Roman Polanski Arrested In Switzerland

[Sanhael]

I say honor his previous plea bargain, and then throw the damn book at him for fleeing his sentencing. Charge him as a repeat offender, deny bail since he's a proven flight risk, and then dump his molesting ass into maximum security for 10-15.

They can mail him his Oscar in prison. Maybe his cellmate will find a nice place to put it.

Huz-ZAH.

 

[Sanhael]

Roman Polanski was allowed to plea down to a far, far less monstrous charge than that which fit the crime he actually committed; as previously mentioned, he gave a 13-year-old girl champagne, plied her for sex and--when she refused--he drugged her, raped her, and sodomized her. When he heard a rumor that the judge was considering going back on the plea arrangement, he fled the country, living in exile in a nation that specifically does not extradite for sex crimes (France... go figure). He frequently made travel plans, then canceled them when he found out the US was going to try to make a grab for him once he set foot off of French soil.

It's not as if we simply got bored, and went after a man who's been taking it easy for 30+ years. Polanski got careless with his travel arrangements, we heard about where he was going, we made the arrangements to have him collected, and--this time--he actually showed up. Go figure that the guy would relax a teensy-weensy bit after three decades, right?

I'm not going to go all emo-ape about how he "ought to burn in Hell," mainly because (a) I don't believe in Hell, and (b) if Hell is real, he will go there--or not--with no input or exercise of authority from me taken into account. What he OUGHT to do, now, is rot in prison for a while. It's not as if he's been living in a hole in someone's cellar for the past 30 years--and, just maybe, he ought to have been. He's been growing in fame, making friends, and living the high-society life.

Did he repeat his crime? I've no idea. I don't know if he was ever accused; I don't know the actual, non-stereotype-colored likelihood of a celebrity in France getting away with doing something like this, or what kind of outcry there would likely be. I have no clue; the only thing I know is that, speaking solely on terms of statistics, an individual who commits a crime such as this is more likely than not to repeat the offense, and he got away with it once.

(Until now, that is...)

 

[WorkInProgress]

It may not be fair that a guy like him escaped conviction because of his fame and power, but if you're going to prosecute, you're supposed to do it in a timely fashion. Waiting a few decades to prosecute ends the relevance of conviction.

The only time something like that makes sense is if it was unknown who the culprit was, and they had just discovered who did it.

It seems to me, you've got the same kind of special circumstance when the offender flees the country to escape prosecution.

There is kind of an irony to the fact that he was so determined to accept a lifetime achievement award that he let himself be careless about where he traveled. Presumably, this was after three decades of being very careful about where he went. He's like a fish, usually wary, seeing a fly that looks particularly savory and appetizing, so he moves in, and...whoops!

 

[MrMacphisto]

Not to derail things, but by your argument, war criminals should be exempt from prosecution? Or at the least, not worth bringing up on charges since everyone knows their crimes and they have had to live with the guilt and won't be committing those previous atrocities again? That seems a bit over the top. Perhaps that's just me, being devil's advocate.

It depends. First, consider this. Victors decide punishments.

If you commit war crimes as part of the victorious side of a war, you're much less likely to get convicted of anything. While America is better than many other countries about prosecuting or at least investigating its own soldiers, things do fall through the cracks like they do with any other country.

So, war crimes are kind of a difficult thing to compare given the case-by-case nature of them. In general, war crimes are also defined by international laws, which is a further difference from Polanski's situation. What is considered a war crime in America is likely to be the same in France. Sex laws, however, vary dramatically between countries.

While French laws obviously prohibit rape, the duration that the prosecution can wait differs there than from here. Also, it's very likely that the French system would view Polanski's situation very differently from our system due to the aforementioned complications brought on by the unethical behavior of the previous judge.

 

[MrMacphisto]

It seems to me, you've got the same kind of special circumstance when the offender flees the country to escape prosecution.

There is kind of an irony to the fact that he was so determined to accept a lifetime achievement award that he let himself be careless about where he traveled. Presumably, this was after three decades of being very careful about where he went. He's like a fish, usually wary, seeing a fly that looks particularly savory and appetizing, so he moves in, and...whoops!

In my opinion, the circumstance does not apply. While France is notorious for rejecting extradition requests, it's not like our government couldn't apprehend him there if they really wanted to. Waiting 30 years to hunt Polanski down seems a bit odd to me, and it makes me wonder just how many resources they put to use on this over that duration to time things properly with Switzerland.

We have 2 possibilities. Either they've been spending all this time to plan the capture of Polanski despite his meticulous travel habits (costing who knows what in resources), or they struck a deal with a government that recently got into a lot of trouble with us over aiding tax evaders (the Swiss and their government-connected banking system).

Polanski's capture could quite possibly be more of a diplomatic move by the Swiss than a sincere effort to deter rape. That's the way it seems to me anyway. Also, it's a nice pat on the back for our law enforcement -- although it remains to be seen if the prosecution can muster much.

All that aside, I just don't see Polanski as the kind of threat so many seem to. I'm not defending what he did, but I just really wonder where all the passion comes from.

 

[Redmage]

In my opinion, the circumstance does not apply. While France is notorious for rejecting extradition requests, it's not like our government couldn't apprehend him there if they really wanted to.

Well, probably not really. This wasn't a federal case - only the state of California officially wanted him. Technically the Federal government could have taken an interest, but the only ways they could have gotten Polanski over France's objections would be tantamount to acts of war - either sending an extraction team into French territory or applying serious diplomatic pressure to an important ally. Polanski simply wasn't worth that to the Feds, and the Los Angeles DA's office didn't have those options.

Waiting 30 years to hunt Polanski down seems a bit odd to me, and it makes me wonder just how many resources they put to use on this over that duration to time things properly with Switzerland.

It wouldn't surprise me to learn that the LA DA has had a "Polanski detail" ongoing for the last 30 years - some group of low-level staffers tasked with (among other things, I'm sure) keeping tabs on Polanski's movements. His presence in Switzerland was announced well in advance, and the Feds may well have applied a little extra pressure to the Swiss in recent negotiations to be more cooperative about US fugitives.

All that aside, I just don't see Polanski as the kind of threat so many seem to. I'm not defending what he did, but I just really wonder where all the passion comes from.

Fair question. I think the atmosphere - both in the LA DA's office and in the public at large - is mainly about revenge. Polanski did something that most people find disgusting. He copped a plea, and if the court had been true to the terms of that agreement it all would have been over. But they weren't, and Polanski fled, so now people have a chance to see him get what they think he should have gotten all along - regardless of what his victim or anyone else thinks ought to happen.

Polanski hasn't been a threat to anyone for 30 years (his victim has pointed this out as well). It's not about "justice," really, or about securing the safety of the American public - they could do that just by leaving him in France. It's really just about using Polanski for symbolic vengeance.

 

[TonyInMyThroat]

Feds may well have applied a little extra pressure to the Swiss in recent negotiations to be more cooperative about US fugitives.

The first thing that crossed my mind when I heard Switzerland was involved was the resent IRS tax evasion crack down; perhaps a tit-for-tat in an attempt to minimize damage to the Swiss banking industry.

Roman Polanski's arrest: a Swiss political ploy to ward off U.S. charges against banking giant UBS?

According to Britain's Guardian, rumors are circulating that Swiss authorities may be using Polanski as a sacrificial lamb to appease their U.S. counterparts in Washington who are investigating a widening tax-evasion scandal involving Swiss banking giant UBS.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/was...-ploy-to-ward-off-us-charges-against-ubs.html

 

[desdemona]

Ahhh... Les Chuisses. Where money is worshipped and the almighty Swiss franc is better than any other god. The country where there are more banks than churches. Truly pathetic if they sold out yet again...hiding behind neutrality like hypocrits.

 

[SlaverTickler]

I have no idea how they're planning to prosecute him though...he's already paid millions to his victim and she's publicly forgiven him. I have a feeling the whole case will be thrown out as soon as he comes back.

The man fucked a 13 year old girl in the ass. The only thing that should happen is they should tie the end of a 6 foot rope around his neck, and the other end from a strong tree brantch 10 feet up, and smack the ass of the horse he is sitting on. That is the only way to get justice, and make sure this pig doesn't do it again.

While they are at it, they can do the same to Woody Allen for brain washing that Asian kid he married to. She may have been old enough by law, but honestly, a man shouldn't mary a woman whom he pretty much raised as a daughter for 15 years.

 

[SlaverTickler]

Well, probably not really. This wasn't a federal case - only the state of California officially wanted him. Technically the Federal government could have taken an interest, but the only ways they could have gotten Polanski over France's objections would be tantamount to acts of war - either sending an extraction team into French territory or applying serious diplomatic pressure to an important ally. Polanski simply wasn't worth that to the Feds, and the Los Angeles DA's office didn't have those options.

And we all know what it's like to go to war with France... just show up and they tap out.