Roman Polanski Free After Swiss Reject Extradition
Roman Polanski is a free man today after the Swiss Justice Ministry officially rejected an extradition request from the United States. The decision ends a nine-and-a-half-month saga which saw Polanski nabbed at an airport, sequestered in jail, moved out to house arrest and finally released when, according to the Swiss, prosecutors failed to provide confidential testimony about the director's original trial and sentencing. Which of course raises many questions, including the eminently obvious: Why the hell did we even bother?
There will be more on this (alas) as the day and week unfolds, and I imagine Vanity Fair or Rolling Stone or someone has an exclusive first interview already in the works. But for now, via the AP, the Justice Ministry explained that U.S. authorities didn't supply testimony sought from Polanski's original 1978 sentencing for unlawful sex with a minor. Or, as passed along via statement: "The reason for the decision lies in the fact that it was not possible to exclude with the necessary certainty a fault in the US extradition request, although the issue was thoroughly examined." A ministry spokesperson added that "national interests were taken into consideration" as well, as though ambushing and arresting a 76-year-old filmmaker who'd just arrived to collect a lifetime achievement award -- and then keeping him in various stages of custody for the better part of a year -- doesn't already have a kind of diplomatic irredeemability written all over it.
Better late than never, I guess, but I can't imagine this is really just about some documents, particularly with those oddly worded official statements like "The freedom-restricting measures against him have been revoked" and caveats that the case was "not about deciding whether he is guilty or not guilty" making the rounds. Polanski remains in Gstaad for now. More to come here as events warrant, and as always, weigh in with your take below...
· Polanski free, Swiss reject US extradition request [AP]
Subscribe to the new Movieline on YouTube
Comments
I think a better question is why the hell did THEY even bother? I have a feeling the Swiss just didn't want to be seen as the bad guys by the film community.
I think the BIGGEST news that we are all missing - The Swiss actually took a side for once!
Wait, so the US didn't fill out a 27B-6? Is that what this comes down to?
Since I have no knowledge of the law or international politics, I'd like to think it had something to do with the US-Russia spy swap. Yeah, I'll go with that. Conspiracy!
Bravo! One less case for the American blood-lusting public to drool and gloat over! One less involuntary member of the Draconian US Prison for Profit System! One less witch to be persecuted by the Christian Taliban! Finally, some real justice!
Wait...so there are VOLUNTARY members of the US prison system?!
You said it, Zflynn! What kind of a country is this, where you can't force quaaludes and anal sex on 13-year-old girls and then flee the country, without being hounded by a bunch of prudes?!
Why even capture the guy if we aren't going to supply documentation from the original trial (that is public record) to get him back here. You gotta love the US justice system. We just keep on embarrassing our selves in the worlds eye.
I have it on good authority that his first post-house arrest stop is going to be a matinee showing of Twilight: Eclipse. Not so much for the movie as, you know, the "people watching."
Why would L.A. need to provide information on the original pre-trial proceedings (there was no trial because of the plea), when he had already pled guilty to the lesser (and oh-so-much-easier-on-the-ears) crime of "unlawful sexual intercourse" (which makes it sound like he buggered a goat, instead of drugged and forcibly raped a 13-year-old)? He was guilty, as admitted. He was going to be, but had not yet been, sentenced. He thought, whether rightly or wrongly, that the judge was going to sentence him with more than what he thought he bargained for--a risk in every plea deal. He fled as a fugitive before being sentenced. None of these facts are in dispute. So how, exactly, was it that the Swiss found they "could not exclude with necessary certainty a fault" in the U.S. extradition request?
Before reading the arrest report and transcripts of testimony from the Grand Jury, I was one of those who believed that Roman Polanski was being "hounded" and should be left alone. Not after doing my homework. I am disgusted by his acts of criminal pedophilia and by the "artistes" who have risen in his defense. I, for one CA citizen, believe prosecutors here should continue to do everything in their power to bring this criminal to justice. Rape, and that's what it was (a 13 year old CAN NOT legally or morally consent to a 40+ year old pervert) must be pursued. If it means just one casting director or agent thinks twice before preying on the next young ingenue it will have been worth it. Oh, and the guilty should be punished for their crimes, not held in "house arrest" in their villas in Gstad. No more Swiss watches for me ...
Stephanie Mcnealy
http://www.famous-philanthropists.org
Customer Service Team