Roman Polanski Denied Bail, House Arrest

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Roman Polanski Denied Bail, House Arrest stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

BRADLEY S. KLAPPER | 10/20/09 02:01 PM | AP

What's Your Reaction?
Roman Polanski

GENEVA — Roman Polanski's three decades as a fugitive are coming back to haunt him.

Noting his previous escape from U.S. authorities, Switzerland's top criminal court on Tuesday rejected Polanski's appeal to be released from prison because of the "high" risk that the 76-year-old director would try to flee again.

Polanski's offers of bail, house arrest and electronic monitoring failed to sway the tribunal. Even a Swiss chalet in the luxury resort of Gstaad was brushed aside as insufficient collateral to guard against Polanski fleeing the country, as the United States seeks to have him extradited for having sex with a 13-year-old girl in 1977.

"The appellant has already once in 1978 eluded American criminal proceedings by traveling to Europe," the Federal Criminal Court said in its 17-page verdict, adding that Polanski's transfer to the U.S. could also cause family trauma and cost investors millions of dollars in losses.

"As a result, the motivation to flee is high," it said.

Tuesday's ruling was another setback to the Oscar-winning director's battle to avoid facing authorities in Los Angeles, where he pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse with the girl. He was arrested on an international warrant by the Swiss on Sept. 26 as he arrived in Zurich to receive a lifetime achievement award from a film festival, and has been battling extradition ever since.

Beyond Polanski's legal troubles, the decision could have damaging consequences for his latest film, "The Ghost," a political thriller that has several months of work left before it is ready for theaters.

Polanski and his family will go bankrupt if he has to remain in prison, his lawyers told the court. They said continued incarceration would prevent him from finishing the film starring Pierce Brosnan as a fictional British leader and Ewan McGregor as the politician's ghostwriter.

Story continues below
advertisement

Investors stand to lose $40 million if Polanski isn't freed, they said.

"It's probable that Mr. Polanski will appeal," Polanski's lawyer Herve Temime told reporters in Paris. "I repeat that Mr. Polanski has firmly and strongly stated that he will remain in Switzerland during the entire extradition procedure, regardless of its outcome."

Still, the tribunal in the southern Swiss city of Bellinzona left open several possibilities for Polanski to challenge its verdict in what is expected to be a lengthy legal battle over his extradition.

Polanski has 10 days to appeal the decision on his release to Switzerland's supreme court. He also can continue attempts to persuade the Swiss Justice Ministry to release him. More court proceedings are expected after Washington files its formal extradition request, which it has until Nov. 25 to submit.

Legal experts said no path offered Polanski much hope for a speedy release from jail.

"If someone has already fled once, it makes sense to suspect he might flee again," said Dieter Jann, a former Zurich prosecutor.

Polanski directed such film classics as "Rosemary's Baby" and "Chinatown" and won a 2002 directing Oscar in absentia for "The Pianist."

He was accused of plying the underage girl with champagne and a Quaalude sedative during a modeling shoot in 1977 and raping her. He was initially indicted on six felony counts, including rape by use of drugs, child molesting and sodomy.

Polanski pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of unlawful sexual intercourse. In exchange, the judge agreed to drop the remaining charges and sentence him to prison for a 90-day psychiatric evaluation.

However, he was released after 42 days by an evaluator who deemed him mentally sound and unlikely to offend again.

The judge responded by saying he was going to send Polanski back to jail for the remainder of the 90 days and afterward he would ask Polanski, a dual French-Polish citizen, to agree to a "voluntary deportation." Polanski then fled the country on Feb. 1, 1978, the day he was scheduled to be sentenced to the additional time.

Since then, Polanski has lived in France, which does not extradite its own citizens.

In its verdict, the Swiss court said Polanski offered to surrender his travel documents, wear an electronic monitoring device and submit himself to daily police checks. Those measures were seen as insufficient to prevent his flight because he could always obtain a new passport or even travel to his French home without papers.

The Swiss court also was concerned that Polanski could avoid the extradition process if he fled Switzerland by helicopter or private airplane.

Lawyers for Polanski offered up the director's Gstaad chalet as collateral, saying it represented more than half of his personal wealth and that it would definitely guarantee his remaining in the country because he has two children he must support through school.

The court, however, sided with Swiss authorities who said even the large bail offer provided insufficient security against flight, and should be made in cash.

The Swiss Justice Ministry said it would examine any new request Polanski submits and evaluate whether it represents a "concrete, realizable" offer as the court ruling suggests. But, spokesman Folco Galli reiterated that detention is only lifted in exceptional cases.

"The point of imprisonment is to ensure that Switzerland can fulfill its treaty obligations on extradition," Galli told The Associated Press. "He can always ask again to be released. But detention is the rule."

It is not clear how much time in jail Polanski faces now, either in Switzerland or in the United States. With appeals, the extradition process in Switzerland could take months. In the United States, Polanski fled before sentencing was complete and is expected to face additional penalties for jumping bail.

___

Associated Press writers Alexander G. Higgins and Eliane Engeler contributed to this report.

GENEVA — Roman Polanski's three decades as a fugitive are coming back to haunt him. Noting his previous escape from U.S. authorities, Switzerland's top criminal court on Tuesday rejected Polans...
GENEVA — Roman Polanski's three decades as a fugitive are coming back to haunt him. Noting his previous escape from U.S. authorities, Switzerland's top criminal court on Tuesday rejected Polans...
Featured Comments:
Have something to say?

Loading...
 
Report Corrections
 
Comments
328
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo
Post Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)
photo

4:30 AM CST

Newsweek, which used to be a reasonably responsible source for journalism, has in recent months become hardly distinguishable from a tabloid rag.

Case in point : In a recent Newsweek online post, written by a "Kate Bailey" (Sept. 29), we have an example of classic tabloid exploitation, titled : "Roman Polanski Raped a Child : A Primer".

481 posts on a poorly constructed blog (all on one page) were entered into with a fiery contest of wills, with myself being foolish enough to join the circus. I leave a small part of myself quoted from that silly blog, onto a much more sensible blog, in the futile hope of redemption :

"...The media and public preoccupation over vengeance on matters of sexual conduct illuminates a pathological obsession that is distinctly American, spawned over bleak decades of prudish post-Victorian propaganda. Dailey's article and posturing, appealing to the lowest common denominator, is a blatant example of that legacy..."

Saint James 10/26/09

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:54 AM on 10/26/2009
- Loophole I'm a Fan of Loophole 4 fans permalink

well said

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:09 PM on 10/29/2009

Nelson Montana has proved repeatedly that he is a lame sophomoric smart aleck armed with nothing more than a high school level ability to say "I know you are but what am I?...."

Another example of a hypocrite who probably never did anything or took action in any way over the last 30 years to do anything of social value concerning the details of this story

But he seems to be full of himself to such an extent, that anyone who should dare disagree with him, not the details of the story, but disagree with him; and he out and out accuses those as being "pro-pedophila"

Next maybe he will suggest those who disagree with invading Iraq are therefore "pro-Saddam Hussein" shamefully sophmoric

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:18 PM on 10/24/2009
- Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 64 fans permalink

Exactly how am I being hypocritical, other than you like using the word? You see, an intelligent person explains his reasoning. An idiot just insults. (Read above).

I never accused anyone of anything. I couldn't understand how someone would want to go to the defense of someone who drugs a child and had forcibly sex with her. Apparently to you and Loophole and Ballard, that stance is sophomoric.

Maybe I'm not sophisticated enough to realize why child molestation should be defended. Perhaps you can explain it to me.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:50 PM on 10/31/2009
- Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 64 fans permalink

You've all convinced me. Polanski is a great guy. Drugging a 13 year old child and having sex with her is completely appropriate. Anyone who thinks differently must just be jealous of Polanski's brilliance. The Pianist was a masterpiece, O.J is innocent, and Phillip Guarido is just misunderstood.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:57 AM on 10/22/2009

So far everything that I have seen shows you are a sophomoric writer.
Your crutch is sarcasm, your cloak yourself with New York isms in order to hide your penchant for being a smart aleck. Frankly it is insulting to New York, not New Yorkers but the actual city,
Yes you are insulting to an entire city.....
It seems clear that your so called writings are more about what ever may pop into your head, and whatever you deem the most self aggrandizing to yourself while demeaning to another. I suppose you re-read your own words and consider yourself quite clever

But without the need to choose sides of some morality debate, I am left with only a clear picture of what is written, and you sir are a hack.

You also seem to repeat yourself
I can play you like a puppet on a string.
Because I know that you will be inclined to challenge me to present some sort of proof to prove myself right, while you will most likely try to prove that I am wrong

Let me guess, you will point to your own self promotion as proof that you are what you think you are because you have found yourself promoted to some sort of pedestal of your own making

Of course you could write a bio and say that it is written by someone else therefore proving that you are not accountable for what is in your bio on your own profile

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 PM on 10/22/2009
- Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 64 fans permalink

So I take it you're PRO-pedopholia?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:57 AM on 10/23/2009
- mmonarch I'm a Fan of mmonarch 23 fans permalink
photo

"agreed to drop the remaining charges and sentence him to prison for a 90-day psychiatric evaluation.
However, he was released after 42 days by an evaluator who deemed him mentally sound and unlikely to offend again.The judge responded by saying he was going to send Polanski back to jail for the remainder of the 90 days and afterward he would ask Polanski, a dual French-Polish citizen, to agree to a "voluntary deportatio­n."

So, he served 42 days of a 90 day sentence and fled so he wouldn't have to do 48 more days? And then be ASKED to voluntarily deport? I had heard that he fled because supposedly the judge told some lawyers that he was going to lengthen his term. If this was it. 48 stinking days, then Polanski is a fool. Besides being a child rapist, he is a fool. He deserves a lot longer sentence than 48 days.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:46 PM on 10/20/2009
- LongTom I'm a Fan of LongTom 6 fans permalink

Actually, the judge cannot "sentence" anyone to a 90 day psychiatric evaluation. He can commit a defendant for UP TO 90 days at a state psychiatric facility for an examination. This was not a sentence. Polanski didn't "owe" 48 days.

The judge's behavior was unprofessional and unstable. He was asking reporters for sentencing advice! He pronounced the state hospital's report on Polanski to be "a whitewash.­" Obviously, he was hoping to use the report as an excuse to further abrogate the plea agreement and was frustrated when the shrinks recommended against incarceration.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:21 AM on 10/21/2009
- john88 I'm a Fan of john88 10 fans permalink

So that makes raping a 13 year old ok? was the judge wrong, yes but no where near as wrong as poor Roman

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:59 AM on 10/21/2009
- mmonarch I'm a Fan of mmonarch 23 fans permalink
photo

Unprofessional, yes. However I am not a psychiatrist, so I cannot say whether or not it was unstable behavior. Perhaps it was the behavior of a person so outraged by the thought that the rape of a 13 year old child was being blown off as some kind of minor offense. He asked reporters for sentencing advice. Tell me where you found this quote cause I would like to see it in context. Was it sarcasm? And I would have been frustrated too, that "shrinks recommended against incarceration". You go, Judge!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:41 AM on 10/21/2009
- Cathy22 I'm a Fan of Cathy22 2 fans permalink

"Polanski and his family will go bankrupt if he has to remain in prison, his lawyers told the court."

A.) Oh Boo Hoo Hoo.
B.) He could prevent some of his financial loss if he were agree to be extradited now in stead of fighting it with appeals, etc. The sooner he starts acting like a man, the sooner this will be over.
C.) If he does not come back here immediately and face up to the fact that he is a rapist of a minor and a fugitive, then his financial problems are his fault.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:55 PM on 10/20/2009
- LongTom I'm a Fan of LongTom 6 fans permalink

For all you all hungering after a Polanski jail term, here's a dose of reality from a letter written by the victim's lawyer to the judge, encouraging him to accept the plea bargain:

“Long before I had met any other attorney in this case my clients informed me that their goal in pressing the charges did not include seeking the incarceration of the defendant, but rather, the admission by him of wrongdoing and commencement by him, under the supervision of the court, of a program to ensure his complete rehabilitation. The plea of guilty by the defendant is contrition sufficient for my clients to believe that goal may be achievable­.”

"THEIR GOAL IN PRESSING THE CHARGES DID NOT INCLUDE INCARCERAT­ION."

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:38 PM on 10/20/2009
- Eris23 I'm a Fan of Eris23 45 fans permalink

So?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:56 PM on 10/20/2009
- Cathy22 I'm a Fan of Cathy22 2 fans permalink

While the wishes of the victim are taken into consideration, the victim does not decide on punishment. The court does. He needs to come back to the US and face up to whatever punishment the court decides on the rape. But in addition to all that, 30 years ago he ran from the law and became a fugitive. He needs to do time for that now.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 PM on 10/20/2009
- Secularist I'm a Fan of Secularist 15 fans permalink

In principle, you are right. The victim's forgiveness is not something law enforcement is concerned with. However, the victim had a civil trial with Polanski and they had a settlement. This shows that he had at least paid for his crime sufficiently to the one person he actually hurt. But the main point is that jailing Polanski does nothing for justice. It's not gonna change him. It's not gonna protect society in any way, since he is not a threat. It will however cause suffering to his family and to the victim, who is again being pulled into a nightmare of media attention, which she has always said was actually more traumatic than what Polanski did to her. Sometimes the wishes of the victim and the family can be ignored for the greater good, but there is no greater good here. This is just public vengeance over an alleged version of a crime which many lay people mistakenly believe . Considering that he did serve an unofficial sentence, it would be best for all if he was fined and everyone moved on.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:55 PM on 10/20/2009

Battered wives and abused children usually don't want their perpetrators to do jail time either. Their goal in pressing charges isn't really the point. The goal of justice for all--including those who don't demand it--is.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:17 AM on 10/21/2009
photo

I 'hunger' for justice to let child rapists know that it is not alright to skip town before sentencing.

I 'hunger' for justice to let the child rapist know that he is not the person that judges whether justice has been served.

I 'hunger' for justice to do what it takes to let other child rapists know that they can't just move to France or a country with no extradition rights with the US, hide out there for 30 years and get away untouched.

I don't care if they send him to jail for 5 days or 5 years. All I want is that justice should tell a child rapist that he cannot design his own punishment.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:44 AM on 10/21/2009

Extremely well put.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:02 AM on 10/21/2009
- LongTom I'm a Fan of LongTom 6 fans permalink

Do you really think Polanski's flight and 30 year exile caused a single "child rape?" Do you think his capture and a harsh sentence for statutory rape will inhibit a single "child rape?" Do you really think that any child rapists think they'll get to "design their own punishment" if they're caught? I don't.

I agree with you that Polanski should be penalized for his conduct. Personally, I agree with the prosecutor, the victim, the state shrinks and the probation officer in that I don't think either the state or the victim will benefit from him serving any prison time. Two-thousand hours of community service in LA County seems like a reasonable penalty.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:09 AM on 10/21/2009
- LongTom I'm a Fan of LongTom 6 fans permalink

BTW, France does have extradition agreements with the US, but won't be compelled to deport a French citizen from France. It'll be interesting to see what the Swiss do. Obviously, they don't necessarily want to piss off the US Justice Department, but their relationship with France is far closer and more important. They do have a rule that they won't extradite people who are facing less than a year in prison. Polanski has a colorable argument that his plea bargain places him in that category. He could also argue that he could not get a fair trial in the US. He'd have plenty of ammunition for THAT argument!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:14 AM on 10/21/2009
- slobone I'm a Fan of slobone 5 fans permalink

She sued him and got a $500,000 settlement. I guess that's a reasonable payment for "forgiving" him...

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:03 AM on 10/21/2009
- PatA I'm a Fan of PatA 49 fans permalink
photo

"poor baby".

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:06 PM on 10/20/2009
- Mafdet I'm a Fan of Mafdet 9 fans permalink

It is great that people who invested money in a fugitive child rapist are going to take a bath now.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:48 PM on 10/20/2009
- dpiyjrtmfr I'm a Fan of dpiyjrtmfr 2 fans permalink

Roman Polanski defenders are an odd bunch. I do not say that RP should go to jail or what his punishment should be. That is not my place to decide.
However, it is not his place to decide what his punishment should or should not be either. It is the courts decision.
He should be extradited and face the consequences of his actions just like anyone in a similar situation should be.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:40 PM on 10/20/2009
- LongTom I'm a Fan of LongTom 6 fans permalink

"Polanski defenders are an odd bunch." How about the dripping-fanged psychos, (like Cokie Roberts), some of whom have written on this very thread, who want Polanski executed, sentenced to life, raped in prison, etc.? They're just normal Americans, I guess?

Polanski's lawyers can defend him. To suggest that the sad facts of this incident be examined, that the professional opinions of the people closest to the case (the probation officers, the court psychiatrists, the prosecutor) be considered before rushing to judgment, that the victim's own point of view be given some weight when it comes to determining a punishment--that's odd to you?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:02 AM on 10/21/2009

Cokie Roberts was joking as part of an informal discussion. She indicated outright that it was not a serious suggestion by immediately laughing. There was nothing "dripping-fanged" about it. It was her way of saying that Polanski doesn't have a leg to stand on.

The people on these threads who adovcate him being raped in prison, etc. do not represent the majority of Americans, or even a significant minority. They are bIowhards.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:59 PM on 10/21/2009
- Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 64 fans permalink

Overrated director. Underrated slimeball.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:31 PM on 10/20/2009
- Mafdet I'm a Fan of Mafdet 9 fans permalink

So true. So true.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:49 PM on 10/20/2009
photo

Amen brother. AMEN!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:14 PM on 10/20/2009
- Secularist I'm a Fan of Secularist 15 fans permalink

Actually, I would flip those adjectives.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:38 PM on 10/20/2009
- picott I'm a Fan of picott 5 fans permalink

This Mr. Montana is a self-described "true Renaissance man"!
I suppose this makes his statement interesting.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:52 PM on 10/20/2009
- Nelson Montana - Huffpost Blogger I'm a Fan of Nelson Montana 64 fans permalink

Not a self description, though it was written in my bio, which I guess makes it sound like I wrote it. I should change that.

As for Polanski, I stand by my statement. Chinatown was good. Everything else...eh. But, he is unquestionably guilty of a heinous act of violence. It's funny...mo­re people are outraged at a 25 year old woman having sex with a 17 old boy, then a 40 year old man drugging and raping a child. Why? Because he's famous? Because he's a so called "genius?" Please.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:59 PM on 10/20/2009
- sexyrexy I'm a Fan of sexyrexy 19 fans permalink

haRDLY.. considering CHINATOWN IS known to be one of THE 5 TOP PERFECT FILMS ever made.. check out what ROBERT EVANS HAVE to say about it in his book.

what is truly amusing is: all this vitriolic comments when hardly any of you were saying & commenting these things when you were watching his films in the last 3 decades.. in fact.. I bet most of you added to his fortune as you watched his films.

so rather late in the day to be indignant and being hateful he lives/livred this life of luxury..

Roman Polanski's place in the arts is assured..

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:13 PM on 10/20/2009

It's not about his place in the arts, it's about raping a 13 year old girl as she cried No.

No amount of good art - even if he was the greatest whatever in history, justifies letting him or anyone else get away with that.

And nope - I didn't add a penny to his fortune. However - that is completely and totally irrelevant.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:02 PM on 10/20/2009
- Loophole I'm a Fan of Loophole 4 fans permalink

Excellent point! You'd think Nelson would've boycotted Mr. Polanki's movies if he's as outraged as he claims. Then again, it could easily be that someone who refers to themselves as a "Renaissance Man" is, perhaps, a bit envious of Mr. Polankl's fame and genius.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:53 PM on 10/20/2009

lol why are you guys saying "polanksi own up" if his original sentence was to be deported? hasn't he basically fulfilled his punishment by self-exile?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:21 PM on 10/20/2009

His original sentence was never determined - he fled before sentence could be pronounced. There are rumors of what it would have been - he was expecting probation at the start, and when he grew to fear it wouldn't be merely probation, he fled.

The rumors were that it would be a bit more jail time, then deportation. So - he hasn't served his punishment - he hasn't served the jail time - but until a judge pronounces the sentence, it could be anything, even up to the 12 year maximum.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:27 PM on 10/20/2009

I'd like to hear from some lawyers who practice criminal law in California. What would be the likely result if he just came back faced the judge? I think he fled because he thought he was going to have to do another few weeks in jail.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:30 PM on 10/20/2009
- Secularist I'm a Fan of Secularist 15 fans permalink

Hi Susan, I'm afraid it is not as straightforward as what you say. You see, Polanski DID serve an unofficial sentence. It was the opinion and desire of all parties that he be given probation and a fine. The judge, however, did not want to come across as soft in the media, so he convinced the DA and the defense, that if Polanski went to Chino for "examination", he would let him go with a fine at the official sentencing when the director was released. This was actually illegal because you can't use medical examination prison facilities for sentencing, but this gave the judge the chance to tell all that he locked Polanski up. However, when Polanski was released earlier than expected (again with the officials recommending probation), the judge reneged and threatened to put Polanski back in jail and then deport him (which was judicial overreaching, by the way). Fearing a ridiculously long jail sentence, and whatever else the judge could pull after that, Polanski fled. So while on paper it may look like Polanski fled before the official sentencing, there is more to it than that.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:22 PM on 10/20/2009
- mmonarch I'm a Fan of mmonarch 23 fans permalink
photo

48 more days. That's it. The article above states,
"The judge responded by saying he was going to send Polanski back to jail for the remainder of the 90 days and afterward he would ask Polanski, a dual French-Polish citizen, to agree to a "voluntary deportatio­n." Polanski then fled the country on Feb. 1, 1978, the day he was scheduled to be sentenced to the additional time.

The remainder of the 90 days. He already had done 42, poor baby.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:51 PM on 10/20/2009
- Mafdet I'm a Fan of Mafdet 9 fans permalink

Polanski agreed to a term of commitment for examination because the judge suggested that then, if Polanski received a positive evaluation (huh?), the judge would set his sentence at "time served." When this arrangement became public knowledge, the judge met with a crisis of conscience (and, one wants to imagine, a fear for his life) and he told Polanski's attorneys that he would have to stiffen the sentence. As rape was punishable by 5 years to life in prison, and as the judge left it open-ended how much of that he would make Polanski serve, Polanski fled.

But the bottom line is: Any other convicted rapist in the state of CA at that time would have been sentenced to 5 to 15 years.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:00 PM on 10/20/2009

"But the bottom line is: Any other convicted rapist in the state of CA at that time would have been sentenced to 5 to 15 years."

How do you know that?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:13 PM on 10/20/2009

Polanski should just come back and face the music.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:13 PM on 10/20/2009
- Fudgefase I'm a Fan of Fudgefase 16 fans permalink
photo

He IS something of a flight risk after all....

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:13 PM on 10/20/2009
- Ascoli I'm a Fan of Ascoli 25 fans permalink
photo

Nice to have some good news.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 AM on 10/20/2009
- Lucille I'm a Fan of Lucille 34 fans permalink
photo

Chuckle.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:44 PM on 10/20/2009
photo

High five anyone? :)

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:55 AM on 10/20/2009
- sexyrexy I'm a Fan of sexyrexy 19 fans permalink

NOW, YOU SAID IT.. you can s tick up your bum.. sweets..

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:16 PM on 10/20/2009
- alsm9 I'm a Fan of alsm9 13 fans permalink

What's wrong with you?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:25 PM on 10/20/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect