Roman Polanski

[belfastuniguy 18]

Roman Polanski in Swiss detention

Roman Polanski fled to France in 1978

Film director Roman Polanski has been taken into custody in Switzerland and faces extradition to the US for having sex with a 13-year-old girl in 1977.

Mr Polanski, 76, was detained in Zurich on Saturday as he travelled from France to collect a lifetime achievement award at the Zurich Film Festival.

He is being held under a 2005 international alert issued by the US.

Mr Polanski has been to Switzerland before, but this time US authorities apparently knew of his trip in advance.

That gave them time to prepare the groundwork for his arrest and send a provisional arrest warrant to Swiss authorities, judicial officials said.

A Swiss spokesman said the US would now have to make a formal extradition request.

The director can contest his detention and any extradition decision in the Swiss courts, he added.

Mr Polanski's lawyer, Georges Kiejman, said he planned to challenge his client's arrest.

"We are going to try to lift the arrest warrant in Zurich," he told France Info radio. "The [extradition] convention between Switzerland and the United States is not very clear."

Mr Polanski fled the US in 1978 after pleading guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse with an underage girl.

He was initially indicted on six counts and faced up to life in prison.

In recent years, he has tried to have the rape case dismissed, claiming the original judge, who is now dead, arranged a plea bargain but later reneged.

CASE TIMELINE 1977 - Polanski admits unlawful sex with Samantha Geimer, 13, in Los Angeles 1978 - flees to Britain after US arrest warrant is issued 1978 - immediately moves to France where he holds citizenship 1978 - settles in France, where he is protected by France's limited extradition with US 2008 - Polanski's lawyer demands case be dismissed and hearing moved out of LA court 2009 - Polanski's request to have hearing outside LA is denied Profile: Roman Polanski Roman Polanski: Your comments

Earlier this year, Judge Peter Espinoza agreed there was misconduct by the judge in the original case, but said Mr Polanski must return to the US to apply for dismissal.

Mr Polanski's lawyers said he would not return to the US because he would be immediately arrested as a fugitive.

The victim at the centre of the case, Samantha Geimer, has previously asked for the charges to be dropped, saying the continued publication of details "causes harm to me, my husband and children".

She has also called the court's insistence that Mr Polanski appear in person "a cruel joke".

'Shock and dismay'

The Paris-born Polish filmmaker - who is also a French citizen - has not set foot in the US for more than 30 years.

His Oscar for directing 2002 film The Pianist was collected by Harrison Ford, who had previously starred in his 1988 thriller, Frantic.

France's culture minister said he was "dumbfounded" by Mr Polanski's detention in Switzerland.

Frederic Mitterrand said he "strongly regrets that a new ordeal is being inflicted on someone who has already experienced so many of them".

He added that French President Nicolas Sarkozy was "following the case with great attention and shares the minister's hope that the situation can be quickly resolved".

The organisers of the Zurich Film Festival said Polanski's detention had caused "shock and dismay", but that they would go ahead with a planned retrospective of the director's work.

A special ceremony is planned for Sunday night "to allow everyone to express their solidarity for Roman Polanski and their admiration for his work", festival managers said in a statement.

Meanwhile, British author Robert Harris - who had been working with Mr Polanski on a film adaptation of his novel The Ghost - said he was taken aback by the weekend's events.

"One of the reasons I'm absolutely shocked and stunned by his arrest is that we have worked together extensively in Switzerland, where he has a home," Harris said.

"If he was such a wanted criminal why did they let him own a house and travel back and forth freely?"

But justice officials in both Switzerland and the US said the difference this time was that a provisional arrest warrant had been sent.

William Sorukas, chief of the US Marshals Service's domestic investigations branch, told the Associated Press that investigators learned about the trip days in advance and were therefore able to prepare for an arrest.

"There have been other times through the years when we have learned of his potential travel but either those efforts fell through or he didn't make the trip," he said.quote>

Roman Polanski 'in fighting mood'

The slow-burning Polanski saga

Film director Roman Polanski is determined to fight his detention in Switzerland and extradition to the US, his lawyer has said.

Herve Temime said the Oscar winner was "in fighting mood" and his legal team would seek his release "without delay".

He added that the 76-year-old was "shocked and dumbfounded" by his arrest three days ago.

US prosecutors want Mr Polanski to face sentencing for having unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl in 1977.

He pleaded guilty at the time but then fled abroad.

ANALYSIS Imogen Foulkes, BBC News, Geneva Swiss precedent shows that the subjects of extradition requests are normally kept in detention. Although the Swiss justice ministry has said bail for Roman Polanski cannot be excluded, if bail is granted the conditions are likely to be very strict indeed. After all, Mr Polanski's record on bail is not a good one - 31 years ago, he skipped bail in the United States and fled to France rather than be sentenced in a US court. That is the reason he is in detention in Zurich today. Read more

Mr Polanski is currently in custody in a Zurich prison.

The director - who holds dual French-Polish citizenship - was detained on Saturday as he arrived in Zurich to receive a lifetime achievement award.

A petition has been signed by film-makers and actors including Monica Bellucci and Fanny Ardant expressing dismay at Mr Polanski's arrest.

Other Hollywood luminaries, including film producer Harvey Weinstein, have called for Mr Polanski's release.

French culture minister Frederic Mitterrand said President Sarkozy was following the case "with great attention".

Mr Mitterrand also told France-Inter radio that he and the Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski have written to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and said there could be a decision as early as Monday if a Swiss court accepts bail.

Mr Polanski has also been visited in prison by French and Polish diplomats.

French Consul General Jean-Luc Faure-Tournaire said the director "thanks the many people who have shown support". Poland's ambassador to Switzerland, Jaroslaw Starzyk, said Mr Polanski was "in good condition".

FROM THE TODAY PROGRAMME More from Today programme

Mr Polanski's agent, Jeff Berg, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme the arrest was "surprising because Roman for the last 12, 15 years has lived in Switzerland, he has a home, he travels there, he works there".

Justice spokesman Guido Balmer said the difference with this particular trip was that authorities knew exactly when and where Mr Polanski would arrive.

Swiss Justice Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf said that because of agreements with the US, "when Mr Polanski arrived we had no choice from a legal point of view but to arrest him".

Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley comments on Roman Polanski's arrest

The Swiss media has rounded on the authorities.

"Switzerland let a guest walk into a nasty trap. We should be ashamed," said tabloid newspaper Blick.

Daily paper Le Temps said Switzerland had "shocked film buffs and friends of the arts with its kindly and efficient co-operation with US justice. It has angered Poland and France".

US authorities have up to 60 days to make a formal extradition request but Mr Polanski could then appeal to the Swiss courts.

In recent years, the director has asked a US appeals court in California to overturn a judge's refusal to throw out his case. He claimed misconduct by the judge, now deceased, who had arranged a plea bargain and then reneged on it.

CASE TIMELINE 1977 - Mr Polanski admits unlawful sex with Samantha Geimer, 13, in Los Angeles 1978 - flees to Britain after US arrest warrant is issued 1978 - immediately moves to France where he holds citizenship 1978 - settles in France, where he is protected by France's limited extradition with US 2008 - Mr Polanski's lawyer demands case be dismissed and hearing moved out of LA court 2009 - Mr Polanski's request to have hearing outside LA is denied Profile: Roman Polanski Roman Polanski: Your comments

The director is being held under a 2005 international alert issued by the US.

Sandi Gibbons, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney's office, confirmed that moves to detain the director were set in motion last week.

"It wasn't a big secret that he was going to be in Zurich. They had announced it on the internet," Ms Gibbons said.

Mr Polanski was initially indicted on six counts and faced up to life in prison. He has not set foot in the US for more than 30 years.

The victim at the centre of the case, Samantha Geimer, has previously asked for the charges to be dropped. She has already sued Mr Polanski and reached an undisclosed settlement.

quote>

Thoughts on the matter?

The crime was committed over 30 years ago, however in my opinion that should be no reason for him being let off. He should be deported and made to serve his sentence. 

 

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[830point35 8]

Give him a wig, a pink tutu and throw him with the violent predators. This kind of animal needs justice. Even if his victim "forgave" him, the law does not. We need to continue to send a message that no matter what, certain kinds of crimes will always come back to haunt you.

[belfastuniguy 18]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

I say leave him alone. His "victim" also agrees with this.

Barbarossaquote>

That does not matter. He fled justice, that in itself displays his guilt.

What I find utterly abhorrent is the number of people AND governments that have condemned his arrest. NO ONE is above the law, he should be deported, justice served and hopefully sent to jail.

I have been the Grand Jury minutes and they are incredibly disturbing.

[CWLGAMER01 39]

A clear example of our government waisting money..... thats all I am goning to say about this issue.

[belfastuniguy 18]

Originally posted by: CWLGAMER01

A clear example of our government waisting money..... thats all I am goning to say about this issue.quote>

I disagree, the America government waste money on a lot more and less important things.

[your_adress_here 11]

I find it disgusting how the US is able to arrest people all over the world (also see: Marc Emery). They should keep their business to themselves.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Duke87 1,070]

Normally, you'd want to throw the book at someone for committing such a crime and running for so many years. Him being a film director is irrelevant, although it does seem to be garnering him sympathy, unfortunately.

However, seeing as the victim herself desires for the matter to be dropped, I'd say that's a damn good reason to drop it.

The wishes of the victim are, ultimately, more important than any ideology of "everyone must pay the price for their crimes". After all, the very basis of these things being criminal is that someone has their rights violated by the act. An individual does, however, have the right to waive their rights or not pursue them if they so choose.

This is why, for instance, you won't be tried for assault if the victim doesn't press charges. Obviously a minor cannot press charges so that logic doesn't directly apply in a typical child molestation case, but the minor in this case is now very much an adult and if she says we shouldn't continue to press charges, then we shouldn't. To do so despite her wishes to the contrary would be a violation of her rights.

[your_adress_here 11]

And I also agree very much with the two posts above me.

[MattShizzle 11]

It's not a question of prosecution/guilt: He fled after pleading guilty.

[sneakeypete 16]

Well, not exactly. Didn't he flee after pleading guitly for a deal, servering 42 days for that plea, then the judge deciding that he was going to cancel that deal and charge him for the other offences?

[SC4BOY 20]

So if the victim's wishes reign supreme, then if someone rapes me and I want him dead, he's to be executed?

[your_adress_here 11]

Originally posted by: SC4BOY

So if the victim's wishes reign supreme, then if someone rapes me and I want him dead, he's to be executed?quote>

Of course not - you're misinterpreting what he said.

[MattShizzle 11]

He should go to jail but not for too long - there needs to be consequences for fleeing justice. And it isnt "the US can grab anyone" - most countries have extradition treaties with most other countries. Why wouldn't France ship him back? They wouldn't ship Einhorn back either without a lot of trouble. Maybe Americans should boycott French Wine...

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[SC4BOY 20]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

Originally posted by: SC4BOY

So if the victim's wishes reign supreme, then if someone rapes me and I want him dead, he's to be executed?quote>

No, but if you assault someone, you will never be prosecuted unless they press charges.  To me, this is the same scenario.  The victim does not want to pursue and, in this type of situation, the victim's wishes should reign supreme.quote>

This is not correct.. there are many legal instances in which the crime is "against the state" and a victim's desires on the issue are of no consideration.

[belfastuniguy 18]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

Originally posted by: SC4BOY

So if the victim's wishes reign supreme, then if someone rapes me and I want him dead, he's to be executed?quote>

No, but if you assault someone, you will never be prosecuted unless they press charges.  To me, this is the same scenario.  The victim does not want to pursue and, in this type of situation, the victim's wishes should reign supreme.

Originally posted by: MattShizzle

He should go to jail but not for too long - there needs to be consequences for fleeing justice.quote>

Seems to me to be more of an issue of wounded pride than legitimate need.  Besides, as a taxpayer, I am not interested in paying for Polanski to be incarcerated.

And it isnt "the US can grab anyone" - most countries have extradition treaties with most other countries.quote>

Yet withstanding US pressure is an entirely different matter, extradition treaty or no.

Maybe Americans should boycott French Wine...quote>

Wine is beyond petty political squabbles. 

Barbarossa

quote>

Tell that to the Americans that poured it down the street drains during the Freedom Fries 'situation'

Such a waste

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

My only question is whether the L.A. D.A. is up for re-election. 

Since the "victim" wants this dropped and there appear to be judicial doubt and/or errors, the whole thing should be dropped.  30 years is far too long a time for "speedy" justice.

[belfastuniguy 18]

Backlash over Polanski supporters

Polanski fled to France after pleading guilty to unlawful sex in 1978 Swiss legal battle awaits Polanski

The French government has dropped its public support for Roman Polanski, saying the 76-year-old director "is neither above nor beneath the law".

He is being held in Switzerland on a US arrest warrant over his conviction for unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl.

Earlier this week, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner called for Polanski to be freed.

Polanski, who has dual French and Polish citizenship, was arrested on Saturday when he flew into the country.

He had been due to pick up a lifetime achievement prize at the Zurich film festival.

'Serious affair'

Speaking to reporters, French government spokesman Luc Chatel said: "We have a judicial procedure under way, for a serious affair, the rape of a minor, on which the American and Swiss legal systems are doing their job."

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski and his French counterpart Bernard Kouchner have written to US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton calling for Polanski to be freed.

But the Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has distanced himself from the move by asking his ministers to show "greater restraint" in defending him.

Martin Scorsese is supporting his fellow director

He added that despite a "leading Polish director" being involved, it is still a "case of rape and of punishment for having sex with a child".

A member of the British parliament has called on the Council of Europe, of which he is also a member, to support Polanski's extradition to the US.

Denis MacShane said the film-maker "should be held accountable" for his actions.

French film-maker Luc Besson, who directed the 1994 movie Leon, has also refused to lend his support.

Speaking to French radio station RTL, he said: "I have a lot of affection for him, he is a man that I like very much ... but nobody should be above the law.

"I don't know the details of this case, but I think that when you don't show up for trial, you are taking a risk."

Despite that, Mr Polanski has no shortage of supporters, including at least 110 film industry figures who have signed a petition calling for his release.

Among them are Martin Scorsese, Woody Allen and David Lynch, as well as Wim Wenders, Pedro Almodovar, Tilda Swinton and Monica Bellucci.

Actor Peter Fonda said he thought "celebrating the arrest of Osama bin Laden and not the arrest of Polanski" was far more important.

Mr Polanski fled the US in 1978 before he was sentenced on a charge of unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old girl.

He has never returned and even missed receiving an Oscar for his 2003 film The Pianist.quote>

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[panthersimcity4 162]

It seems to me in this case the only reason people want to drop it is because Polanski is a famous director, (who has made some great movies if I say so myself) What I don't get is... if this guy were, say, someone who nobody cares about, would the guy be treated the same way if the victim said they didn't want to go through with the trial and forgave him?

[Yoman3 5]

I'd say I forgave him if I got a few million as well also.

[830point35 8]

"Statutory rape is hardly a crime against the State.  Murder, yes.  Treason, yes.  Burglary, no.  Assault, no.  Rape, no.  Domestic Abuse, no.  Keep in mind that you are focused on types of crime completely outside what this thread is discussing."  (Barbarosa)

Statutory rapes is not a crime against the state.  Drugging and raping a thirteen year old child is.  As are rape and domestic abuse.  The victims do not have to press charges or even testify against their assaulters- that doesn't help the prosecutors but it is not necessary in California.  Rape victims in general never want to relive the pain of their victimization, which is why you and I must be legally responsible to go after their attackers ourselves.  If we didn't then crooks could lay low for a while and either bribe or coerce their victims into "not pressing charges," and thus be immune.

[Duke87 1,070]

Yes, I know that rape victims often don't report the crime or pursue charges. But there's a subtle but important difference here: in these cases the victim is taking a neutral stance, so the decision of whether to prosecute falls to the judicial system because the victim has declined to make it. And the judiciary is out of common sense and concern for public safety probably going to go ahead and prosecute if they have enough evidence.

This is distinctly different, however, from the case we have here, where the victim has specifically and legitimately spoken out and said "please let this guy go, don't charge him with any crimes". In such cases, it's only proper for the justice system to stand down. Obviously if there's reason to believe the victim was bribed, coerced, or threatened into saying so then that doesn't apply but that being the case here is highly unlikely considering the circumstances. There would be no means or opportunity for that to have happened.

[belfastuniguy 18]

"please let this guy go, don't charge him with any crimes". quote>

He's already been charged, There is no trial to be had. He fled sentencing, not the actual trial or charges.

[SC4BOY 20]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

Statutory rape is hardly a crime against the State.  Murder, yes.  Treason, yes.  Burglary, no.  Assault, no.  Rape, no.  Domestic Abuse, no.  Keep in mind that you are focused on types of crime completely outside what this thread is discussing.quote>

Luckily these are all defined by legal precedence.. not individual whim....

had he (a 35 yr old or so at the time) done this to my 13 yr old daughter, likely I would have killed him myself.. where do you stand on my prosecution..