Roman Polanski arrested in Zurich

[Greg M]

You guys are passing judgment based on reading 2 paragraph news stories from journalists who spent 10 minutes researching before rushing the news to press.

I have no idea if he is guilty or not guilty...I am not qualified to judge. All I am saying is that you shouldnt rush to judgment based on your 1 minute read of the Fox news website.

 

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

There where a hell of a lot of events that lead up to Polanski deciding to flee to france it wasn't as simple as people on this board are describing.

 

[Michael Schrengohst]

In 1977, he was accused of raping the teenager while photographing her during a modeling session. The girl said Polanski plied her with champagne and part of a Quaalude pill at Jack Nicholson's house while the actor was away. She said that, despite her protests, he performed oral sex, intercourse and sodomy on her.

Polanski was allowed to plead guilty to one of six charges, unlawful sexual intercourse, and was sent to prison for 42 days of evaluation.

Lawyers agreed that would be his full sentence, but the judge tried to renege on the plea bargain. Aware the judge would sentence him to more prison time and require his voluntary deportation, Polanski fled to France.

The victim, Samantha Geimer, who long ago identified herself publicly, has joined in Polanski's bid for dismissal, saying she wants the case to be over. She sued Polanski and reached an undisclosed settlement.

Festival organizers said Polanski's detention had caused "shock and dismay," but that they would go ahead with Sunday's planned retrospective of the director's work.

The Swiss Directors Association sharply criticized authorities for what it deemed "not only a grotesque farce of justice, but also an immense cultural scandal.

I think Polanski is being hauled in now because Obama is not happy with the President of France:

http://ambafrance-us.org/spip.php?article1432

64th United Nations General Assembly
United Nations Security Council Summit on Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Speech by Nicolas Sarkozy, President of the Republic, to the United Nations Security Council

New York, 24 September 2009

France fully supports your initiative to organize this meeting and the efforts you undertook with Russia to reduce nuclear arsenals. But let us speak frankly – we are here to guarantee peace.

We are right to speak of the future, but before the future there is the present, and at present we have two nuclear crises.

The people of the entire world are listening to what we’re saying, to our promises, our commitments and our speeches, but we live in a real world, not a virtual world.
We say: reductions must be made. And President Obama has even said, “I dream of a world without [nuclear weapons].” Yet before our very eyes, two countries are currently doing the exact opposite. Since 2005, Iran has violated five Security Council resolutions. Since 2005, Secretary-General, the international community has called on Iran to engage in dialogue. An offer of dialogue was made in 2005, an offer of dialogue was made in 2006, an offer of dialogue was made in 2007, an offer of dialogue was made in 2008, and another one was made in 2009.

President Obama, I support the Americans’ outstretched hand. But what did the international community gain from these offers of dialogue? Nothing. More enriched uranium, more centrifuges, and on top of that, a statement by Iranian leaders proposing to wipe a UN member State off the map.

What are we doing? What conclusions are we drawing? There comes a time when facts are stubborn and decisions must be made.
If we want in the end to have a world without nuclear weapons, let us not accept the violation of international rules.

I understand perfectly well the various positions of the different parties, but all of us may one day be threatened by a neighbour who has obtained a nuclear weapon.
Second, North Korea. It gets even better: they have violated all Security Council deliberations since 1993, and they disregard everything that the international community says, everything. What’s more, they are continuing their ballistic tests.
How can we accept this? What conclusions can we draw from it? I say that at some point, all of us – regardless of our positions in other respects – will have to work together to adopt sanctions and to ensure that the UN Security Council’s decisions are effective.

Finally, I share the opinion expressed by the President of Uganda and the Chinese President with respect to access to civil nuclear energy. We, the nuclear powers, must agree to technology transfers so that everyone can have access to this clean energy. I would add that this will make it possible to avoid deliberate confusion on the part of those who claim to be carrying out nuclear research for civilian purposes while they’re doing it for military purposes.

So, ladies and gentlemen, my dear colleagues, this is what I believe, in full support of what was decided in the resolution and in full support of President Obama’s initiative. What I believe is that by having the courage to strengthen sanctions, together, against countries that violate Security Council resolutions, we will give credibility to our commitment to a world whose future holds fewer nuclear weapons and perhaps, one day, no nuclear weapons.

 

[Simon Smith]

here's the victim

hahahaha

 

[Karl Lohninger]

The docu that run on HBO some months ago tried to paint a bigger picture and it would be great if those self-righteous and god-fearing judges on this list get themselves informed a bit better before they cry wolf. Geezus krist!

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'll just say this before I'm done. I've read on this quite a bit on the past, looking at various filmmaker bios, etc.. I've seen the documentary. Instead of focusing on the original crime and how the victim feels now, and how that should somehow exonerate him, I'm just saying that the guy didn't address this properly. And it's high time for him to face the music and do so.

I believe Craig is correct when he says there's a lot of events which lead up to Polanski's flight from the US. And those close to him have always claimed such. On the other hand, he still fled when the arrest warrant was issued and did nothing for 20 years to address the issue properly, with the exception of an attorney and his former victim appealing to the court 20 years later. I'm not passing judgement on the guy for the initial crime, it seems the court has already done that long ago. The point is he ran away, and all the surrounding reasons are irrelevant. He skipped out before he had to face his sentencing and for 20 years he knowingly evaded extradition to face this issue and to properly appeal a court's decision.

Being a brilliant artist is not a free pass to shirk legal responsibilities. Although, it seems that many people think it is. And many do get away with it from time to time. And same with other hardships in life. Sympathy should only go so far, and it seems there's an over-abundance of sympathy these days and yet a completely lost sense of civility and duty. Or maybe sympathy just isn't my thing...

 

[Maria Costa]

 

[Tom Lowe]

Who cares. The US is going bankrupt and we are worried about this?

 

[Adrian T.]

The arrest warrant finally caught up with him 22 years later.

Chances are he'll get a small slap on the wrist because it's been over 20 years.

Still, that doesn't mean he isn't a douchebag for skipping town after admitting his crime and knowingly avoiding arrest and extradition for over 20 years.

On the other hand, he still fled when the arrest warrant was issued and did nothing for 20 years to address the issue properly, with the exception of an attorney and his former victim appealing to the court 20 years later.

He skipped out before he had to face his sentencing and for 20 years he knowingly evaded extradition to face this issue and to properly appeal a court's decision.

You're bad at math, Jeff. It's been over 30 years! :yesnod:

 

[Joel Kaye]

The article

"He did something really gross to me, but it was the media the ruined my life."

I wish we could put the media in jail for ruining people's lives. This whole thing just sounds sad to me from every perspective.

 

[Iannis Holwech]

This could have been solved in back then if the judge had not gone back on his words, according to the victim Samantha Geimer in this piece she wrote in LA Times in 2003.

Judge the Movie, Not the Man
Roman Polanski's 25-year-old crimes should not damage his chances for an Oscar, his victim says.

By Samantha Geimer
February 23, 2003

I met Roman Polanski in 1977, when I was 13 years old. I was in ninth grade that year, when he told my mother that he wanted to shoot pictures of me for a French magazine. That's what he said, but instead, after shooting pictures of me at Jack Nicholson's house on Mulholland Drive, he did something quite different. He gave me champagne and a piece of a Quaalude. And then he took advantage of me.

It was not consensual sex by any means. I said no, repeatedly, but he wouldn't take no for an answer. I was alone and I didn't know what to do. It was scary and, looking back, very creepy. Those may sound like kindergarten words, but that's the way it feels to me. It was a very long time ago, and it is hard to remember exactly the way everything happened. But I've had to repeat the story so many times, I know it by heart.

We pressed charges, and he pleaded guilty. A plea bargain was agreed to by his lawyer, my lawyer and the district attorney, and it was approved by the judge. But to our amazement, at the last minute the judge went back on his word and refused to honor the deal.

Worried that he was going to have to spend 50 years in prison -- rather than just time already served -- Mr. Polanski fled the country. He's never been back, and I haven't seen him or spoken to him since.

Looking back, there can be no question that he did something awful. It was a terrible thing to do to a young girl. But it was also 25 years ago -- 26 years next month. And, honestly, the publicity surrounding it was so traumatic that what he did to me seemed to pale in comparison.

Now that he's been nominated for an Academy Award, it's all being reopened. I'm being asked: Should he be given the award? Should he be rewarded for his behavior? Should he be allowed back into the United States after fleeing 25 years ago?

Here's the way I feel about it: I don't really have any hard feelings toward him, or any sympathy, either. He is a stranger to me.

But I believe that Mr. Polanski and his film should be honored according to the quality of the work. What he does for a living and how good he is at it have nothing to do with me or what he did to me. I don't think it would be fair to take past events into consideration. I think that the academy members should vote for the movies they feel deserve it. Not for people they feel are popular.

And should he come back? I have to imagine he would rather not be a fugitive and be able to travel freely. Personally, I would like to see that happen. He never should have been put in the position that led him to flee. He should have received a sentence of time served 25 years ago, just as we all agreed. At that time, my lawyer, Lawrence Silver, wrote to the judge that the plea agreement should be accepted and that that guilty plea would be sufficient contrition to satisfy us. I have not changed my mind.

I know there is a price to pay for running. But who wouldn't think about running when facing a 50-year sentence from a judge who was clearly more interested in his own reputation than a fair judgment or even the well-being of the victim?

If he could resolve his problems, I'd be happy. I hope that would mean I'd never have to talk about this again. Sometimes I feel like we both got a life sentence.

My attitude surprises many people. That's because they didn't go through it all; they don't know everything that I know. People don't understand that the judge went back on his word. They don't know how unfairly we were all treated by the press. Talk about feeling violated! The media made that year a living hell, and I've been trying to put it behind me ever since.

Today, I am very happy with my life. I have three sons and a husband. I live in a beautiful place and I enjoy my work. What more could I ask for? No one needs to worry about me.

The one thing that bothers me is that what happened to me in 1977 continues to happen to girls every day, yet people are interested in me because Mr. Polanski is a celebrity. That just never seems right to me. It makes me feel guilty that this attention is directed at me, when there are certainly others out there who could really use it.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wire/la-oe-samantha-geimer23-2003feb23,0,4716430.story

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

OMG... You're right, Adrian. LOL.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Quote from victim:

Today, I am very happy with my life. I have three sons and a husband. I live in a beautiful place and I enjoy my work. What more could I ask for? No one needs to worry about me.

The one thing that bothers me is that what happened to me in 1977 continues to happen to girls every day, yet people are interested in me because Mr. Polanski is a celebrity. That just never seems right to me. It makes me feel guilty that this attention is directed at me, when there are certainly others out there who could really use it.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,4716430.story
---------------

Sounds like she has her head screwed on pretty straight - but our society is pretty f'd up.

 

[Andrae Palmer]

It sure comes in handy to be a talented rich guy when you are a pedophile.

 

[Joel Kaye]

It sure comes in handy to be a talented rich guy when you are pedophile.

Or live in Spain. I think consent there is 13... which was raised from 12. (although this case was non-consensual)

 

[Jacob_Ross]

I hope Draconian measures are taken.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Was I the only one really confused because of Sally and Steve's avatars?

I thought Steve kept double posting agreeing with is own posts.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

"He did something really gross to me, but it was the media the ruined my life."

I wish we could put the media in jail for ruining people's lives. This whole thing just sounds sad to me from every perspective.

Tough line to draw though. Are people posting details of the case in this thread any different from the media?

 

[Nick Wolf]

This won`t break him, He has been through far worse. He will come out of this stronger and with new energy to create yet another classic.

DogDay.

 

[Joel Kaye]

Tough line to draw though. Are people posting details of the case in this thread any different from the media?

Yes. The difference is reach, credibility, intrusion and motivation. No one here is hounding her for an interview and using her pain to gain more eyeballs to view an advertisement. I'd say it's a pretty big difference.

Real journalism about things that actually matter died a long time ago.