Roman Polanski Finally Arrested.

[Big Orange]

I like him as a film maker but despise him as a person, although interestingly even his jailbait victim wants the case dimissed:

Director Polanski Arrested On 1978 Warrant
27 September 2009, 11:18

Roman Polanski was facing extradition to the US after he was taken into Swiss custody on a 1978 arrest warrant.

In a statement the Zurich Film Festival said the Oscar-winning director was held on his arrival in Switzerland.

A spokesman for the city's police confirmed Polanski had been detained, but gave no further details.

The Swiss Justice Ministry was reported as saying he would be extradited to the US.

Polanski was making a film of the Robert Harris book The Ghost, who told Sky News he was "utterly stunned" by the arrest.

"The warrant is 31 years old and Roman Polanski has a house in Switzerland, I have worked with him there two or three times in the last year or so," he said.

"He has travelled freely throughout Europe and in Switzerland - filming has been based in Germany.

"He has just come back from a holiday in Greece back.

"I'm amazed this should happen now, and I cannot begin to fathom what reason lies behind it."

Polanski fled America more than 30 years ago after pleading guilty to having sex with a 13-year-old girl.

The 76-year-old has been unable to travel to the US since the warrant was issued.

Polanski, who is a French citizen, has been trying to have the case thrown out on grounds of misconduct.

The director claims the now-deceased judge who arranged a plea bargain later went back on it.

In May, a Californian judge dismissed Polanski's bid because he failed to appear in court.

Victim Samantha Geimer, now 45-years-old, has also called for the case to be dismissed and the saga put to an end.

She has already sued Polanski, reaching an undisclosed settlement.

The director had been due to receive a lifetime achievement award at the Zurich Film Festival, organisers said.

Polanski's early films include Rosemary's Baby and Chinatown.

More recently, he was awarded the 2002 best director Oscar for The Pianist and released a remake of the Charles Dickens' classic Oliver Twist in 2005.

In 1969 Polanski's pregnant wife, actress Sharon Tate, was brutally murdered along with four other people by followers of Charles Manson.

Cult member Susan Atkins, convicted in 1971 for her part in the killings, died in prison last week.

Orange (video included)

[Broomstick]

His jailbait victim has probably moved on with her life and doesn't want to interrupt it for a trial.

[Cosmic Average]

His jailbait victim has probably moved on with her life and doesn't want to interrupt it for a trial.

Jailbait? He drugged and raped a thirteen-year-old girl. Anyway, there won't be a trial since he's already been convicted:

Mr. Polanski, 76, was convicted that year in a California court of unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl whom he had lured to the home of Jack Nicholson and drugged. Faced with a prison term, he fled the United States just before his sentencing.

Link

[[R_H]]

Link

French Culture Minister Frédéric Mitterrand said he was "stupefied" to learn of the arrest of the French-Polish film-maker.

He said he greatly regretted that "a new ordeal should be inflicted on someone who has already known so many during his life" and added that President Nicolas Sarkozy was closely following the case and shared the hope that the situation would be resolved quickly.

Why the hell do the French have their panties in a knot because this shitstain finally got arrested?

[Sarevok]

The world can now finally sleep safely knowing Roman Polanski can no longer continue to threaten everyone. Who knows what untold horrors this evil man would do if he was allowed to walk free.

Seriously what purpose does jailing him serve again ? Who exactly are we protecting by putting him in jail ?

[Steel]

I think there was some sort of conflict at the time of the original trial where the judge tore up the plea bargain he agreed to in order to plead guilty and was going to sentence him differently than was agreed so he fled.

I'm confused why they didn't arrest him before now. Can't say I have any sympathy for him as anyone who did what he did certainly should not go though the rest of their life without any consequences and should include at the least some treatment.

[Sarevok]

Same here as Steel. No one in their right mind would sympathise with that crime. Yet at same time it was 30 years ago. Why was he not prosecuted all these years ? Punishing him now is just purely vengeance. I believe justice should a purpose,

[Admiral Valdemar]

Same here as Steel. No one in their right mind would sympathise with that crime. Yet at same time it was 30 years ago. Why was he not prosecuted all these years ? Punishing him now is just purely vengeance. I believe justice should a purpose,

Because he escaped his sentencing, perhaps? He wasn't going to hang around, and that made the US want to get at him more pressing, I suppose. I honestly can't see the point to a prison term now, and I doubt the girl involved really wants this dragging up after so long.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Because he escaped his sentencing, perhaps? He wasn't going to hang around, and that made the US want to get at him more pressing, I suppose. I honestly can't see the point to a prison term now, and I doubt the girl involved really wants this dragging up after so long.

The main argument for sending him to prison at this point is to show that justice operates in a uniform fashion and doesn't only punish those without the means to flee to France. I mean, the judge didn't sentence him to "X years in prison, unless you've got the money to leave the country and live in comfort abroad for 30 years, at which point we'll all just drop it."

[Broomstick]

His jailbait victim has probably moved on with her life and doesn't want to interrupt it for a trial.

Jailbait?

Yes, synonym for "underaged".

He drugged and raped a thirteen-year-old girl.

Who is now middle-aged, has a family of her own, and may well not want to revisit a terrible period in her life. Not everyone feels a driving need to go over their pasts in public (I'm looking at you, Mckenzie Phillips) which no doubt will happen to some degree whether this woman wants it or not.

On the other hand, more power to her if she wants to pursue anything in regards to this. Her choice.

The world can now finally sleep safely knowing Roman Polanski can no longer continue to threaten everyone. Who knows what untold horrors this evil man would do if he was allowed to walk free.

Well, I’d really hate to see him drug and rape another 13 year old. That’s a really shitty thing to do. In fact, it’s really shitty to drug and rape a woman of any age. I’m sorry, what part of “conviction for rape” are you having trouble with?

Seriously what purpose does jailing him serve again ? Who exactly are we protecting by putting him in jail ?

Women he might rape in the future.

He was convicted of a felony sex crime. Don’t you think that’s serious?

Of course, as a woman, I tend to be biased against rapists.

You don’t receive a get out of jail free card for being on the lam/run/hiding out in France for 30 years.

I'm confused why they didn't arrest him before now.

Because he fucking fled to France you idiots, and the French weren’t willing to extradite him. Probably because he’s a French citizen, countries are usually reluctant to hand their citizens over to justice somewhere else. Is it that fucking hard for you to understand?

Because he escaped his sentencing, perhaps? He wasn't going to hang around, and that made the US want to get at him more pressing, I suppose. I honestly can't see the point to a prison term now, and I doubt the girl involved really wants this dragging up after so long.

No, the woman (she hasn’t been a “girl” in decades) has stated that she’d rather the whole matter be dropped. Fine. However, as I said, the US justice system does not give you a pass merely because you evaded prison for 30 years. In fact, it is likely he might face additional penalties for evading the US system for so long. The point of prison term now is that the US justice system doesn’t forget, even after 30 years, and it’s not very forgiving.

Apparently he’s traveled to Switzerland before and not been arrested. Well, I don’t know why, perhaps the authorities involved in this case weren’t aware of such travels and thus did not push to have the warrant served.

From the New York Times (link above):

In Los Angeles, a representative for prosecutors described the arrest as all but inevitable in a game of cat and mouse they had never stopped playing. “Any time word is received that Mr. Polanski is planning to be in a country that has an extradition treaty with the U.S., we go through diplomatic channels with the arrest warrant,” said Sandi Gibbons, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.

Ms. Gibbons said it was simply a matter of having enough advance notice that Mr. Polanski would visit a country in which he was vulnerable.

The director has been careful to avoid certain countries – he testified by video link in a 2005 libel trial in London rather than risk entering Great Britain – but has traveled freely in Europe for decades, partly to direct new films.

Looks to me like over the years the delays in official legal channels allowed him to travel pretty freely, but this time there was enough notice to catch him.

[Master of Ossus]

Same here as Steel. No one in their right mind would sympathise with that crime. Yet at same time it was 30 years ago. Why was he not prosecuted all these years ? Punishing him now is just purely vengeance. I believe justice should a purpose,

He was prosecuted, but fled the US before he could be sentenced. The Frenchies have been sheltering him for all this time. And, yeah, I think sending him to jail will serve a purpose: it tells pedophiles that while France will protect them, other countries won't. It also sends the message that fleeing justice doesn't allow criminals to escape consequences for their actions.

[Broomstick]

While technically he is a "pedophile", if the girl was physically mature at the time he isn't really a pedophile, just a skanky old man. Pedophiles are attracted to immature humans, not adolescents with developed secondary sexual characteristics. In fact, if I recall correctly, in some states 13 is old enough to marry with parental approval, believe it or not. Key word here being "consent". Neither the girl nor her parents in this case consented to anything, that is why it is a crime.

The issue here is really more bog standard rape than pedophilia.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

He'd apparently visited Switzerland repeatedly, before, without being arrested. I wonder if his arrest now was the result of some kind of deal over the whole recent Swiss banking taxation imbroglio between the US and Switzerland? Did the Swiss change their extradition laws in general over that? That could have been the cause for his arrest. Expect him to manage to remain in Switzerland fighting the charges in their courts for some time, though.

[Master of Ossus]

While technically he is a "pedophile", if the girl was physically mature at the time he isn't really a pedophile, just a skanky old man. Pedophiles are attracted to immature humans, not adolescents with developed secondary sexual characteristics. In fact, if I recall correctly, in some states 13 is old enough to marry with parental approval, believe it or not.

According to this, 18 is the minimum age to marry without parental consent, and in two states you must be older. Moreover, while the DSMIV does include the term "prebuscent child or children" in its diagnostic criteria, the objective criteria is "generally age 13 years or younger." Polanski obviously meets the other criteria; I stand by my classification of him from a legal, psychological, and moral perspective.

Key word here being "consent". Neither the girl nor her parents in this case consented to anything, that is why it is a crime.

Nonsense. Statutory rape is a crime even if there is what would nominally be considered consent from a more mature individual, and most states would classify him as a child molester (a far more serious offense) because his victim was 14 or under.

The issue here is really more bog standard rape than pedophilia.

I don't know where he raped this unfortunate girl, but by any standard Polanski is far worse than a "bog standard" rapist.

[Broomstick]

While technically he is a "pedophile", if the girl was physically mature at the time he isn't really a pedophile, just a skanky old man. Pedophiles are attracted to immature humans, not adolescents with developed secondary sexual characteristics. In fact, if I recall correctly, in some states 13 is old enough to marry with parental approval, believe it or not.

According to this, 18 is the minimum age to marry without parental consent, and in two states you must be older.

Yeah, what I said - and I even said what I said with the caveat that I might not recall correctly. Your own source states that in Alabama 14 years olds can still legally marry with parental consent. In 1958 Jerry Lee Lewis married his first cousin when she was 13 (his daughter from that marriage is his current manager). Keep in mind that 30 years ago the laws in several areas were different and allowed younger marriage - which your own source alludes to: "When I was a teen, you could be married at age sixteen (around 1976), ... some things do change." in the very first paragraph.

Moreover, while the DSMIV does include the term "prebuscent child or children" in its diagnostic criteria, the objective criteria is "generally age 13 years or younger." Polanski obviously meets the other criteria; I stand by my classification of him from a legal, psychological, and moral perspective.

Right, because the whole situation changes between being 13 years 364 days old and being 14 even.

I'm sorry you're too stupid to understand a modifier such as "generally" or understand that the age of physical maturity varies considerably from woman to woman. There are 13 years olds who look 8 and 13 year old who look 18. A man attracted to the former is arguably a pedophile, a man attracted to the latter is not, despite the age of the object of his gaze.

If the girl had been 7 I would have no dispute with the "pedophile" label, but that's not the case. On the left is a picture of her at approximately age 13:


Yes, she's young, but note the bustline and hips. This is not a kid. Put her in the right clothes and add make up she's going to look like a woman, and older than she does in this picture. Human males are biologically "programmed" to find young women attractive. Most men in this day and age can resist drugging and raping newly mature females, but apparently Mr. Polanski is not one of them. Going by this photo, though, he didn't focus his attentions on a kid, he went after a female with physically mature characteristics.

More accurately, this was a case of ephebophilia, the sexual preference for a mid-to-late adolescent. Except there is nothing to indicate he prefers women in that age group. He's been married three times, and normally goes after women are adult in age as well as body. I think this truly was a one-time giving in to temptation and not a pattern of behavior. Nonetheless, he did commit a felony.

Key word here being "consent". Neither the girl nor her parents in this case consented to anything, that is why it is a crime.

Nonsense. Statutory rape is a crime even if there is what would nominally be considered consent from a more mature individual, and most states would classify him as a child molester (a far more serious offense) because his victim was 14 or under.

Some states allow a girl as young as 14 to marry with parental consent - a clear instance where sexual activity with a minor is legal. My point was that there was no way to say any form of consent could have been given. As this was outside marriage and she was not of an age to consent to extra-marital sex this was rape. The custom of labeling men who fuck physically mature but chronologically underage women as "child molester" is a recent phenomena.

The issue here is really more bog standard rape than pedophilia.

I don't know where he raped this unfortunate girl, but by any standard Polanski is far worse than a "bog standard" rapist.

No, actually what happened to her is a fairly common type of rape, that is, drugging a woman and then fucking her despite her saying "no". Yes, it's outrageous, but it's also typical.

What happened was that Polanski asked Gailey to pose for a photo shoot for the French edition of Vogue. Her mother consented to this, and he never laid a hand on her during that shoot. So, unless you think that Vogue is in the habit of using pre-pubescent models you might want to consider that she looked fully adult and older than 13. Polanski called her back for a second shoot. During that shoot he fed her champagne, some of which apparently had Quaaludes in it. When she wound up on a bed she says she protested, said no and that she didn't want to have sex several times, yet he went ahead. Yes, that's a fairly typical sort of rape scenario - invite woman over for something else, get her drunk/drugged, then fuck her despite her saying no.

It was 1977, I'm old enough to remember this scandal as it happened. People who shocked he raped a minor, but no one was screeching "pedophile!" or "child molester"

And, by the way - the rape occurred at Jack Nicholson's house in Los Angeles, California.

[Pick]

She looks like a pretty damn young girl in that photo to me.

[Broomstick]

Yes, it's obviously a picture of a school girl. That's why I said look at her bust and hips - she's got adult curves under those clothes. Young enough that any man should refrain from pursuing her, but old/mature enough to be attractive to a man without making him a pervert.

[Stark]

What the fuck is this 'she has big tits so it's okay to use your status to procure her, drug her and rape her' business? Who gives a shit? You fuck 13 girls you drugged and you go to prison as a child molester. Sorry, your honour, she had great tits... what could I do?

[Broomstick]

Oh, no dispute that he should be in jail - my point is that a pedophile probably wouldn't be interested in her because of those developed secondary sexual characteristics. I never said what he did was OK. Yes, Polanski drugged and raped a woman. The fact she was a minor is an aggravating circumstance. At the time, that alone would not label him a child molester. NOW it would, but this went through the legal system 30 years ago when many of today's laws hadn't been written yet, and today's laws based everything on chronological age. Pedophiles don't check kids' ID's for birthdates prior to molesting them, they go after children who look like children, that is, have not started to mature sexually on a physical level. Gailey was past that even at the age of 13. Physically, if not mentally, she's more woman than girl. He's a rapist, but not a pedophile. I'm objecting to the mis-use of the term "pedophile", that's all. Otherwise, yes, he committed a heinous crime and fled rather than serve his time. That makes him a skanky piece of shit.

[Elfdart]

I clicked the story over at IMDB and clicked Polanski's name out of curiosity. There were several threads that not only defended him, but slimed the victim as well. It never occurred to that so many people would be special pleaders for a child molester, even in a troll haven like IMDB.

As far as Polanski is concerned, as Sammy Davis Jr used to sing in every episode of Baretta: Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

[Xisiqomelir]

I think the real story here is: what the hell is going on with Switzerland? UBS throwing all their US customers under the bus was just bizarre, especially since so many other countries in the world would be more than happy to take tax haven money; and now Polanski gets nailed out of nowhere, despite the '78 warrant just being a joke this whole time. Why the hell do they suddenly owe America?

[Havok]

The article also says that he has a house there. I doubt he just bought it, which means that he has been coming and going for a while. Not to mention the traveling all over Europe he has done. I'm curious myself as to what suddenly spurred this issue on to the point of arrest and extradition. I wonder if it has anything to do with the lifetime achievement award he was being given and the high visibility of the event.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm glad the bastard has been caught. What he did would have been utterly dispicable if it was done to an adult, but it is doubly so considering it was done to a child. Polanski is a pervert and a criminal and it is only a pity he has evaded justice so long.

Moreover, I do not buy the argument that their is no point to putting him in jail now. Pedophiles are often repeat offenders, and even if he really hasn't committed such an act since then, the fact remains that we know he was capable of it, and did it. Even an old man can still molest a child. So, public safety is potentially protected by imprisoning him.

I could possibly see giving him house arrest and attaching a tracking device, rather than placing him in an actual prison, on the grounds that pedophiles don't win popularity contests even in prison, so I don't know how long he'd survive in jail.

[Master of Ossus]

Yeah, what I said - and I even said what I said with the caveat that I might not recall correctly. Your own source states that in Alabama 14 years olds can still legally marry with parental consent. In 1958 Jerry Lee Lewis married his first cousin when she was 13 (his daughter from that marriage is his current manager). Keep in mind that 30 years ago the laws in several areas were different and allowed younger marriage - which your own source alludes to: "When I was a teen, you could be married at age sixteen (around 1976), ... some things do change." in the very first paragraph.

Ah, I see the moral equivalence between "It's okay to marry with your parent's consent at 14," and "it's okay to drug a 13-year-old girl and have sex with her without her parents' consent." Yes. Clearly they are morally identical situations. Moreover, according to the information I've recently read, these charges were brought against him in California, which has no such laws. Keep your screaming hysterics to yourself.

Right, because the whole situation changes between being 13 years 364 days old and being 14 even.

Yes, it does. When she's 13 you're a child molester if you do anything sexual with her. When she's 14 you're "merely" a statutory rapist. Clearly Polanski is on the up-and-up.

I'm sorry you're too stupid to understand a modifier such as "generally" or understand that the age of physical maturity varies considerably from woman to woman. There are 13 years olds who look 8 and 13 year old who look 18. A man attracted to the former is arguably a pedophile, a man attracted to the latter is not, despite the age of the object of his gaze.

Why? You have not attempted to cite a legal definition. 14 is the "child molester" age in California, and it's never been legal to marry here at that age. So despite your bullshit, he's a pedophile.

If the girl had been 7 I would have no dispute with the "pedophile" label, but that's not the case. On the left is a picture of her at approximately age 13:


Yes, she's young, but note the bustline and hips. This is not a kid.

I beg to differ. She's 13.

Put her in the right clothes and add make up she's going to look like a woman, and older than she does in this picture. Human males are biologically "programmed" to find young women attractive. Most men in this day and age can resist drugging and raping newly mature females, but apparently Mr. Polanski is not one of them. Going by this photo, though, he didn't focus his attentions on a kid, he went after a female with physically mature characteristics.

How do you figure that?

More accurately, this was a case of ephebophilia, the sexual preference for a mid-to-late adolescent. Except there is nothing to indicate he prefers women in that age group. He's been married three times, and normally goes after women are adult in age as well as body.

DSM's definition of pedophelia doesn't have anything to do "preference."

I think this truly was a one-time giving in to temptation and not a pattern of behavior. Nonetheless, he did commit a felony.

According to the timeline, as I understand it, he had known her for months and had deliberately staged a photoshoot in order to lure her to a place where he could drug and rape her. That's not really a "one-time thing." He's also been accused of making sexual advances towards at least one other underage girl.

Some states allow a girl as young as 14 to marry with parental consent - a clear instance where sexual activity with a minor is legal.

California is not and never has been one of them.

My point was that there was no way to say any form of consent could have been given. As this was outside marriage and she was not of an age to consent to extra-marital sex this was rape. The custom of labeling men who fuck physically mature but chronologically underage women as "child molester" is a recent phenomena.

Nonsense--he was charged with "lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14"--that is California's child molester statute. And how is she "physically mature," in that photo you have, above? Even if she's developing, that's not physical maturity.

No, actually what happened to her is a fairly common type of rape, that is, drugging a woman and then fucking her despite her saying "no". Yes, it's outrageous, but it's also typical.

You forgot the whole "luring her away from her parents so he could drug her and rape her" first.

What happened was that Polanski asked Gailey to pose for a photo shoot for the French edition of Vogue. Her mother consented to this, and he never laid a hand on her during that shoot. So, unless you think that Vogue is in the habit of using pre-pubescent models you might want to consider that she looked fully adult and older than 13. Polanski called her back for a second shoot. During that shoot he fed her champagne, some of which apparently had Quaaludes in it. When she wound up on a bed she says she protested, said no and that she didn't want to have sex several times, yet he went ahead. Yes, that's a fairly typical sort of rape scenario - invite woman over for something else, get her drunk/drugged, then fuck her despite her saying no.

I don't see it. Rape does not typically involve isolating a 13-year-old from her parents.

It was 1977, I'm old enough to remember this scandal as it happened. People who shocked he raped a minor, but no one was screeching "pedophile!" or "child molester"

So? That's what we call people who drug and have sex with 13-year-olds, today.

And, by the way - the rape occurred at Jack Nicholson's house in Los Angeles, California.

Great--a state in which your bullshit about "14-year-olds can marry in some states with parental consent" has no meaning whatsoever, let alone making someone who rapes a 13-year-old any less of a child molester.

[Anguirus]

What the fuck is this 'she has big tits so it's okay to use your status to procure her, drug her and rape her' business?

Something you made up.