In today’s breaking news, noted legal scholar Whoopi Goldberg has ruled in her latest decision that Roman Polanski’s actions in 1977 did not constitute “rape-rape”, thereby creating an entirely novel legal classification for his actions in an apparent attempt to absolve him of something or other. Further explanation of the legal theory supporting this reclassification are coming along any time now.

This raises several important questions, such as:

“If plying a child with alcohol and quaaludes and then forcing oral, vaginal and anal intercourse on her, despite her protests that she wanted to go home and that he should ‘stay away’ doesn’t constitute “rape-rape”, what does it constitute?”

Does it constitute Just Plain Rape, without the extra -Rape modifier? How about pedophilia? How about fleeing the country after pleading guilty? What about becoming a fugitive from justice? Is fleeing to France an indictable offense yet?

Next up: Whoopi Goldberg expounds on the subtleties of the “is-is-was-was-are-are” dichotomies, for example:

“It depends on what the meaning of the word is, is when you’re deciding whether Roman Polanski’s actions were-were rape-rape and are-are still a crime-crime.”