# Roman Polanski Is Arrested in Switzerland



## Big Don (Sep 27, 2009)

September 28, 2009
* Roman Polanski Is Arrested in Switzerland *

By DAVID JOLLY NEW YORK TIMES EXCERPT:

            PARIS  After more than 30 years as a fugitive from U.S. justice, Roman Polanski,
 the director of legendary films including Chinatown and Rosemarys Baby, was arrested in Switzerland on an international warrant as he arrived in Zurich for a film festival featuring a retrospective of his work, the Swiss authorities said Sunday.
 Mr. Polanski was detained by the police Saturday upon his arrival at the Zurich airport, said Guido Balmer, a spokesman for the Swiss Federal Justice Department. The director was being held in provisional detention in preparation for a possible extradition to the United States based on an arrest warrant dating to 1978.
 Mr. Polanski, 76, was convicted that year in a California court of unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl whom he had lured to the home of Jack Nicholson and drugged. Faced with a prison term, he fled the United States just before his sentencing.
END EXCERPT
Put his *** in the general population!


----------



## Omar B (Sep 27, 2009)

I always say, love the art not the artist.  He does amazing work in his professional life, "The 9th Gate" is a great favorite of mine, but then pretty much anything with Satan.


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 27, 2009)

Don't know much about the man or his work.  30 years, though, isn't there a statute of limitation on this?


----------



## jim777 (Sep 27, 2009)

CoryKS said:


> Don't know much about the man or his work. 30 years, though, isn't there a statute of limitation on this?


 
A Statute of limitations keeps you from charging and prosecuting if enough time passes between the incident and the arrest. He's been charged, tried and found guilty already, so the Statute doesn't apply.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Sep 27, 2009)

jim777 said:


> A Statute of limitations keeps you from charging and prosecuting if enough time passes between the incident and the arrest. He's been charged, tried and found guilty already, so the Statute doesn't apply.



Good thing IMO.
Anyone who did what he did deserves to spend the rest of his life behind bars.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 27, 2009)

This is one of those case where the perp absolutely needs to spend his time in an 8x10 cell with a hairy backed, knuckle dragging mouth breather named Bubba who wants to be his "special friend"...


----------



## Big Don (Sep 27, 2009)

Dirty Dog said:


> This is one of those case where the perp absolutely needs to spend his time in an 8x10 cell with a hairy backed, knuckle dragging mouth breather named Bubba who wants to be his "special friend"...


Exactly, let Polanski know what it is like to be raped!


----------



## Jenna (Sep 28, 2009)

I worry some of you do not understand that there is another side to this that the 13yo victim is not that any more.  Samantha Geimer, she is married now herself and has repeatedly requested that the charges are dropped and because every time this farrago raises its head again she has to face the same crap over.  I am not saying what was done was appropriate or acceptable no and but I think some of the comments here are overzealous and overpermissive of our own feral natures in destroying society's ills, if you will.

I think Samantha Geimer already obtained compensation directly from Polanski and wants this ended.  Why does nobody consider her position?  Why are we so keen to push this backwards and then even get this man raped in prison???  I do not understand that.  There is a victim here once again typically ignored.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Sep 28, 2009)

He is a sentenced man who fled the country before he got locked up.

They can't really sweep it under the rug because statute of limitations does not apply. He still has to do time no matter what anyone thinks. The only legally significant way for this to end without him doing time is to issue a pardon. No politician would be willing to sign it, because it would be political suicide for various reasons.

The only thing they could have done was turning a blind eye to him being stupid and going to a country that extradites to the US. Even repealing the arrest warrant would have been a sensitive matter. Apparently, it was known more than a week in advance that he would be in an extraditing country at a given time, which gave the US prosecutors enough time to prepare.  Once he crossed the border and the issue of the arrest warrant came up, the wheels started turning. His own damn fault. 

And while I understand the plight of the victim, we can't discard sentences just because the victim asks for it. It wouldn't take much imagination for convicted criminals to put the pressure on their victims to make them forgive them in public and asking to let the criminal run free.


----------



## Jenna (Sep 28, 2009)

No, of course, yet you cannot completely understand the position of the victim if you are not prepared to at least countenance the situation where the sentence is dropped per her wishes.

I am not for Polanski in this case, no.  I do think though in such an instance, the law, blind and impartial in its avid execution of its mandate becomes a cold and partially-advised automaton in matters of victims' wellbeing.  Still, we get what we pay for.


----------



## punisher73 (Sep 28, 2009)

jim777 said:


> A Statute of limitations keeps you from charging and prosecuting if enough time passes between the incident and the arrest. He's been charged, tried and found guilty already, so the Statute doesn't apply.


 
Usually things like rape and murder don't have limitations either.  So even if he was just wanted for all this time it wouldn't matter.


----------



## girlbug2 (Sep 28, 2009)

Bruno@MT said:


> He is a sentenced man who fled the country before he got locked up.They can't really sweep it under the rug because statute of limitations does not apply. He still has to do time no matter what anyone thinks.....
> And while I understand the plight of the victim, *we can't discard sentences just because the victim asks for it*. It wouldn't take much imagination for convicted criminals to put the pressure on their victims to make them forgive them in public and asking to let the criminal run free.


 
Exactly right. When somebody is convicted of a criminal charge, they serve their sentence because _they owe it to society_, not just their particular victim. So even if the "girl" has forgiven him, there is a debt to society to be paid.

 I have never studied law, but I believe the reason behind this is that A, it removes the criminal from society and prevents him from doing further harm during his sentence, and B, sends a larger message that he won't get away with it. All necessary for the greater benefit of the rest of a criminal's potential victims.


----------



## Big Don (Sep 28, 2009)

*Anger in France and Poland after Polanski arrest*

Sun Sep 27, 2009 12:42pm EDT Reuters EXCERPT:

   * French politicians seek release of Polanski
   * Artists question Swiss motives for arresting director
   * Poland considers appealing to United States

   By Crispian Balmer
   PARIS, Sept 27 (Reuters) - France's political elite rallied to the defence of Roman Polanski on Sunday, calling on Switzerland to free the 76-year-old film director rather than extradite him to the United States.  Artists and film makers also urged the release of Polanski, who faces charges of having sex with a girl of 13 in 1977, accusing Switzerland of being overzealous in pursuing the case.
   Polanski was due to receive a prize for his life's work at the Zurich Film Festival on Sunday, but was arrested on a 1978 U.S. arrest warrant after arriving in Switzerland on Saturday.
   French Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand said he was "stunned" by the news, adding that both he and French President Nicolas Sarkozy wanted to see the acclaimed director returned swiftly to his family.
   "(Mitterrand) profoundly regrets that a new ordeal is being inflicted on someone who has already known so many during his life," the culture ministry said in a statement.
   French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner also issued a statement, saying he had spoken to his Swiss counterpart to demand that Polanski's rights were fully respected and that a "favourable" solution be rapidly found.
   Polanski holds French citizenship and is married to French singer actress Emmanuelle Seigner. He has spent much of his life here since fleeing the United States in 1978
END EXCERPT
None of this changes the FACTS that Polanski was tried and convicted of rape and fled the country to avoid serving his sentence.


----------



## Live True (Sep 28, 2009)

I can truly sympathise with the girl having to relive this situation and have her name brought up into the public spotlight again.  However, as others have so eloquently stated, the case states thet he drugged and abused a 13 year old girl.  The vigor of the comments are based on that fact.  If we are honourable folk, then we want to protect those that we deem innocent, it is part of our personal code of ethics and belief.

Yes, people grow up and even change. And I certainly think it is acceptable to forgive Polanski for what he has done, as this girl has apparently done. But forgiveness is not forgetting.  Forgiveness is not accepting, and forgiveness is not condoning.  

He still raped a 13 year old girl, drugged her to do it, and then used his wealth and connections to escape punishment. Privilege and time should not equate to escaping punshiment when you harm another.

As always Jenna, I appreciate your viewpoint, but I think he deserves to serve some time for what he's done.  I also, though, think the victim's name should be left anonymous and that this should be let to die a quick media death. (for two reasons...the victims peace of mind, and the lack of glorification of Polanski's actions).


----------



## Big Don (Sep 28, 2009)

The Smoking Gun has the Grand Jury Transcripts
The man is scum, a child raping rat bastard.


----------



## grydth (Sep 28, 2009)

Big Don said:


> The Smoking Gun has the Grand Jury Transcripts
> The man is scum, a child raping rat bastard.



 I have finally found a topic I can agree with Big Don on completely.

It is a depressing sign of our times to see pederasts celebrated and defended.... as if *they* were the helpless victims. There's _zero doubt_ about whether this one did it, yet for the Illiteratti, it is Aux Barricades!  for poor, poor Roman.

One hopes misguided "compassion" , and low friends in high places do not result in freedom for this monster.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 28, 2009)

I can only add to this topic somewhat tangentially because my emotional reaction is the same and as strong as many of the condemnatory posters that have gone above.

I have sat on the jury of a case that is very similar to this, except that rather than drugs being used to gain compliance it was the threat of violence.  It broke my heart to have to listen and watch the testimony of the young girl involved - after all, despite my rebellion and rejection of it, I had a very strict religious upbringing and the case was a direct line to where my sense of morality dwelled.

What it boiled down to in the end is that there was no hard evidence - it was one persons word against anothers and there were circumstances around the case that suggested that the accusation may well have been a malicious asault on the supposed defendant.

It is highly unlikely that the same circumstances pertain in the Polanski case under discussion here but we all have to try and bear in mind that without verifiable evidence all testimony is hearsay and that is insufficent to make a judgement upon.

We can give free rein to our visceral repulsion at what is alleged to have occurred because we have no involvement and there is no repurcussion whatsoever for our 'pitchfork and fire-brand' reaction.  If it ever comes into court again, the jury (if there is one) will not be so fortunate.


----------



## JDenver (Sep 28, 2009)

While I don't entirely agree on the language used, I do agree with Big Don (and that's a first!).

Not much different than Nazi hunting all these decades later.  While I really like Polanski's work........what he did.......


----------



## Tames D (Sep 28, 2009)

I can't help but wonder if Polanski feels that the people responsible for his wifes murder also deserve a pardon for their crime.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Sep 28, 2009)

Whether I agree with it or not, I can certainly understand the victim's point of view.

What infuriated me, however, is the Hollywood elite's mentality on this.  Debra Winger's comment: It is based on a three-decade-old case that is all but dead except for a minor technicality.  

You gotta wonder about the mentality of people who will forgive brutality done to others because he makes "great art".


----------



## Big Don (Sep 28, 2009)

The smart *** in me has to ask: Isn't three decades in France punishment enough?


----------



## Bruno@MT (Sep 29, 2009)

Nothing susprises me anymore in that regard. I've see slashdotters mention that Hans Reiser should have been left off the hook because they felt it could be argued that Hans' work on ReiserFS was more valuable to 'humanity' than the life of the wife he murdered. I didn't respond to that. Can't argue with crazy.

Clarification for those who don't know:
Slashdot is a forum where Geeks and Nerds talk about stuff. Mostly related to the tech world.
Hans Reiser was a programmer (supposedly very good) who developed a file system for linux (supposedly not that great). Apart from very intelligent, he is also extremely arrogant. His wife went missing, and there was a big pile of circumstantial evidence. He might even have walked, had he not taken the stand, against his lawyer's wishes. He talked himself into the conviction by piling ridiculous argument on ridiculous argument. After his conviction he escaped life sentencing by showing where the body was hidden.


----------



## KELLYG (Sep 29, 2009)

Just out of curiosity, has Polanski been in an  extradition country other than this time in the last 30 years?  If he has not why did he leave this time.  If he has why did he get busted this time?


----------



## Live True (Sep 29, 2009)

Kelly, it's my understanding that he has been in other countries where he could be extradited, but was in and out before police could get organized. This time there was a lot of advance notice.


----------



## CanuckMA (Sep 29, 2009)

Live True said:


> Kelly, it's my understanding that he has been in other countries where he could be extradited, but was in and out before police could get organized. This time there was a lot of advance notice.


 
Not quite. He's been to Switzerland regularly. It is my understanding that he has a residence. One of the unanswered questions here is why have the Swiss arrested him now?


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 29, 2009)

Reminder: Roman Polanski raped a child

But Chinatown was a good movie (I'm told) so it's all good, right?


----------



## Big Don (Sep 29, 2009)

The Smoking Gun has Polanski (the pervert's) Plea Transcript
LINK
He fully understood his plea, and the consequences of it. He should be given the maximum sentence allowed by law for that crime and prosecuted for fleeing justice for 30 years.
Seizing his assets would be a nice way to finance this.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 29, 2009)

Gentlemen, I can't help but think that you are allowing your perfectly legitimate revulsion at the crime committed by a 'famous' person to override the countless cases of the worse crimes committed that never see the light of day.

For example, Catholic Priest ... Choir Boy ... Politician ... Secretary ... an all too prevalent pair of couplets, the mingling of which is swept under the carpet and quietly absolved when things come to light on the odd occasion.

Don't allow the fact that this is a 'decadent' and priveledged 'artist' to make your rage any the less or any the more than for all those cases you haven't heard about or don't care to countenance.

Righteous indignation has it's place and without it sometimes things cannot be changed but it is inaccurate thinking to believe that venting spleen on one figure buys absolution for others that we know naught about.

Power is exploited every minute of every day around the world - until we break that equation the crucifiction of an unfortunate few who 'get caught' does nothing but salve consciences that are pricked by a vague sense of communal guilt.

We can rail and be sated by how moral we are to have cried for blood all we like - that says something rather worse about us than it does about the crime I fear.

All that said, I do have to confess that if it were *my* daughter he'd done that to ...


----------



## grydth (Sep 29, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> Gentlemen, I can't help but think that you are allowing your perfectly legitimate revulsion at the crime committed by a 'famous' person to override the countless cases of the worse crimes committed that never see the light of day.
> 
> For example, Catholic Priest ... Choir Boy ... Politician ... Secretary ... an all too prevalent pair of couplets, the mingling of which is swept under the carpet and quietly absolved when things come to light on the odd occasion.
> 
> ...



For me, that Polanski is an artist doesn't make the crime better or worse... the _*uncontested*_ facts behind this child rape are horrible enough.  

I believe the reason "artist" keeps coming up is a well founded suspicion that Polanski will manipulate said status to escape punishment - as he has for 3 decades.

Cries for blood _*may*_ reflect badly upon us; allowing child molesters to run free, indeed celebrating them, that sir _*will *_damn us.

If we will not defend our children, we will not defend anything. At that juncture, should it come to that, we will be worse than Polanski.


----------



## Big Don (Sep 29, 2009)

grydth said:


> For me, that Polanski is an artist doesn't make the crime better or worse... the _*uncontested*_ facts behind this child rape are horrible enough.
> 
> I believe the reason "artist" keeps coming up is a well founded suspicion that Polanski will manipulate said status to escape punishment - as he has for 3 decades.
> 
> ...


Well said.
I haven't seen anyone call for blood, only justice, you know serving the sentence for the crime he plead guilty to, and of course fleeing to escape that punishment for 3 decades.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 29, 2009)

I don't believe you quite caught my point square on, gentlemen. 

*Grydth* I would ask with all due civillity that you amend the implications of your words that I for a second intimated that I thought any less deeply of this crime than anyone else here.

Ah well, words on a screen cannot ever hope to convey a message with any accuracy.

Bay for blood with righteous fervour - hang the one heinous celebrity that passes in front of your eyes and then rest easy. It will change nothing. The problem will remain and thousands will go unpunished for very similar offences.

I for one don't know how you can ever prevent such crimes, particularly for the rich, powerful or sanctified. We certainly can't from our positions here at the shallow-end of the economic/political/religious pool.


----------



## David43515 (Sep 29, 2009)

According to most of the news stories I`ve read, courts have considered relooking at the plea deal he made (and the first judge supposedly backed out of), but the current judges insist that he must be present for any hearing and he simply refuses to set foot in the US because there`s a warrant out for him.

         I sincerely doubt he will ever receive the punishments he so richly deserves, at least in this life. However if he really wants this crap to end, all he has to do is show up in the court and all his Hollywood friends will probably get it thrown out within a week.


----------



## grydth (Sep 29, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> I don't believe you quite caught my point square on, gentlemen.
> 
> *Grydth[/d] I would ask with all due civillity that you amend the implications of your words that I for a second intimated that I thought any less deeply of this crime than anyone else here.
> 
> ...


*

Far be it from me to attempt to speak for you or anyone else here. Indeed I was referring to your observations on the possible causes and contexts for our indignation.

You can never prevent all child rapes.... but you can punish every one you catch and that manifestly has not been done in Polanski's case to date. Each one you do punish severely shows the rich and famous just how much they have to lose.... and will lose. No, don't hang only the celebrity - hang'em all.

Nobody advocates tolerance or forgetfulness regarding the garden variety child molester. The numerous 'ordinary' pederasts often are severely punished, and not after a delay of 30 years, either... they lack the resources to flee to France and live in fine style, they lack the connections amongst the Illiteratti and star struck officials.

There are a wealth of measures all of us, even those on "the shallow end" can take. The primary one is aggressively take care of your children - the pederasts have shockingly easy hunting because families often won't make the effort of adequate supervision and protection. Educate your children about the danger. I've curtailed my own MA studies but my 2 daughters are getting the best MA available, and I am confident at least the older one can already take care of herself to some extent. When you see an organization protecting a pederast, do not patronize it.... be it a church or a record label or a movie theatre....and if your child is a victim, sue and prosecute the piss out of them. That's what finally curtailed the clergy abuses, and led to the fall of their protectors.*


----------



## Gordon Nore (Sep 29, 2009)

It just occurred to me that folks who want Polanski released and forgiven feel that way for the same reason that so many want him pilloried. He's a celebrity; moreover, an artiste.

One group exalts the artist above normal social responsibility; the other wants an example made of him.

Stringing him up will not deter future sex criminals any more than his work as a film maker exonerates him from fleeing from the justice system.

Polanski is just a guy who drugged a 13-year-old and forced himself upon her. Then, fearing a judge would not acquiesce to a plea agreement, he skips out. He still owes for that. Won't fix anything. Won't change anything. He owes.


----------



## crushing (Sep 29, 2009)

Gordon Nore said:


> It just occurred to me that folks who want Polanski released and forgiven feel that way for the same reason that so many want him pilloried. He's a celebrity; moreover, an artiste.
> 
> One group exalts the artist above normal social responsibility; the other wants an example made of him.
> 
> ...



I certainly disagree and give them more credit than that!  From the discussion, it looks like the people that want Polanski to be punished for the rape he committed would want any and all rapists to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Sep 29, 2009)

crushing said:


> I disagree.  From the discussion, it looks like the people that want Polanski to be punished for the rape he committed would want any and all rapists to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.



My comments were not limited specifically to this discussion, but to the broader range of opinions being voiced in the media. Listening to some comment Debra Winger (a juror for the award he was due to receive) made at a press conference today made me want to :barf:


----------



## Big Don (Sep 29, 2009)

Had Polanski not fled to France thirty years ago, NONE of this would be necessary. Polanski alone is responsible for all the current hoopla.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Sep 29, 2009)

Big Don said:


> Had Polanski not fled to France thirty years ago, NONE of this would be necessary. Polanski alone is responsible for all the current hoopla.



I agree with you.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Sep 30, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> Gentlemen, I can't help but think that you are allowing your perfectly legitimate revulsion at the crime committed by a 'famous' person to override the countless cases of the worse crimes committed that never see the light of day.
> 
> For example, Catholic Priest ... Choir Boy ... Politician ... Secretary ... an all too prevalent pair of couplets, the mingling of which is swept under the carpet and quietly absolved when things come to light on the odd occasion.



I have thought about this, but no. I feel the same about the examples you mention. However, in this case, it is really cut and dried. Polanski is a convicted man who ran away before he got sentenced. He is a fugitive.

My personal feelings aside (father of 2 daughters here), now that he is captured, the arguments don't matter anymore. He should enter the penal system to do his time.

It was his own stupidity that got him in this situation. The wheels are turning and his social status irrelevant. To let him go now would be to say 'celebrities don't need to do time' or 'if you can stay out of our paws long enough, we'll give up'. Both would be wrong imo.


----------



## yorkshirelad (Sep 30, 2009)

I am really appauled at Debra Winger's stance during the press conference. She is one of the stars of my favourite film (Shadowlands) and now I do not respect her in the slightest. It really goes to show the elitest snobbery that exists in Hollywood circles. Polanski plead guilty and was convicted of THE DRUGGING AND RAPING OF A CHILD. What he did was heinous in the extreme and the Hollywood elite believe that because of his artistic genius he should get a pass. The whole thing makes me sick. This guy has been a fugitive for thirty years. If he doesn't go down for the rest of his natural life, there is something wrong with the system.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Sep 30, 2009)

A child rapist is a child rapist, no matter how big or rich they are. 

Ted Kennedy should have been in prison for the death of Kopechne and Polanski should have been in jail for the rape, sodomy, and drugging of a 14 year old. 

The only difference is Kennedy hid behind his dead brothers while Polanski pleaded guilty and ran. 

Well Polanski has been caught. Justice? Well when you send someone to prision it's for many reasons. Punishment, rehabilitation, keeping them out of socity for societies safety, and *MAKING AN EXAMPLE OUT OF THEM*.

Polanski needs to be made an example out of him so the rich see they are not above the law, no matter where they hide or whom covers for them (like Whoopi Goldberg making excuses for him.)

Throw him in the slammer. We sent Phil Spector to prison, so send Polanski.

Deaf


----------



## blindsage (Oct 1, 2009)

Bring him back, sentence him, and put him in prison.  That's it.   Time doesn't absolve you of child rape.  Not 'rape' rape my ***.  And the victim forgiving him has nothing to do with it.  *HE* is responsible for her pain, and his not coming forward to pay his debt is the reason for it continuing, not the prosecutor.


----------



## shihansmurf (Oct 1, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> Gentlemen, I can't help but think that you are allowing your perfectly legitimate revulsion at the crime committed by a 'famous' person to override the countless cases of the worse crimes committed that never see the light of day.
> 
> For example, Catholic Priest ... Choir Boy ... Politician ... Secretary ... an all too prevalent pair of couplets, the mingling of which is swept under the carpet and quietly absolved when things come to light on the odd occasion.
> 
> ...



Your point is well taken, sir. I'm sure that there is a great deal of  projection going on here. Since we can't get them all, let's make damn sure this one really famous guy gets strung up nice and high for all to see. That sort of thing, right?

Thing is, I'm sure that you're right, but it doesn't change the fact that he is a rapist that should be punished for his crimes.

As for me, though, I'm a pretty simple guy. I think that child rapists should be burned to death. All of them. Keeps us from having to try to rehabilitate the worthless filth, protects any future victims, and sure as hell provides closure to the victim. As for acting as a deterrent, well, it will at least prevent recidivisim in the case of that particular monster.

To be fair, I feel that way about all rapists. I don't care about the social status of their prey. A rapist destroys a part of a person. Sex offenders are slime and filth, purge them.

Mark


----------



## David43515 (Oct 2, 2009)

I just read that during the same period he was sleeping with actress Nastasha Kinski who was 12-13 years old. That`s a pattern of behavior. And there`s no telling how many other times he did it that no one has talked about. He`s a pedophile, plain and simple. 

       I say lock him up and throw away the key.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Oct 2, 2009)

Poland is going to start (or planning to start) chemical castration of convicted pedophiles. Given the near zero chances of successful rehabilitation, this is something I would wholeheartedly support in my own country.
Just letting them go after they did their time is going to end with more victims.


----------



## geezer (Oct 2, 2009)

Bruno@MT said:


> Poland is going to start (or planning to start) chemical castration of convicted pedophiles. Given the near zero chances of successful rehabilitation, this is something I would wholeheartedly support in my own country.
> Just letting them go after they did their time is going to end with more victims.


 
After this goes into effect for a few years, it will be interesting to see how effective it really is. I'm always a bit skeptical about the reliability of such "technological solutions". I doubt that even actual _physical_ castration is 100% effective. Humans can be frighteningly persistent and inventive when it comes to their perversions.


----------



## Big Don (Oct 6, 2009)

The Swiss Justice Ministry denied Polanski's bid for release, citing he is a flight risk.
AP ARTICLE C/O Breitbart 
The last sentence in the article speaks volumes to AP's biases and is also patently false:


> U.S. authorities asked for his apprehension and want him extradited for having sex in 1977 with a 13-year-old girl.


He isn't wanted because he had sex with a 13-year-old girl, he is wanted because he raped a 13-year-old girl, plead guilty to a lesser charge, and fled the country before he could be sentenced.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 6, 2009)

Big Don said:


> The Swiss Justice Ministry denied Polanski's bid for release, citing he is a flight risk.
> AP ARTICLE C/O Breitbart
> The last sentence in the article speaks volumes to AP's biases and is also patently false:
> 
> He isn't wanted because he had sex with a 13-year-old girl, he is wanted because he raped a 13-year-old girl, plead guilty to a lesser charge, and fled the country before he could be sentenced.


 
I remember the case at the time but not the details, is there a reason he was allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge? My knowledge of American law isn't much I'm afraid. While I'm sure there's a good reason, reading it makes it sound as if the charge is downgraded to something less awful or serious?


----------



## CoryKS (Oct 6, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> I remember the case at the time but not the details, is there a reason he was allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge? My knowledge of American law isn't much I'm afraid. While I'm sure there's a good reason, reading it makes it sound as if the charge is downgraded to something less awful or serious?


 
I think usually in these cases they offer a deal to the guy in exchange for a plea so that the child doesn't have to sit in front of a room full of strangers and describe in full detail what the guy did to her.


----------



## Tez3 (Oct 6, 2009)

CoryKS said:


> I think usually in these cases they offer a deal to the guy in exchange for a plea so that the child doesn't have to sit in front of a room full of strangers and describe in full detail what the guy did to her.


 
That sounds a good idea. Bad enough to have been violated in the first place but to have to relive it unnessarily isn't pleasant.


----------



## Big Don (Oct 6, 2009)

CoryKS said:


> I think usually in these cases they offer a deal to the guy in exchange for a plea so that the child doesn't have to sit in front of a room full of strangers and describe in full detail what the guy did to her.


That and, plea bargains, supposedly, save the state the time and money that would have had to be spent on the prosecution.


----------



## grydth (Oct 6, 2009)

Polanski will probably wind up doing more time in a Swiss jail awaiting extradition than he would have originally done in California had he not fled.... which shows what about us?

Polanski's avatars have bemoaned all the unfairness the justice system inflicted on poor Roman; yet who thinks 90 days is a sufficient sentence for what he did to that girl? 

A just sentence would read more like _*90 years*_ in my opinion.

Odd nobody thought to seize his passport way back when.......


----------



## David43515 (Oct 7, 2009)

I think the prosecution usually asks the court to seize someone`s passport when they`re considered a flight risk. Since they were working on a plea bargin where he would have probably seen almost zero jail time he wasn`t considered a risk. In fact L.A. is such a 'company town' regarding the movie industry that Polanski was allowed to leave the country to finish a movie he was working on while this was in it`s Grand Jury phase. ( He came back and they began the plea deal once it was determined they had enough for a case.)


----------



## grydth (Oct 23, 2009)

Update: The US formally requested this individual be extradited. In the intervening weeks, he has remained in jail. The Swiss judicial system has denied every effort of his to get out - realistically viewing him as a flight risk.

Who says there's no good news anymore?


----------



## grydth (Nov 7, 2009)

Update :  Polanski still sits in a Swiss jail, and could spent months more there if he tries to fight the US extradition request. Oddly enough, the Swiss refuse to believe he isn't a flight risk.

He may wind up spending more time in jail now than he would have if he'd just done the original (way too brief) sentence in California.

Justice delayed isn't always justice denied........


----------



## FierySquidFace (Nov 7, 2009)

Jenna said:


> I worry some of you do not understand that there is another side to this that the 13yo victim is not that any more. Samantha Geimer, she is married now herself and has repeatedly requested that the charges are dropped and because every time this farrago raises its head again she has to face the same crap over. I am not saying what was done was appropriate or acceptable no and but I think some of the comments here are overzealous and overpermissive of our own feral natures in destroying society's ills, if you will.
> 
> I think Samantha Geimer already obtained compensation directly from Polanski and wants this ended. Why does nobody consider her position? Why are we so keen to push this backwards and then even get this man raped in prison??? I do not understand that. There is a victim here once again typically ignored.


 
Very interesting point...


----------



## crushing (Nov 7, 2009)

Jenna said:


> I think Samantha Geimer already obtained compensation directly from Polanski and wants this ended.  Why does nobody consider her position?  Why are we so keen to push this backwards and then even get this man raped in prison???  I do not understand that.  There is a victim here once again typically ignored.



Does she really want it to end, or has she been compelled to say that after some sort of threat perceived or real?  I'm not saying such a threat was made purposefully or otherwise, but such a possibility is one of the reasons why justice is pursued even if it seems to be against the wishes of the victim.


----------

