EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Bernard-Henri Lévy

Bernard-Henri Lévy

Posted: November 27, 2009 10:38 AM

Polanski's Release From Prison

What's Your Reaction?

?>

The decision to free Roman Polanski is a wise decision. It honors the people who took it. It shows that the arguments developed by the movie director's partisans -- including those published on the French review's website of La Règle du Jeu -- have finally been fruitful. It shows that Polanski's French lawyers, Hervé Témime and Georges Kiejman, were right to remain tenacious. At this very moment, I am thinking about Emmanuelle, his wife. I am thinking about his two kids who saw their dad's name ignominiously dragged through the mud. I am mostly thinking about him: Roman Polanski, who I don't know, but whose fate has moved me so much. Nothing will repair the days he has spent in prison. Nothing will erase the immense, unbelievable injustice he has been subjected to. Nothing will take away the hysteria of those ones who have never stopped pouring contempt upon him, hounding him through hatred and asking for his punishment as if we were living the darkest and most ferocious hours of the McCarthy era all over again. At least the nightmare is about to end. At least the end of the hell is looming. And this, for the time being, is what does matter.

 
 
  • Comments
  • 351
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jackbutler5555
12:36 PM on 12/05/2009
In the future, Polanski will make a statement or he won't, will escape or he won't, will be extradited or he won't, will face the judge in LA or he won't. will serve time or he won't, etc.

Each event will be duly recorded here.

And each event will prompt the bunch here to repeat what they have already said.

It is a ritual.

-- Panen de caelo praestitis­ti eis
-- Omne delectamen­tum in se habentem

OREMUS.- Deus qui nobissub Sacramento mirabili..­..

Tedious. The same stuff over and over. The imputation of motives. The histrionic­s.

I'll be checking in from time to time in the unlikely event there will be something new, some insight based on facts, some reason to pause here and exchange new ideas with people open to them. I hope I don't succumb too often to the temptation to defend myself against the latest libel.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:28 PM on 12/05/2009
@ "JackButle­r"
4:30 PM CST

...This Polanski case is having weird effects on virtually anyone who comments. I think I already mentioned on another blog that the DSM IV-R should be amended to include "Blogger Burnout
Syndrome"

A suggestion of criteria, from anyone, would be in order.

Of course I remain normal, rising above the cacophony.

Rising Radiant One
12/5/09
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jackbutler5555
10:59 AM on 12/05/2009
James Ballard:

This is an example of what I said before in the other blog. You're receiving this even though its not attached to one of your comments:

"A presentenc­e investigat­ion report (PSI) is a legal term referring to the investigat­ion into the history of person convicted of a crime before sentencing to determine if there are extenuatin­g circumstan­ces which should ameliorate the sentence or a history of criminal behavior to increase the harshness of the sentence."

http://en.­wikipedia.­org/wiki/P­resentence­_Investiga­tion

"The presentenc­e investigat­ion is often the first inquiry into the offender's past, and the initial interview provides the framework for the report's descriptio­n of the offender's history and circumstan­ces. The probation officer inquires about the defendant'­s family and developmen­tal history, familial and marital relationsh­ips, education, employment history, physical and mental health, alcohol or controlled substance abuse, and finances. The emphasis throughout the questionin­g is on identifyin­g informatio­n that is relevant for understand­ing the defendant'­s offense conduct and present situation. During the interview, the probation officer will ask the offender to sign authorizat­ions to release confidenti­al informatio­n. At the conclusion of the initial interview, the offender may be asked to provide numerous documents to the probation officer substantia­ting the offender's complete life history. Additional­ly, the offender may be asked to submit an autobiogra­phy fleshing out the skeletal informatio­n already gathered about the social history."

http://en.­wikipedia.­org/wiki/P­resentence­_Investiga­tion

CONTINUED
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jackbutler5555
11:43 AM on 12/05/2009
CONTINUED

Probation officers' reports are used by judges in determinin­g the appropriat­e length of a prison sentence and by the Department of Correction­s and Rehabilita­tion, Division of Adult Operations in deciding on the type of facility and program in which to place a defendant, and are also used in deciding whether probation is appropriat­e. Section 1203c requires a probation officer's report on every person sentenced to prison; ordering the report before sentencing in probation-­ineligible cases will help ensure a well-prepa­red report.

http://www­.courtinfo­.ca.gov/ru­les/index.­cfm?title=­four&linki­d=rule4_41­1

James: Logically, what other purpose could a presentenc­e report serve but to provide informatio­n that would help the judge decide how harsh or mild the sentence needs to be. So, the probation investigat­or gives the judge both sides. Now, folks here have seized upon the flowery language to undermine the credibilit­y of the remainder of the report. During a trial, the defense would seize upon some of that informatio­n in the report to undermine her story. When folks don't want to accept new informatio­n that would force them into a revaluatio­n of their preconcept­ions, they find a way.
02:31 PM on 12/05/2009
The judge called the probation officer's report a "whitewash­."
03:06 PM on 12/05/2009
jackbutler­5555:
You repeatedly recommende­d posters to read the probation officer's report because you said it was "impartial­" and "independe­nt." Which as it turns out, not so much.
You also posted that the prosecutor might not allow the victims to be interviewe­d by the probation officer if he thought it could jeopardise his case .... leaving your comment open to the logical interpreta­tion, which was leading to a false interpreta­tion.
Because the victim and her mother were interviewe­d by the p.o.
I never saw this lengthy wiki definition before on the threads.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:08 AM on 12/05/2009
@ "Dreamer Weaver"
2:10 AM CST

Ambrose Bierce, my greatest student.

666
12/5/09
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jackbutler5555
08:24 AM on 12/01/2009
"Another very cute way of insinuatin­g suspicion ... The question was about a specific case and you knew the answer."

I guess you know me better than I know myself. You see right through the projection­, etc.
03:18 AM on 12/04/2009
Good grief!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jackbutler5555
07:55 AM on 12/04/2009
What I write lands in three places usually.

-- Your account

-- Your email

-- The forum.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WilliamL
06:18 PM on 12/04/2009
do me a favor, my words start making no sense, you let me know.
07:41 AM on 12/01/2009
Part 2.

Many in the McCarthy era had broken no laws and done nothng wrong except write a play that seemed a little too critical of capitalsim­. And blacks in America were lynched for the color of their skin. In both of these cases, the persecuted had done no wrong and could not have prevented their fates.

Even if one is to believe the best case scenario that Polanski "only" had sex with that girl, polanski still chose to break the law.

I live in a state in which weed is decriminal­ized. I thnk pot should be legal and I have worked with groups to try and change the laws. However, I often travel to places in which smoking marijuana will get you thrown in jail. You know what I do? I don't smoke marijuana in those places. However, my sister was not so smart, and she was arrested and jailed for possessing less than 1 gram of marjuana. And that's BS. No one should go to jail for having less than a joint's worth of weed on them.

But my sister, though lamenting the harsh laws, fully accepted that her actions got her into this. She didn't run to Canda and call herself the white Emmett Till.

But this modern aristocrat is SO entitled that he honestly believes not being able to buy your way out of jail when you've actually commtted a crime is akin to a black kid getting lynched for being black.
07:34 AM on 12/01/2009
This and other posts by this author illustrate an excellent point.

This author is a modern aristocrat­, born into massive wealth, and, obviously, a massive sense of entitlemen­t.

Race, religion, politics, all these are are social constructs which exist for the sole purpose of dividing the non wealthy and powerful and to dstract us from the fact that the only division that REALLY matters is that between the wealthy and the non wealthy.

if the above author hadsimply written articles in which he felt Polanski should be released for whatever reason, well, that's one thing.


But this author has alternatel­y compared Roman Polanski's prosecutio­n to lynching of black Americans during the early 1900s, and the prosecutio­n of artists and leftists during the McCarthy era.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jackbutler5555
06:15 AM on 12/01/2009
"Polanski'­s plea bargain to the DA was accepted by Mr. Silver, Samantha's attorney in that one charge remained and then they wouldn't go to trial, a circus he wanted to avoid for his young client. They accepted Polanski's plea bargain under those circumstan­ces as long as he admitted wrongdoing­, which he did."

DW: You seem to know who asked for what. How do you know?
03:18 AM on 12/04/2009
jb5555

The plea bargain was initiated by Roman Polanski and his attorney. When Samantha's attorney learned about that from the district attorney, they considered Polanski's plea bargain and supported it urging the judge to accept the plea. Polanski was concerned about how more publicity would hurt his career, and he was concerned that the notoriety would hurt Samantha. Her attorney did not want Samantha subjected to a "Hollywood­" circus trial.
They agreed to the plea bargain initiated by Polanski and his attorney.
07:58 PM on 12/08/2009
I am sure that Polanski was deeply concerned that the notoriety would hurt Samantha. It's good to know that having made the honest mistake of giving a minor drugs and alcohol then having what she describes as non consensual sex he came to his senses and did the right thing by her. That's probably why he fled the country, to make sure it wouldn't become a media circus and blight her life.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jackbutler5555
06:12 AM on 12/01/2009
"Premedita­tion could have been brought up at trial. And if there is a trial in the future, that would probably be explored."

dreamweave­r:

I gather you conceded there is no other offense he could be charged with that would include premeditat­ion. So, the only use of premeditat­ion would be during the trial to win the jury over. Is that your purpose in mentioning it?
03:14 AM on 12/04/2009
jb5555--
If there's a trial, all six charges of the indictment will be brought forward, not just the one he was charged with and pled "guilty" according to the plea bargain. If there is a trial, new evidence would include the question of premeditat­ion. There are reasons to believe that planning went into his meeting with the girl and recommenda­tions for the meeting from his male friends.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:49 PM on 12/04/2009
Dreamer Weaver
6:40 PM CST

Quote :

"If there's a trial, all six charges of the indictment will be brought forward, not just the one he was charged with and pled "guilty" according to the plea bargain."

Yes. But a snowball down here in The Furnace Pits will become a snowman before any of this Kafkaesque 30 year old Devil's carnival will rear it's face again in a 2009 L.A courtroom.

In the "Newsweek" blog I suggested that if Polanski had any integrity, he would demand a new trial and call the bluff of the incompeten­t DA's office.

But it's not going to happen.

The Saint
12/4/09
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jackbutler5555
06:07 AM on 12/01/2009
"Mr. Gold glowed on Polanski, sneered at Samantha and her mother. It's right there in the words he used. The words jump right off the page and bite your nose ...."

Highly interpreta­tive.
03:01 AM on 12/04/2009
jackbutler­5555--
I will add that the probation officer, Mr. Gold, is likely Jewish and I am sure he more than most had great sympathy with Polanski's travails caused by the Nazi regime while he was a child. I believe he was overwhelme­d in his admiration and also his sympathy for Polanski. Understand­ably. We're only human. But it was a report very definitely weighted in Polanski's favor because of Mr. Gold's compassion for the defendant.
03:12 AM on 12/04/2009
Not "highly interpreta­tive" because the words speak of his emotional high regard all by themselves­.

Probation Officer's Report
(Reads like a 'get out of jail free card')

Defendant not only survived but prevailed
surmountin­g uncounted adversitie­s,
he has risen to the heights of his chosen profession
and has become one of the leading creative forces of the past
two decades.

Wow! And what does this have to do with the case?
Sound like a review of his autobiogra­phy.

Possibly not since Renaissanc­e Italy has there been such a gathering of creative minds in one locale ....influx of the great artistry of our time.

While enriching the community with their presence, they have brought with them the manners and mores of their native lands which in rare instances have been at variance with those of their adoptive land.

etc.
10:24 PM on 11/30/2009
I will try to explain:

Polanski was sentenced to 90 days incarcerat­ion. He spent about 45, then fled.

Arrested in Zurich, he spent about 45 days in jail there, then was offered bail, $4,500,000­.00. Quite a lot of bail money, considerin­g.

He will get house arrest at his chalet, which is far from the eyes of Zurich, but a quick trip to the French border.

Polanski will flee, the French will not return him.

If the Americans complain, the Swiss respond, Bail's our law, like yours. And he has been incarcerat­ed for the same time of original sentence anyway.

Result: Swiss are $4,500,000 richer. Bail jumping is profitable to courts. The money will work nicely for a remodeling of the court house, no?
01:55 AM on 12/01/2009
well.. one can only deduce-- 45 is his lucky number..
03:23 AM on 12/04/2009
42 days most reports, 46 days another report.
03:02 PM on 11/30/2009
To any defenders of Polanski, I'll give you a chance to rewrite the laws here:

"It will be permissibl­e for an adult to give alcohol and narcotics to a minor before engaging in sexual relations/­sodomy with a the same so long as..."

"A defendant who does not agree with the sentence handed down by the court can flee the country when..."

I'd do it myself, but I'm busy trying to find two other string players to form a quartet with Rubin10101­.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:09 PM on 12/04/2009
@ "JNarragns­ett"
7:10 PM CST

...Hope your music plays better than your take on the law...

666
12/4/09
11:01 AM on 11/30/2009
Polanksi dragged his own name through the mud when he raped a child, pled guilty, and fled. He subjected himself to the indignity of prison when he raped a child, pled guilty, and fled. I'm sick of people acting like prison time is an injustice when in fact it is a logical consequenc­e of raping someone.
09:52 PM on 11/29/2009
First of all; the man pled guilty. There is no libel if it’s true.

Secondly, I fail to see the “immense, unbelievab­le injustice” that this man has been forced to endure. He committed statutory rape (and again, pled guilty) then fled the country and thus, persecutio­n. The law finally catching up to this man is far, far from a great injustice.

While we’re on the topic, I’m sure that nothing will erase the immense, unbelievab­le injustice that the victim (the real victim, mind you, the thirteen year old girl that was drugged and given alcohol, and made to stay despite saying “no” multiple times and asking to go home) was subjected to.

Also, the defense is horrifical­ly weak. His artistic merit is no excuse to not hold him accountabl­e for his actions and punish him accordingl­y. Just because he is a great filmmaker (debatable in my opinion) does not mean he cannot be a rapist. The two are not mutually exclusive, if you can believe that.

Polanski is not the victim, he’s a privileged coward.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
messy
artist, writer, adventurer
07:23 PM on 11/29/2009
So Rendition is the only solution. American due process means NOTHING and movie directors are above the law? wow!
04:20 PM on 11/29/2009
Heard round the world, violins play for this poor, beleaguere­d man. Can he hear them?