Yes.
Well, I agree that he should have been extradited, but the US is the biggest obstacle to political progress in that area, generally refusing to extradite its own citizens as well.
If a European country had requested, its leverage would be much greater, there is even such a thing as a European Arrest Warrant.
Hahaha, yes, never saw it from that side, it’s really an old trick. I think the whole thing is ridiculous. Now after 32 years the Swiss decided to arrest him. I don’t see why they do it now, the victim seems to be okay now and it just seems that Switzerland wants something from the US. Looks like a deal to me.
One thing I’m not clear on. If Polanski pled guilty as part of a plea deal including sentencing terms, and the judge wasn’t going to keep to that agreement, would Polanski have been able to rescind his plea and proceed to trial?
Yes. Not that it would have helped him.
Stranger
I think Polanski really should have had some kind of list put on his front door. Something in the line of “Countries not to visit”. I guess he forgot to update it.
Fuck Polanski. He fled because he didn’t like that the judge was not going to approve an overly lenient plea deal. He ran from justice and took advantage of the fact that most countries won’t extradite their own citizens. He’s been supported by the film community who given him work, despite the legal pressures.
Why should he be rewarded for having fled justice? If anything they bring additional charges based on his having fled. He deserves to be sentenced to what his sentence should have been, and he should have to serve every day of it.
Could someone refresh my memory? ISTR that Polanski was no angel even when he was married - didn’t he fool around on his pregnant wife? It’s not like he was the picture perfect, loving husband before her murder, and then just totally fell apart.
Lord knows how many other young women he’s done this to.
It’s terrible, the things that have happened to the people he loved. And I have sympathy for him for that. It’s also terrible the thing he did to one young girl, and I’m angry about that and feel that he should receive whatever justice the courts decide. I don’t think that those are two competing or mutually exclusive emotions.
I don’t agree. I think she got the same early release a first-time offender would have gotten in that situation, and then got thrown in jail again after the public flipped out. That wouldn’t have happened to someone else.
He raped a young girl. Calling him a pedophile does not make the crime worse. And no, he doesn’t deserve extra sympathy for making movies - particularly if it’s true his plea deal was thrown out only after he started partying in Europe.
As far as the victim forgiving him, that’s not unheard of. There are plenty of people sitting in prison cells right now who were forgiven by their victims.
Polanski actually had a reputation for being a belligerent, aggressive womanizer and particularly toward young women long before this incident. He had a reported habit of following women on the street and yelling explicit comments about what he would do to them; he even once did this to his wife from behind, not realizing it was her. That this sort of behavior was accepted at the time, and common among his group of peers does not excuse it.
Regardless, he admitted to drugging and forcibly sodomizing a 13 year old girl. He has never shown genuine remorse or accepted responsibility, so any extenuating circumstances are of no import until he does.
For those whose knowledge of Polanski and the case at hand comes strictly from the documentary film mentioned above, realize that a documentary is an exclusive world controlled by the filmmaker, who will include or exclude information based upon the theme and message he or she would like the film to convey. Very few documentaries are detacted reporting of facts. See, for instance, Fredrik Gertten’s Bananas!, about Nicaraguan banana workers who were sterilized by a subsidiary of Dole…only, unmentioned by the filmmaker, the judge in the case found the plaintiffs behavior to be so maleficent that the judgment was tossed out, blatant evidence of conspiracy by the Nicaraguan judge in presenting false evidence was discovered, and the lead counsel is likely to be indicted for fraud. Zenovich is clearly sympathetic to Polanski and does her best to undermine the victim and the claims against Polanski by impugning the victim’s reputation.
Stranger
I have a lot of pity for the bad things that happened to Polanski early in his life. But there is literally nothing that can happen to a person in this world, no amount of pain and suffering, that excuses or in any small way even mitigates raping some kid that keeps telling you she just wants to go home.
Even if you think he just wasn’t in his right mind at the time, that he snapped that night but now is better, he still needs to face the consequences of his actions. A truly repentant person would accept their punishment as well deserved, not run away. If, somehow, in some fog of mental illness I raped anybody, much less a kid, when I came to my senses I’d probably eat a bullet. Not Polanski though, he moved to France and spent the next few decades doing the things he loves to do, living in opulent luxury, making movies, and having relationships with teenage girls. There’s real penitence for you. :rolleyes: He needs to face justice.
Cite? I don’t remember the doc saying anything against her, and doesn’t mince words in discussing the explicit nature of Polanski’s crime. The emphasis of the doc is the legal maneuvering and alleged improprieties that occurred in his case (w/the judge in particular subject to harsh scrutiny), but that is not the same thing as excusing his actions or redirecting blame elsewhere.
Heh. This makes me giggle each time I read it.
IMHO, for some of Polanski’s supporters (I’m still undecided), several issues stand out very prominently.
1.) whether or not the girl’s statements are completely true. Call me a cynic, but I don’t think a defense attorney would let them go without scrutiny and there is a big difference between what someone will admit to in a plea bargain when they think they are going to get an easier sentence than what they will admitt to on the stand facing a jury.
2.) the difference between 1970 and 2009, for many people other than Polanski in the 70s drunken or drugged consent was still consent and 13 year olds were not sacrosanct in 70’s either. Many more people in the 70s would have approved of having consentual sex (which Polanski at times has claimed it was) with a 13 (especially one that attended Hollywood parties), than would approve of it now. Therefore, they view judging a crime committed in the 70s by the social mores of the 21st century wrong.
3.) the girl’s mother, who many people suspect basically pimped the kid out to Polanski and should therefore be partially held to blame for whatever happened.
4.) the girl herself, I’m certain people will jump on me for “blaming the victim”, but what the hell was she doing at Nick Nolte’s with drugs and alcohol freely flowing, if she wasn’t up to something, maybe a blackmail plan that backfired? In any con the most dangerous moment is when the mark figures out what’s going on. When that happens people get dangerous.
This is something that irks me: I couldn’t care less that he’s a “creative arty French citizen” and I don’t defend his actions at all, so for my own purposes at least this is a straw man. My objections to his incarceration would be the exact same if he was a submariner or a truckdriver who fled justice: his victim forgives him, it neither benefits nor protects anybody to imprison him, and there are many extenuating circumstances as well as a high probability that lawyers will keep him out of prison or have him released soon anyway due to irregularities from 31 years ago thus the whole thing will be for naught. To me this is different from saying “He made THE PIANIST! Let him go!”
And again, I say “Fuck the French extradition policy”. This and Ira Einhorn are inexcusable and barbaric. And had he been extradited in the 70s I’d have gladly seen him stand trial. Today- an expensive lawyer and I seriously doubt he’ll do any jail time anyway.
And did anybody see Nancy Grace last night? Holy Christ- in rare form everything you’d think it would be- alternatively shouting and purring “ANALLY SODOMIZEDDDDDDDD” while full screen photos of Samantha Geimer cover the screen, asking the anti-prosecution speaker [who just had a baby] “so what if your child is anally sodomized? Would you say drop the charges he’s an artist!”, mocked the stammer of another commentator, and lamented and mourned for the pain and suffering of Samantha Geimer (cue pictures from when she was 13, then morph into modern day pictures), yet when the statement that she has forgiven Polanski and chooses to move on of course she gives the Kiplingesque paternalist “she doesn’t know what she’s saying and we’re doing this for her own good” argument and the smirk-sneer one associates with a Creationist who follows Richard Dawkins with “Oh yeah? Read Genesis! I’m goin’ with God on this, not a scientist!” And it’s only the beginning.
That’s a rather disturbingly precise and thought out image.
-
To my knowledge, Polanski has never contradicted the basic facts of her testimony.
-
I really don’t think such hedonism was quite as pervasive as you make it out to be back then. Of course, there were groups that may have had a more free-wheeling attitude towards sex and ages of consent, but you’d be hard-pressed to assemble a jury that didn’t also consist of some fairly hardcore social conservatives who would’ve been immediately repulsed by such a lifestyle.
-
She may be complicit and irresponsible (and in this day and age, subject to some harsh scrutiny from Social Services), but that doesn’t mitigate Polanski’s actions at all. She’s not the one on trial.
-
She was there, ostensibly–and compelled by her mother–for a photo shoot (this was her second visit to Polanski; he used that pretense the first time also).
And it was Jack Nicholson, not Nick Nolte.
I feel sorry for the victim that this is being brought out again, but the fact that this isn’t ancient news and is always a topic when his name comes up, whether it is this time, or when he won an Academy Award for The Piano, or whatever, is all on Polanski. Full stop.
So if you run away and years pass, you’ve gotten away with the crime?