Roman Polanski arrested in Zürich

[Alatriste]

I'd warn against the section in the Salon article in which the reactions of the French press are discovered via the English press because, well, it involves trusting the English press.

Quoted for truth. Trusting British press is just a bit more advisable than trusting tin-hat wearing psywar operatives with an innate hate of everything French other than Alsace-Lorraine (that's Elsass-Lothringen for you).

[The Minsky Moment]

It was a plea bargain - which I don't know about, I don't think we have them in the UK - so apparently he either gets that deal (the prosecutor wanted 40 days, the judge was unhappy with that) or he can withdraw his plea and have a trial again.

I cant claim to much knowledge about Cal state criminal procedure in the mid-70s, but my understanding is that the plea was formally entered, and he was ordered to undergo an evaluation for sentencing.  The way pleas usually work is that the prosecutor makes their sentencing recommendation but the judge decides.  If the judge decides a heavier sentence than the recommendation you can not revoke your plea.  It would be very unusual to be able to revoke your plea at or in connection with sentencing (again Cal state rules at this time might have differed from this).

It does seem that Polanski got fairly favorable treatment that your garden variety sex offender wouldn't ordinarily get: not only did the deal allow him to plea to a lesser offense, but he was given very permissive bail conditions - conditions which facilitated his flight from the jurisdiction.

[garbon]

It was a plea bargain - which I don't know about, I don't think we have them in the UK - so apparently he either gets that deal (the prosecutor wanted 40 days, the judge was unhappy with that) or he can withdraw his plea and have a trial again.

When you plea, you are agreeing to be convicted of that lesser offense...at least I think.

[Sheilbh]

I cant claim to much knowledge about Cal state criminal procedure in the mid-70s, but my understanding is that the plea was formally entered, and he was ordered to undergo an evaluation for sentencing.  The way pleas usually work is that the prosecutor makes their sentencing recommendation but the judge decides.  If the judge decides a heavier sentence than the recommendation you can not revoke your plea.  It would be very unusual to be able to revoke your plea at or in connection with sentencing (again Cal state rules at this time might have differed from this).

It's just something I heard on a US news channel.  It sounds sort-of fair to me, but I'm not really clear on the whole plea bargain thing, so I've no idea.

[Martinus]

There is a conspiracy theory put forth here that the extradition is a way of the Swiss to get into the US good graces in exchange of not being grilled too much over the banking secrecy thing.

You know there can be a very simple explanation as well.  We often run into people here that have had outstanding warrants for years and year.  They have been working, easy to find, if anyone had ever gone looking for them.

Then one day for some inoccuous reason they deal with a police officer, who runs their name and: wham.  They are arrested for a years-old charge.

The EU-Swiss border is pretty loose.  I don't think the Swiss ever ran our passport when we were just driving through.  It may well be that Polanski just hadn't come to anyone's attention in Switzerland until now.

Dude, he has a second home there, and it's not like he is a Joe Nobody.

[Martinus]

So France does not extradite citizens?

Yes they do, they've got a number of extradition treaties with the US.  However according to those treaties extradition is at the discretion of both countries.  So the French simply said 'no' to US requests.

So a French person can go outside France, commit some crime, then go back to France and be secure in the knowledge that he is safe from prosecution?

No.

The EU-Swiss border is pretty loose.  I don't think the Swiss ever ran our passport when we were just driving through.  It may well be that Polanski just hadn't come to anyone's attention in Switzerland until now.

The Swiss are in Schengen.  The Swiss-EU border is no more international than the Franco-German one

I think you are wrong on a couple of things there but CBA to check.

[Martinus]

and yet she (the victim... the only person harmed by Polanski in this scenario) denies any harm being done. She has to continually relive all this shit... at least now that he's arrested and likely to get a worse sentence than any other rapist maybe that will be over for her? Nope. She still has to live with it.

I think on any 30 year old warrant there is pause to be given to make sure that after all this time, things are still wrapped up correctly. I'm not saying he shouldn't do time. But If it was something that was important to anyone they could have caught him any time they really wanted over the years. Why now?

Are US law enforcement so incompetent that they can't catch a famous movie Director/star whose whereabouts are always known?

Bah. too bad this isn't actually about the crime committed. I noticed too that Marc Emery is finally surrendering for extradition. Maybe it's more to do with USA flexing it's muscles in areas that they feel comfortable. Canada & Switzerland. Wow good job catching those guys who pled guilty.

So you're saying this should just be forgotten? He drugged and raped a child, and it should just be... forgotten. Because he had the fortitude to stay out of the States for 30 years?

Maybe it could have been done sooner. Maybe they should have tried harder. But the reality is that he did the crime and should pay the time. I feel for the child/woman, but as you said, she's going to have to live with this forever regardless of what happens.

Well it's not like I'm saying he did nothing wrong but saying that he "drugged and raped a child" is a fucking hell of an overreaction. The girl was not a virgin at the time and she was being pimped out by her mother to be a startlet. I don't think any party involved had any doubts as to what will happen if they live a 40 y.o. director with a teenage girl seeking an "audition" in a huge empty villa with a swimming pool, a jacuzzi and a well stocked bar.

He should answer for having sex with an underaged girl, but you make it sound like he picked and drugged some innocent girl from a school playground and then had his way with her.

[Martinus]

"To see him thrown to the lions and put in prison because of ancient history - and as he was traveling to an event honoring him - is absolutely horrifying,"

Isn't Nazi hunting because of ancient history?

I don't think the French are big on nazi hunting either. After all, didn't they just nab some prominent nazi collaborator few years ago, and at the time he was living a respectable life in France?

[Martinus]

Let's keep in mind that Roman Polanski gave a 13-year-old girl a Quaalude and champagne, then raped her, before we start discussing whether the victim looked older than her 13 years, or that she now says she'd rather not see him prosecuted because she can't stand the media attention. Before we discuss how awesome his movies are or what the now-deceased judge did wrong at his trial, let's take a moment to recall that according to the victim's grand jury testimony, Roman Polanski instructed her to get into a jacuzzi naked, refused to take her home when she begged to go, began kissing her even though she said no and asked him to stop; performed cunnilingus on her as she said no and asked him to stop; put his penis in her vagina as she said no and asked him to stop; asked if he could penetrate her anally, to which she replied, "No," then went ahead and did it anyway, until he had an orgasm.

Did he actually do it? I thought it was "consensual"? Ok if that is true, that would change my view quite a bit.

[Martinus]

But anyways. You said he was a convicted child rapist, I think that's technically incorrect.  (the convicted part)

Well he did plea to, and thus was convicted for, unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. That's pretty close to rape.

I thought he was not convicted, but fled after he plead guilty. I may be wrong on the facts of the case, but that was my impression.

And considering a confession to be tantamount to a conviction has been looked down upon since, at least, the Spanish Inquisition.

[citizen k]

But anyways. You said he was a convicted child rapist, I think that's technically incorrect.  (the convicted part)

Well he did plea to, and thus was convicted for, unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. That's pretty close to rape.

I thought he was not convicted, but fled after he plead guilty. I may be wrong on the facts of the case, but that was my impression.

Don't you have to be convicted before you are sentenced and it was his sentencing that he skipped out on?

[citizen k]

Did he actually do it? I thought it was "consensual"? Ok if that is true, that would change my view quite a bit.

[Eddie Teach]

You don't see a difference between forcible rape and statuatory rape?

[citizen k]

You don't see a difference between forcible rape and statuatory rape?

Of course. I thought that's why this case stirred such passions. I don't think you'd get near the publicity if this was just a case of statutory rape.

[Eddie Teach]

Ah. I think one reason the issue is so confused is people attacking Polanski keep bringing up that he gave the girl drugs. That makes it sound like she then acquiesced. If the account Hans just gave is accurate, the drugs weren't important at all.