGE issue!!!)

It's rape people. There is no rape-rape. There is RAPE. Sexually violating a person against their will. Rape. Period.

All this waffling is only hurting the ones who have been, or will be, violated in this way. No means no, people. And you can't give consent when you're a child, nor when you're under the influence, and for pity's sake NOT BOTH AT THE SAME TIME.

WTF. Mind blown.

[Julie @ The Mom Slant]

He was convicted of statutory rape, yes. But even if Geimer had been over 18, the fact that she was drugged and repeatedly told Polanski to stop makes it "rape-rape". That's why Whoopi's hair-splitting disgusts me.

[Marinka]

I am so shocked and disgusted by these apologists for pedophilia.

[Palinode]

First there's rape, then there's rape-rape. What we will do when our scientists go on to invent rape-rape rape?

[kgirl]

Oh lord, she's worse than Camille Paglia.

[Laurel]

The video is disgusting. I can't even form words to explain how furious this makes me.

[Lisa]

I think if I were a supporter of Roman Polanski, I might ask Woody Allen to quietly take a seat at the back of the rally. Good lord, it's anything goes with these people...

[Heather]

Shocking and ridiculous. The fact that this was ruled statutory rape in the first place is unbelievable.

[Jessi]

Deborah Tate is an idiot. Plain and simple. I've spent years following every minutiae of the Manson murders and one irrefutable fact is that she is an attention-whoring idiot who is always willing to cry on national tv. Manson's in his 70's, Sadie's dead, she sees her time in the spotlight dwindling fast. The only thing she can do to keep in the spotlight is to say outrageous things. About Roman Polanski, about other victims, about whatever. That's just who she is.

[Amy]

That interview made me want to vomit! As a person who was molested as a child, I know that there should be no "qualifications" on whether sex with a minor was consensual or not. Children are not able to consent as they are too young (or too scared) to make a decision. And she DID say no!!! But even if she hadn't it would have been a criminal act worthy of serious jail time. The fact that he's some great artist should not decide whether he should be prosecuted or not. I think perhaps Ms. Tate is trying to get a chunk of change from the will or something. I can't think of another reason to defend the disgusting acts.

[bikerchick]

Oh. My. Boiling. Blood. Sign me up for the uber-boycott of all these f*tards. Since when does "philanthropy and humanitarianism" negate or mitigate the reality of a felony conviction for rape?

[Jess]

A friend from college went to jail a couple of years ago for having consensual sex with a 13-year-old boy without the aid of drugs or alcohol. While I don't agree with my friend's decisions or condone her behavior, she's paid her time and her life and career as a teacher are ruined. In light of that, I have a hard time believing that just because Polanski is a celebrity, his crime is not a prosecutable offense.

[nezl]

a giant W.T.F. has anyone read or heard the testimony of this woman when she was 13? if there was any question as to if it was rape rape, it erases it. polanski needs to go to jail, there is no question about it. showing pictures of his "worried" wife, or sharon tate, or what movies have come out, or how he's helped others break into the business don't amount to jack sh*t. he destroyed that young girl after she REPEATEDLY told him no or pushed him off her. that disgusting sad excuse for a woman matt lauer interviewed needs to take a seat next to polanksi on the train going to hell.

[rebecca]

ug...this whole thing makes me stabby. it never should have been plead down; obviously she never consented. and 13 is 13. Too young to consent. This man has done nothing to pay for his actions. I don't care what happened to him before; yeah, yeah, yeah, tough life. So every pedo who was molested as a child, who had a tragedy, gets a break? I don't think so.

[Cecilieaux Bois de Murier]

I don't disagree with you on the principle of rape, but you've got the facts of this case all wrong. See my upcoming post (tomorrow) on Shavings Off My Mind.