Filmmaker Roman Polanski has been arrested

[TotallyOz]

(CNN) -- Filmmaker Roman Polanski has been arrested on an arrest warrant stemming from a decades-old sex charge, Swiss police said Sunday.

The Academy Award-winning director pleaded guilty in 1977 to a single count of having unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, acknowledging he had sex with a 13-year-old girl, but fled the United States before he could be sentenced. U.S. authorities issued a warrant for his arrest in 1978.

He was taken into custody trying to enter Switzerland on Saturday, Zurich police said.

Polanski has lived in France for decades to avoid being arrested if he enters the U.S. He declined to collect his Academy Award for Best Director in person when he won it for "The Pianist" in 2003.

He was en route to the Zurich Film Festival, which is holding a tribute to him, when he was arrested by Swiss authorities, the festival said.

Polanski was nominated for best director Oscars for "Tess" and "Chinatown," and for best writing for "Rosemary's Baby," which he also directed.

"Roman Polanski, who is one of the greatest film directors of all time, would have been honored for his life's work in Zurich today," the film festival said in a statement.

"However yesterday, on Saturday, he was taken into custody while attempting to enter Switzerland due to a request by U.S. authorities in connection with an arrest warrant from 1978."

Polanski was accused of plying a 13-year-old girl with champagne and a sliver of a quaalude tablet and performing various sex acts, including intercourse, with her during a photo shoot at actor Jack Nicholson's house.

Nicholson was not at home, but his girlfriend at the time, actress Anjelica Huston, was.

According to a probation report contained in the filing, Huston described the victim as "sullen."

"She appeared to be one of those kind of little chicks between -- could be any age up to 25. She did not look like a 13-year-old scared little thing," Huston said.

She added that Polanski did not strike her as the type of man who would force himself on a young girl.

"I don't think he's a bad man," she said in the report. "I think he's an unhappy man."

Polanski pleaded guilty to a single count of having unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.

There have been repeated attempts to settle the case over the years, but the sticking point has always been Polanski's refusal to return to attend hearings.

Prosecutors have consistently argued that it would be a miscarriage of justice to allow a man to go free who "drugged and raped a 13-year-old child."

Polanski's lawyers tried earlier this year to have the charges thrown out, but a Los Angeles judge rejected the request.

In doing so, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza left the door open to reconsider his ruling if Polanski shows up in court.

Espinoza also appeared to acknowledge problems with the way the 76-year-old director's case was handled years ago.

According to court documents, Polanski, his lawyer and the prosecutor thought they'd worked out a deal that would spare Polanski from prison and let the young victim avoid a public trial.

But the original judge in the case, who is now dead, first sent the director to maximum-security prison for 42 days while he underwent psychological testing. Then, on the eve of his sentencing, the judge told attorneys he was inclined to send Polanski back to prison for another 48 days.

Polanski fled the United States for France, where he was born.

In the February hearing, Espinoza mentioned a documentary film that depicts backroom deals between prosecutors and a media-obsessed judge who was worried his public image would suffer if he didn't send Polanski to prison.

"It's hard to contest some of the behavior in the documentary was misconduct," said Espinoza.

But he declined to dismiss the case entirely.

Legal experts said such a ruling would have been extremely rare.

Polanski's victim is among those calling for the case to be tossed out.

Samantha Geimer filed court papers in January saying, "I am no longer a 13-year-old child. I have dealt with the difficulties of being a victim, have surmounted and surpassed them with one exception.

"Every time this case is brought to the attention of the Court, great focus is made of me, my family, my mother and others. That attention is not pleasant to experience and is not worth maintaining over some irrelevant legal nicety, the continuation of the case."

Geimer, now 45, married and a mother of three, sued Polanski and received an undisclosed settlement. She long ago came forward and made her identity public -- mainly, she said, because she was disturbed by how the criminal case had been handled.

Following Espinoza's ruling earlier this year, Geimer's lawyer, Larry Silver, said he was disappointed and that Espinoza "did not get to the merits and consider the clear proof of both judicial and prosecutorial corruption."

He argued in court that had "Mr. Polanski been treated fairly" his client would not still be suffering because of publicity almost 32 years after the crime.

Polanski was arrested two days after one of his wife's killers died.

The director's pregnant wife, actress Sharon Tate, and four others were butchered by members of the "Manson family" in August 1969.

By her own admission, Susan Atkins held the eight-months-pregnant Tate down as she pleaded for mercy, stabbing the 26-year-old actress 16 times.

Polanski was filming in Europe at the time.

Atkins, 61, died Thursday. She had been suffering from terminal brain cancer.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Movies/09/27/zurich.roman.polanski.arrested/index.html

[MsGuy]

Granted there was misbehavior on the judge, I can't see 90 days in jail (42+48) for the rape of a minor as particularly punitive.

[BigK]

Granted there was misbehavior on the judge, I can't see 90 days in jail (42+48) for the rape of a minor as particularly punitive.

I agree...a pretty light sentence. I wonder why he didn't just serve the extra 48 days 30 years ago??

[BiBottomBoy]

He didn't do the extra time 30 years ago because the judge was going to break the deal on the plea bargain and sentence him to up to 50 years in prison.

No matter what you think of his actions, it's ridiculous to get a guy to plead guilty by promising him a lesser sentence and then letting the judge change that and instead give him a huge sentence.

If criminals stop trusting the plea bargaining system then suddenly there will be no more plea bargains and every single arrest will go to trial which will cost the court system billions of dollars.

[MsGuy]

BBB, the articles I read indicated that the judge had told Polanski's lawyer that he intended to add 48 days to the 42 days Polanski had served while undergoing psychologocal testing. Breaking the deal, yes; end of the world, no. Most (back then almost all) judges will allow a defendant to withdraw a guilty plea if he intends to exceed the sentence recomendation. Polanski's choices were serve 48 days, take his chances with a jury, or skip to France. He chose France.

[BiBottomBoy]

Nope.

Even the victim admits it would have been 50 years.

"The Los Angeles Times"

Sunday, February 23, 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

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.

*Editor's note: The Times' usual practice is not to name victims of sexual crimes. Samantha Geimer's name is used here with her consent.

Copyright 2003 Los Angeles Times

[MsGuy]

I agree...a pretty light sentence. I wonder why he didn't just serve the extra 48 days 30 years ago??

Somewhere along the line, I picked up the idea that Polanski had a horror of prisons dating back to a childhood spent hiding from the Nazi SS in wartime Poland. His mother was captured and died in the camps. Also Sharon Tate, his pregnant wife, had recently been murdered by Charlie Manson. Maybe he was too stressed out to make a good decision.

Sharon Tate's death and the childhood years hiding for his life are facts. The horror of prison part may be the product of some publicist's imagination; in Hollywood, who knows?

[MsGuy]

Nope.

Even the victim admits it would have been 50 years.

No, Ms. Geimer says that Polanski feared that he might serve 50 years. That's how she remembered it 35 years later and it may well have been true. Polanski had already been surprised by the original 42 days in jail after he had been told he would walk. Maybe he didn't trust the judge to carry through with the 48 day additional time. Again, who knows why he jumped bail? Only Polanski and maybe not him.

[KYTOP]

What surprises me is that it took this long for a country to finally arrest him for possible extradition back to the US.

[MsGuy]

Polanski is a French citizen and is (was?) usually to be found there. France has a limited extradition treaty with the U.S. and flat refused to extradite him to the U.S. Over the years the DA's office has tried a number of times to catch him on trips outside France but were unsuccessful. According to media reports, this time the DA got enough advance notice of his intent to attend a film event in Switzerland to push the paperwork through and have the police waiting for him at the border.

[BiBottomBoy]

Yeah the deal is there are Shengen countries that have one extradition agreement with the US and non-Shengen countries which have a different on.

In Western Europe the big non Shengen countries are the UK and Switzerland.

He fucked up by going to a non-Shengen.

[MsGuy]

I had to google Shengen to figure out your post. Shows how provincial I am, I guess.

[BiBottomBoy]

Sorry!

As an american who lives in Europe I have to be aware of this all the time and I forget sometimes that people outside of here don't have to worry about it.

Though that does say something about Polanski - I've never been charged or convicted of a crime, but for visa reasons I still keep track of which countries are Shengen and which are not.

[KYTOP]

Polanski is a French citizen and is (was?) usually to be found there. France has a limited extradition treaty with the U.S. and flat refused to extradite him to the U.S. Over the years the DA's office has tried a number of times to catch him on trips outside France but were unsuccessful. According to media reports, this time the DA got enough advance notice of his intent to attend a film event in Switzerland to push the paperwork through and have the police waiting for him at the border.

CNN reported tonight that he had been to Switzerland numerous times in the past and even had a house there. They asked a question similar to my statement "Why Now?".

[MsGuy]

Some spokesman for the DA's office was pressed on this point by LA media. The reply was "We're not a bunch of gumshoes." Translation: Shut up and go away. Next year being an election year probably had nothing to do with it.

[MsGuy]

More speculation on "why now?"

Why now?

[BiBottomBoy]

I also wonder why the Swiss decided to coooperate now.

[Guest Conway]

For whatever reason the Swiss decided to cooperate, Polanski needs to be prepared to serve the original sentence plus whatever additional sentence time he has earned for fleeing our country and thumbing his nose at it from France for over 30 years.

Personally, I hope they throw the book at him.

[BiBottomBoy]

Yeah, because it's a great idea to blow all the good will Obama has generated in Europe when we need the EU to help us deal with Iran.

[caeron]

I don't really care if the EU is upset that a guy who drugged and fucked a 13 year old is finally going to face justice.

[BiBottomBoy]

I think if you balance a 76 year old man who probably can't functionally rape anyone anymore against the good will of several countries whose help we need with Iran, Israel and a variety of other global issues, you need to come down on the side of realpolitic.

[caeron]

No, I don't.

France won't stop cooperating with us on Iran over this incident.

I don't care how old he is. He doesn't become innocent because time has passed. If this was a 30 year old murder, would you say the same? He did the crime. The victim said it was not consensual. Are you really suggesting he not be punished because he's successfully evaded the law for 30 years? Or that because he's famous and popular that he be let off?

[BiBottomBoy]

I think that so much time has passed justice can not be served. It has nothing to do with him being famous.

[KYTOP]

It seems the French are changing their mind on Polanski.

From the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8283707.stm

[BiBottomBoy]

Yeah. It's a weird thing. The french newspapers had bunches of articles about this yesterday. The "cultural elite" which is well represented in the government wanted him released and made efforts in that direction but the working class French people flipped the fuck out at this and started to write letters to parliment, their newspapers, etc...

Sarkozy got worried this could trigger a new election, so he backed down.