Roman Polanski is granted bail by a Swiss court

[The Straight Story]

Roman Polanski is granted bail by a Swiss court

A Swiss court has accepted film-maker Roman Polanski's plea to be freed on bail from a Swiss jail where he is being held for a US child sex case.

Polanski has been wanted in the US since fleeing the country in 1978 after pleading guilty to having unlawful sex a year earlier with a 13-year-old girl.

He was held in Zurich after travelling from France to collect an award at the city's film festival in September.

The Swiss Justice Ministry said it would decide quickly whether to appeal.

It is thought Polanski will remain in jail until a decision is made whether to challenge Wednesday's ruling.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8379141.stm

[madokie]

1. I think the word is RAPE

[paulsby]

17. well, according to whoopi, it wasn't

"rape rape" yknow?

i mean drugging a child with quaaludes and alcohol and forcibly raping her is not "rape rape" because like, polanski is an artist!

[UndertheOcean]

2. YES !!!!

I hope friends can smuggle him out quickly and end this travesty .

[seabeyond]

5. the travesty of a rapist actually having to face the judge. nt

[UndertheOcean]

7. I am not getting into this , I will only say :

Watch his movies , those Pillars of Human cinematic Art in the 20th century can NEVER be the labours of a Rapist.

I will get Flagellated for such seemingly faith based view , I admit . But would you rather I lie about my feelings rather than stating them .

That's all I 'll ever say about this subject on this board.

[seabeyond]

8. Pillars of Human cinematic Art in the 20th century can NEVER be the labours of a Rapist

wow

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. You are assuming a level of connectivity without proof

That "sensitive" artists can not do violence is projection of a false hope at best

[tonysam]

11. There is more outrage over Polanski than there ever was over the Manson gang

I was around then during the Manson killings, and there wasn't all of this feigned outrage like there is against Polanski.

[Dr. Strange]

14. That might be because...

no one was trying to make excuses for Manson or claiming that he couldn't be a monster because he was an artist.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

36. Also, Manson is actually serving his term.

[paulsby]

19. the outrage is that justice has not been carried out

vis a vis polanski.

it WAS carried out in regards to the manson family.

so, that's a silly thing to say. the outrage isn't over what polanski did, it's over the fact that he evaded punishment, is celebrated by the hollywood ignorati, and leads a life of luxury w/o consequences for what he did.

THAT's the outrage.

[TheWraith]

27. Speaking as someone who doesn't give a shit one way or the other...

Context does matter. Polanski made a plea deal which included probation, 90 days in jail, and psych evaluation. Both the probation and psych reports recommended no additional jail time, but the judge suggested to Polanski's attorneys that he was going to order prison time and deportation anyway. The change of the sentence after he'd pleaded was the reason Polanski went on the lam.

That said, as in the title, I really don't give a shit whether Polanski gets tossed in jail or not. It's pretty damn ancient history.

[TorchTheWitch]

39. there was no sentencing deal when he pleaded guilty

Read it. He was well aware that that the judge could sentence him to many years in jail and that deportation might be included with that. Considering all the charges against him, he should have been overjoyed to even have the option to plea down to that one lesser charge.

Amazing the stupid claims people make when the actual transcript of his plea deal is available to read...
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0928091polanskiplea1.html

<snip>

MR. GUNSON: Mr. Polanski, before you can plead guilty, you must understand the possible direct consequences of your plea. Do you understand you are pleading guilty to a felony?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

MR. GUNSON: What is the maximum sentence for unlawful sexual intercourse?

THE DEFENDANT: It’s one to fifteen – twenty years in State Prison.

MR. GUNSON: Do you understand it is also possible that you could be placed on probation, with or without being required to serve up to one year in the County Jail?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

MR. GUNSON: Mr. Polanski, because this offense involved a girl under the age of 14, it is mandatory that MDSO proceedings be instituted. MDSO means Mentally Disordered Sex Offender.

If you are found to be a MDSO and amenable to treatment, you could be sent to a State Hospital for an indeterminate period of time.

If you are found to be an MDSO, you would have to register that fact with the law enforcement officer of the community in which you resided.

Mr. Polanski, who do you believe will decide what your sentence will be in this matter?

THE DEFENDANT: The Judge.

MR. GUNSON: Who do you think will decide whether or not you will get probation?

THE DEFENDANT: The Judge.

MR. GUNSON: Who do you think will determine whether the sentence will be a felony or a misdemeanor?

THE DEFENDANT: The Judge.

MR. GUNSON: Do you understand that at this time, the Court has not made any decision as to what sentence you will receive?

THE DEFENDANT: (No response.)

MR. GUNSON: Do you understand that the Judge has not made any decision?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

MR. GUNSON: Further, do you realize that this Court will not make any decision regarding probation and sentence until after it has read and considered the report and recommendation that will be prepared and submitted to it by the Probation Department? And after it has heard the argument of your attorney and the argument of the prosecutor; --

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

MR. GUNSON: -- do you understand that?

Mr. Polanski, do you understand that at the time of probation and sentencing, the prosecutor may argue that you should be sentenced to State Prison, or be incarcerated in the County Jail?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

</snip>



Bottom line - Polanski freely pleaded guilty to the one lesser charge knowing full well what the consequences might be. He ran for no other reason than he didn't want to be subjected to ANY consequences. People can twist it however they like, but the bottom line is that he raped a 13 year old girl, was given a gift of being allowed to plea down to one lesser charge that would have resulted in little to no jail time, and was so arrogant as to jump bail and hide from justice all these years.

[paulsby]

41. excellent... facts trump rhetoric nt

[Gwendolyn]

43. It wasn't a "gift." He pled to the only charge they could prove.

The rest was he said/she said and would've never gone anywhere. Had it gone to trial, questions would've been raised about the other adult the girl was having sex with, and quite likely there would've been charges laid there as well. It was in the interest of both parties to keep the whole thing on the down low and settle.

[TorchTheWitch]

49. it absolutely was a gift

and would never have occurred in this day and age. Since when is it in the best interest of anyone to excuse the rape of a 13 year old girl??? Particularly HER best interest. Almost every rape comes down to he said/she said and it's never in anyone's best interest to sweep it all under the rug. Without her testimony, there was no way to proceed on any of the charges other than the one he plead to, and others decided for her that it was supposedly in her best interest to not testify.

This archaic excuse of "she had sex with someone else so she couldn't have been raped" is DISGUSTING. I've also seen no evidence that the boyfriend she allegedly had sex with before was an adult, in fact, as I understand it he was 17. Further, the idea that her boyfriend would have been somehow hunted down and prosecuted at that time is absurd.

There is no "settling" for criminal charges. Either there is enough evidence to prosecute or there isn't, and the DA decides that. Settling occurs in civil matters only. And why should it have been kept on the down low? Society should know when a 40 year old man is out there raping young teenagers and know who that monster is.

[Gwendolyn]

50. Bad reading comprehension. And you are quite wrong to boot.

The testimony from the girl was given before the grand jury, therefore it was not disputed as the defendant has no say during these proceedings. Not so at trial.

There was absolutely no way to prove in a court of law that he had furnished her with drugs, performed lewd and lascivious acts on her, or sodomized her. That's a fact despite your outrage. The only crime that was provable was unlawful sex with a minor, in other words statutory rape.

Would you put someone away for 30 years for those other allegations based on the unsubstantiated testimony of one witness? Most people wouldn't and that's why the prosecutor was willing to deal.

The mother has spoken in interviews and has stated that she and her daughter were unaware that the shit would hit the fan so spectacularly and that her family did NOT want there to be more publicity than what was already generated. The mother was the star of a popular teevee car commercial that aired through the 80's, and she feared the loss of that contract should there have been a trial. Nobody is blaming the girl for having sex with her boyfriend, but the fact remains she was a minor while having sex with him as well, and the family feared at the time, for good reason, that he would face repercussions too. All that info is available through Google.

[ljm2002]

24. What a truly ridiculous comparison...

...first of all, there was plenty of outrage in regards to the Manson killings. I was around when that happened too. It was huge, and I have to laugh at your parsing, that there wasn't any of the "feigned" outrage.

On the other hand, you are presuming that the current outrage is feigned, or that it was feigned at the time of the rape, with no evidence to back up your claim, other than that you don't like it and therefore it must be feigned. Because goodness knows, no one should be shocked or upset when a 40-something big shot drugs and rapes a 13-year-old girl; we should all just hum a few bars of "Thank Heaven For Little Girls" and get over it already.

For the record, I have a lot of sympathy for Polanski given the brutal killing of his pregnant wife at the hands of the depraved Manson family. I'm sure it affected him in many ways, and that may have contributed to his behavior. But he did commit a crime, and he was convicted, and he did run. I'm not sure we need to run him to ground, given that his victim doesn't really want that. But ultimately it is not her choice; the law is the law and neither will I condemn those who are after him. Had he stayed and faced the music, which was what, 45 days in jail? this would have been long behind him.

[anonymous171]

61. Cry me a fucking river

Life isn't fair, especially for poor people who are accused of rape.

[mrbarber]

16. So because he made good movies (debatable, btw) he cannot be a rapist.

Wow. Just...wow.

[paulsby]

18. lol. that is possibly the most absurd thing

i have read on the intertubes this month. and that's saying a lot.

but i applaud you for being honest about your feelings.

and i note that FEELINGS imply an emotional response, not a logical response.

i don't feel X about polanski, i believe X about polanski.

where X = punishment for his crime

[tinrobot]

25. In Chinatown, John Huston's character impregnated his own daughter.

Polanski himself changed the ending so that Noah Cross (Huston) kills his daughter (Faye Dunaway), gets away with the crime and also takes custody of his granddaughter (presumably as his next victim)

If you want to use his films as evidence of his purity, you might want to leave that one out.

[unblock]

29. wow. just. wow. rapists usually have jobs and some do them quite well.

being a rapist has little if anything to do with being able to do a job, be it artist or engineer or ceo or carpenter or garbageman.

what ON EARTH makes you think that a rapist couldn't be capable of singing beautifully, acting passionately, directing a movie brilliantly, or painting a moving work of art.

fyi, rapists don't rape all the time. they also eat, sleep, shit, shower, shave, and shop just like the rest of us. most of the time they're pretty normal-seeming people. can't say i know what leads them to rape on occassion, but the point is that the rest of the time they're normal-looking. you just can't know, certainly not from seeing their artistic works.

[cherokeeprogressive]

30. I've posted some stupid shit on this board, and I've read some stupid shit on this board.

That said, I find this post to be the strangest thing I've ever seen here, bar none.

[thelordofhell]

33. Rosemary's Baby

"....Then Rosemary gets pregnant after a bad dream in which a horrible creature makes love to her. A caring Minnie keeps giving her some weird concoction for the pregnancy and Rosemary doesn't feel at all well. The only solution is, as the tag-line says, to "pray for Rosemary's baby.""

Hmmmmmmmmm

[DrCory]

34. Remarkable

With a single post, you have managed to profoundly, and likely permanently, compromise your credibility.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

35. Wow. Someone that makes good movies can't be a rapist, huh?

Just...wow.

[kiva]

52. So eating a turkey = approval of genocide,

but child rape is OK if you are an ARTIST. :eyes: Good to know your priorities.

[Orrex]

54. Wait a minute--Polanski raped a genocidal turkey?

Shiver me giblets!

[kiva]

55. Yes, and now Polanski has bad karma,

so he should eat Tofurky.

[CreekDog]

53. You are even better than the movie about you

:rofl:

[Midlodemocrat]

62. I laughed. I cried. I'd see it again.

:rofl:

[dysfunctional press]

56. he drugged a 13-year old girl and then fucked her in the ass...

those are the undisputed FACTS of the case.

tell me one state where that isn't rape.

[tonysam]

10. Oh, sure

Never mind the victim in question doesn't want him to go to jail and never did, and for good reason. I stand with her and not with the self-righteous types.

She doesn't count when there are so many other people who want to get their pound of flesh.

Pathetic.

[Irreverend IX]

13. He shouldn't be prosecuted just on account of his victim.

He should be prosecuted for the sake of future young girls who catch the eye of rich old perverts. As it stands, the lesson of the Polanski case is that you can get away with child rape if you're wealthy and influential.

[Hepburn]

15. IMO, the feelings of the victim are very important.

This event took place years and years ago. She wants it kept in the past and I agree.

JMHO

[paulsby]

21. plenty of (ime the majority) of domestic violence victims

don't want prosecution either.

i've arrested people for SERIOUS DV crimes, where the victim didn't want prosecution, and in many cases - prosecution goes forward (moreso for more serious offenses).

i had a case where the husband threatened a woman with an axe, made her put her head on a chopping block and then swung the axe just over her head, telling her he could kill her any time and there's nothing she could do about it.

she didn't want prosecution

should he not face prosecution?

apparently, you are just fine with wife beaters doing their thang, as long as their victims don't desire prosecution

[Hassin Bin Sober]

38. Your analogy kinda sucks. One woman is most likely dependant and/or under duress.

The other woman doesn't want a 30 year old painful and very personal trauma dragged through the modern 24 hour cable extravaganza or the Nancy Grace-a-palooza.

[paulsby]

40. the analogy holds because

many rape victims don't want prosecution, yet we go ahead in many cases.

it comes down to this : you weigh the justice benefits, the cost to society of prosecuting or not prosecuting, the desire of the victim, etc.

does what the victim want matter?

of course.

but it's not dispositive.

in LOTS of rapes, the victim doesn't want prosecution. vili didn't want marykay letourneau prosecuted.

should a teacher who repeatedly schtups a 13 yr old student be prosecuted? yes.
fwiw, even after the prosecution, she got a light sentence (probation and a few days in the jail iirc). she only got the "real" sentence after she violated probation and was caught schtupping him AGAIN. that's just askin' for it

polanski's crime was heinous. it was not "just' statutory rape. he drugged the girl and then forcibly raped her.

it's good to know the victim doesn't desire prosecution. if i was in her place, i probably wouldn't either.

there are higher concerns. like a justice system that doesn't roll over for "artists' because they are famous, cute, and have lots of support amongst the hollywood ignorati.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

44. Another sucky analogy.

A 13 year old (who has no capacity) and a currently employed teacher versus an adult and a 30 year old case.

I don't give a shit about Polanski and his movies. I care about the victim's wishes. (not to mention the shenanigans that went on with the judge. Even the prosecutor admitted it)

[paulsby]

46. i care about many things

like justice, the victim's wishes, etc.

justice matters. it is an INjustice that polanski was not punished.

fwiw, i think polanski is a fantastic director. his movies (generally) are excellent.

that means jackshit in regards to whether he should be punished... and jack left town

[Gormy Cuss]

47. It's really unfortunate that Polanski created this situation.

Had he gone to jail as he agreed, the whole thing would be ancient history.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

63. The only flaw in your argument is he DID go to jail as agreed.

[pleah]

23. +1

[seabeyond]

28. and that has anything to do with a rapist...... how? nt

[spiritual_gunfighter]

45. You destroyed any credibility you may have on DU

in one post.

[sudopod]

6. what? nt

[aikoaiko]

48. I'm sorry, I cannot support a lynching.

Is that what you meant smuggling him out and ending the travesty?

[anonymous171]

59. That's what I originally thought as well. Sounded like a good idea to me. nt

[anonymous171]

57. I thought you believed in karma? I hope his friends try that and get arrested as well.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Which country(ies) don't have an extradition pact with the U.S.?

Just an academic question . . . .

[rhett o rick]

22. Dubai nt

[Sultana]

31. Dubai is a city within the UAE

[rhett o rick]

51. Agree, and as far as I can tell the UAE and the USA do not have an extradition treaty.

I may be wrong.

[anonymous171]

60. What's their age of consent? 11? Polanski might like it there. nt

[Kolesar]

4. Senator Larry Craig came to regret "copping a plea", too...eom

[joeybee12]

12. Good, and by good, I mean...

...it's a Roman Polanski thread! Always great for entertainment.


And that's all I will say about this.

[Echo In Light]

20. To reiterate; POLANSKI!!!

[WI_DEM]

26. Well, he'll be on the lam again.

[TorchTheWitch]

42. he'll be under house arrest with electronic monitoring

But I also believe that he'll manage to jump bail and go back to hiding in plain sight again.

[Sultana]

32. Tthe rich are always above the law

Polanski supporters=fucking sick M'fers.

[anonymous171]

58. So fucking true. nt

[dem629]

64. +1

[Hassin Bin Sober]

37. Yea! I love a good cops and robbers thriller with a chase scene.

Maybe Dog The Bounty Hunter can get him this time.