I am a regular reader of your free newspaper, which I pick up in my Old Town neighborhood. I usually find the articles about our downtown area to be informative and useful. I rarely read the “gossip column,” but I was scanning your July 29 column when I saw the item about Roman Polanski.

“Roman Polanksi is not the real victim.” Your take on who is at fault in this 30-year-old rape case is totally outrageous. You ought to be ashamed of yourself, but I suspect you don’t even get it.

Yes, the mother ought to share in the guilt for not having protected her daughter, indeed even “giving” her daughter to this pedophile. But since when is the man who actually commits the crime not guilty just because he was “given permission.”

Do you have minimum age limit for which it is permissible to rape someone when given permission by someone else? Ten years? Eight years? How about 3? How would you feel if this were your granddaughter? Would you still fee so charitable? Would you still say he was just a pig?

Words fail me in expressing how angry your attitude about this case makes me. I would put it off to generational differences, but when I saw the other little item about the cheating wife of the “Timid Medic Husband” I realized you have double standards. Why else would you be judgmental enough to “out” someone in your public column for cheating and give Roman Polanski a pass for raping a 13-year-old?

You owe every reader a big apology. I know I will find it difficult to pick up this newspaper again.