# How much time do you think Polanski will get ? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 26, 2009, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241 "2009-10-26T23:43:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/1 "2009-10-26T23:43:34Z")
Not looking for a debate on what he _should_ get, but given the facts of the case, what are the legal realities. AFAIK the facts are something like this: - He pled guilty and accepted a deal in exchange for 42-day sentence in 1977. - He fled the country when it looked like the judge would reject the plea deal. - The victim shows no interest in reopening the case How final is that plea deal + guilty plea ? Presumably it was never entered under oath (if the judge was still in a position to reject it). Can he still be held to it, as long as that 42-day sentence is all he gets ? There is a pretty slim chance of getting prosecution in open court (which would, I assume, be pretty tricky after 30+ years, even with a witness). How serious a crime, if any, is fleeing the country before your day in court ? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/2 "2009-10-26T23:59:52Z")
I don’t know the sentencing laws in California, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see him get 10 to 12 years. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/3 "2009-10-27T00:03:33Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > I don’t know the sentencing laws in California, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see him get 10 to 12 years. For fleeing the country ? Personally I can’t see how they are going to get a conviction for the crime itself (unfortunately). Unless they force the victim to testify by threats of legal action (she had testified to a grand jury, presumably under oath), which seems pretty unacceptable to me. And even then it seems like a long shot, given the age of the case. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/4 "2009-10-27T00:53:33Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Personally I can’t see how they are going to get a conviction for the crime itself (unfortunately). Given that he’s already pled guilty to unlawful sex with a minor, there seems to be no need to hold a trial on the original charges. My understanding is that the max penalty is something like 2 years. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/5 "2009-10-27T01:28:46Z")
If he is extradited by Switzerland on the original charges, he likely can’t be charged with fleeing the country. Under extradition treaties, there’s the [Rule of Specialty](http://obtainingforeignevidence.blogspot.com/2008/02/rule-of-specialty-jacques-semmelman.html): > [@](#): > > Briefly stated, the Rule of Specialty provides that a person who has been extradited from one country to another may only be prosecuted on the charges for which he or she has been extradited. As far as I can tell from the news reports, the extradition request is only based on the charge of sex with a minor; there’s not been any suggestion that he’s currently facing a charge of fleeing the country, nor that the US has made any extradition request to Switzerland on that basis. If that’s correct, he can’t be charged with fleeing the jurisdiction if the Swiss extradite him to the US. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/6 "2009-10-27T01:35:21Z")
> [@Xema](#): > > Given that he’s already pled guilty to unlawful sex with a minor, there seems to be no need to hold a trial on the original charges. > > My understanding is that the max penalty is something like 2 years. But if the original judge was in a position to reject the plea deal, surely he had AGREED to plead guilty, not actually pled, on-oath in a court of law. Or am I misunderstanding how such things work. My understanding was (based mainly on L+O and the like :)), is that the two group of lawyers agree the deal with the accused, and then go to the judge. If the judge refuses to accept it, then the trial carries on as if there had been no deal to start with (and the fact there was deal is not admissible). ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/7 "2009-10-27T01:40:07Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > If he is extradited by Switzerland on the original charges, he likely can’t be charged with fleeing the country. Under extradition treaties, there’s the [Rule of Specialty](http://obtainingforeignevidence.blogspot.com/2008/02/rule-of-specialty-jacques-semmelman.html): So, apparently if you are going to flee, then make damn sure you make it to another country first ? In which case, no harm no foul ? Wonder what the reasoning is there ? Maybe its just a “different rules for the rich and powerful thing” being snuck into the rule book. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/8 "2009-10-27T01:42:36Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > But if the original judge was in a position to reject the plea deal, surely he had AGREED to plead guilty, not actually pled, on-oath in a court of law. Or am I misunderstanding how such things work. My understanding was (based mainly on L+O and the like :)), is that the two group of lawyers agree the deal with the accused, and then go to the judge. If the judge refuses to accept it, then the trial carries on as if there had been no deal to start with (and the fact there was deal is not admissible). He plead guilty on August 8, 1977. [Cite.](http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0928091polanskiplea1.html) ---
**Author:** ![anson2995](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@anson2995](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anson2995)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/9 "2009-10-27T02:06:32Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > He plead guilty on August 8, 1977. > > [Cite.](http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0928091polanskiplea1.html) I encourage the others who are speculating here to read the transcript \*\*Contrapuntal \*\*links to. After he pleads guilty, the judge asks Polanski if he understands the maximum penalty for the crime he has just pleaded guilty to, and he acknowledges that it is 20 years plus the possibility of being deported. The Judge goes on to explain that a proceeding will be initiated to determine whether or not he is a “Mentally Disordered Sex Offender.” Contrary to what the OP said, he didn’t accept a 42 day plea deal… he was sent for psychological examination. Polanski believed that at the end of the evaluation they would recommend he receive probation, and when it looked like that wasn’t going to happen he fled. And the guilty plea was given under oath, with Polanski acknowledging there was no deal with respect to sentencing. The issue of whether that deal can be vacated or not has already been addressed in the courts. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/10 "2009-10-27T02:33:56Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > So, apparently if you are going to flee, then make damn sure you make it to another country first ? In which case, no harm no foul ? No, it’s just that the country applying for extradition has to list all the charges pending that it wishes to bring against the individual, and the extraditing country has to agree. Provided the requesting country has a charge pending of fleeing the jurisdiction (however it’s described for that country), and the extraditing country has a similar offence, then the person could be extradited on that charge. My point is just that I’ve not seen any indication in the news reports that the Los Angeles D.A. has got charges pending for fleeing the country, nor any indication that the US has asked Switzerland to extradite him on that type of charge - all the news reports have just talked about the sex with a minor charge. If I’m incorrect on that factual information, then the Rule of Specialty may not apply. [QUOTE=billfish] Wonder what the reasoning is there ? Maybe its just a “different rules for the rich and powerful thing” being snuck into the rule book. [/QUOTE] It’s to prevent the requesting country from extraditing on only one or two minor charges, and then once the person is extradited, stacking on charges that the extraditing country doesn’t recognize and wouldn’t have extradited for. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/11 "2009-10-27T02:35:32Z")
> [@anson2995](#): > > The issue of whether that deal can be vacated or not has already been addressed in the courts. Has it? I thought that the defence had applied, and the courts had refused to address the issue unless Mr. Polanski returned in person to face the court. I didn’t think that the courts had ruled on the merits of the defence application. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/12 "2009-10-27T02:39:23Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > So, apparently if you are going to flee, then make damn sure you make it to another country first ? In which case, no harm no foul ? > > Wonder what the reasoning is there ? Maybe its just a “different rules for the rich and powerful thing” being snuck into the rule book. No, there’s nothing to stop the California authorities laying a charge of skipping bail, etc, and then seeking to extradite him on that charge. Why haven’t they? Well, I’m guessing, but maybe: - The sex offence carries a higher penalty, so they don’t really need to. - Historically, most contries are happier to extradite for substantive crimes - rape, murder, theft, fraud - than for "procedural’ matters - basically, failing to comply with your obligations to the state, since the latter might involve aiding a foreign state to oppress its own citizens, or alternatively involve the extraditing country in assessing whether the obligations imposed by the foreign state _were_ oppressive, an assessment they would much rather not be involved in. If I’m right, adding a charge of skipping bail might have materially prejudiced the chances of securing extradition, while not really offering much upside in terms of sanctions against Polanski. So they didn’t add it. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/13 "2009-10-27T02:43:45Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > My point is just that I’ve not seen any indication in the news reports that the Los Angeles D.A. has got charges pending for fleeing the country, nor any indication that the US has asked Switzerland to extradite him on that type of charge - all the news reports have just talked about the sex with a minor charge. If I’m incorrect on that factual information, then the Rule of Specialty may not apply. > > . Oh okay. I misread your post to mean that fleeing charges would not be allowed in extraditions. Of course, now it sounds like maybe some legal dufus may not have INCLUDED fleeing charges, some judge throws out the original crime, and now the jerk will walk free rather than at least serve a few years for fleeing justice. :mad: Lets just hope that charges of fleeing just arent being mentioned. ---
**Author:** ![Alex\_Dubinsky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dbc845/32.png) [@Alex\_Dubinsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alex_Dubinsky)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/14 "2009-10-27T02:53:36Z")
So is it 2 years or 20? > [@](#): > > Of course, now it sounds like maybe some legal dufus may not have INCLUDED fleeing charges, some judge throws out the original crime, and now the jerk will walk free rather than at least serve a few years for fleeing justice. I don’t understand how you can think what he did is a horrible crime if the victim herself, having her whole life to contemplate it, doesn’t think that what happened was bad. Or is there some way of stretching the “teens are too dumb to consent” argument to include adults? Sigh, sorry. I guess it’d be inappropriate to debate that here. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/15 "2009-10-27T02:55:17Z")
> [@Alex\_Dubinsky](#): > > I don’t understand how you can think what he did is a horrible crime if the victim herself, having her whole life to contemplate it, doesn’t think that what happened was bad. Where has she said that? ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/16 "2009-10-27T04:01:28Z")
> [@anson2995](#): > > I encourage the others who are speculating here to read the transcript \*\*Contrapuntal \*\*links to. > > After he pleads guilty, the judge asks Polanski if he understands the maximum penalty for the crime he has just pleaded guilty to, and he acknowledges that it is 20 years plus the possibility of being deported. The Judge goes on to explain that a proceeding will be initiated to determine whether or not he is a “Mentally Disordered Sex Offender.” > > Contrary to what the OP said, he didn’t accept a 42 day plea deal… he was sent for psychological examination. Polanski believed that at the end of the evaluation they would recommend he receive probation, and when it looked like that wasn’t going to happen he fled. > > And the guilty plea was given under oath, with Polanski acknowledging there was no deal with respect to sentencing. The issue of whether that deal can be vacated or not has already been addressed in the courts. Is that the way plea deals worked at the time (or still work) ? Its seems like good lawyer would want more than a gentlemen’s agreement that he wouldn’t serve all that long. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/17 "2009-10-27T04:09:59Z")
> [@Alex\_Dubinsky](#): > > I don’t understand how you can think what he did is a horrible crime if the victim herself, having her whole life to contemplate it, doesn’t think that what happened was bad. Or is there some way of stretching the “teens are too dumb to consent” argument to include adults? This not the purpose of the OP (I’m sure there are threads a’plenty in GD about this side of the matter). But that said, the impression I’ve got of her opinion is its was a hideous thing that happened and she’d rather put it behind her (as opposed by having it dredged up and shoved in her face by the media every time Polanski hits the headlines over the years). ---
**Author:** ![SunSandSuffering](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ee7513/32.png) [@SunSandSuffering](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SunSandSuffering)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 8:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/18 "2009-10-27T08:50:07Z")
Didn’t he already serve some time, like 30 days or something? Will that be taken into account? ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 9:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/19 "2009-10-27T09:10:24Z")
He was sent for a psychiatric examination. I would think that if he were given a longer sentence, that time would count as time already served and would be deducted from the amount of time he has to serve. However, we really need to hear from someone knowledgeable in the California criminal court system for a detailed answer. ---
**Author:** ![anson2995](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@anson2995](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anson2995)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241/20 "2009-10-27T14:13:41Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Has it? I thought that the defence had applied, and the courts had refused to address the issue unless Mr. Polanski returned in person to face the court. I didn’t think that the courts had ruled on the merits of the defence application. You are correct. [QUOTE=Northern Piper=Alex\_Dubinsky] I don’t understand how you can think what he did is a horrible crime if the victim herself, having her whole life to contemplate it, doesn’t think that what happened was bad. Or is there some way of stretching the “teens are too dumb to consent” argument to include adults? [/QUOTE] Straying into GD territory here, but are you aware of the facts? He drugged a 13-year old girl then raped and sodomized her while she begged him to stop. I’m shocked that people continue to try to minimize this. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-time-do-you-think-polanski-will-get/515241.md?page=2)