Should Roman Polanski Be Arrested?

Posted by Alex in Crime & Law on September 28, 2009 at 2:27 pm


So. Three decades after he fled Los Angeles, director Roman Polanski was arrested in Switzerland.

In 1977, Polanski pled guilty of "unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor" to avoid being charged with rape by use of drugs (he gave alcohol and quaaludes to the then-13-year-old female model he was doing a photo shoot with) and sodomy, amongst other charges. He fled the United States before his sentencing and has been avoiding traveling to countries that could extradite him ever since. The victim has since forgiven him and settled a civil suit against Polanski for an unspecified amount.

Granted, the Polanski case was tawdry. It was filled with celebrity, sex, drugs and violence (not to mention charges of ethical misconduct of the judge presiding over the case). In short, it was the stuff of Hollywood. So the media frenzy of the arrest was not unexpected. But what surprised me was the diplomatic row that ensued when both France and Poland (Polanski is a dual citizen of both countries) protested Polanski’s arrest.

Is rape of a minor not a serious offense in those two countries? How about fleeing and being a fugitive from the law (while not exactly hiding – Polanski continued to direct award-winning films even with warrants outstanding)? Was the arrest outrageous, as journalist Anne Applebaum wrote in a column for The Washington Post? Or was it justice finally being served?

What do you think of the whole drama?

Is Climate Change / Global Warning Real?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Previous post
this post? Please Email this               
Next post

Tags: , , ,


FUN PRODUCTS FROM THE NEATORAMA SHOP:
BuckyBalls (w/ Mystery Bonus!)


COMMENT

49 comments to "Should Roman Polanski Be Arrested?"

  1. cabalist
    September 28th, 2009 at 2:46 pm

    I like Roman Polanski, his movies, and his vision. Incredible director, one of my favorites.

    That being said, rape of a minor (even what is called 'statutory rape', is a serious crime that most or all western nations recognize and enforce.

    The civil settlement is irrelevant. Whether or not he had been sentenced, and for that matter served the last however-many-years in prision, the civil suit would have progressed (anyway).

    He broke a real law, meaning a law intended to protect the weak form other stronger members of society, and he needs to be punished.

    Whether I like him or not is also irrelevant.

    I like Bill Clinton but still curse him for not being able to keep his fly shut. Think of everything he could have gotten accomplished if he had not had the Lewinsky scandal to feed the flames of the republican machine against him.

    Just because I like someone, or most of what someone is doing, doesn't make them perfect or infallible.

  2. Geekazoid
    September 28th, 2009 at 2:57 pm

    This guy's a disgusting creep! I care not one iota how talented, genius, or culturally supercalifragilistic anyone is. NO ONE is above the law! He RAPED her, plain and simple! If it were anyone else besides someone with the fame of this guy, they would be mercilessly crucified, as it should be. For example, anytime a topic about convicted sex offenders and their inability to live in neighborhoods pops up on various websites (including those who committed their crimes decades ago but their name is on the offender registry), I see nothing but people filled with scorn and contempt, showing no understanding or sympathies.

    Yet because this creep made some 'deep' movies people are automatically overlooking what he did. Sick, sick, sick world we live in. And do not even start on the victim's statements. Who cares what she says, it has no bearing on people being punished for their wrong doings.

    Oh, no politics on Neatorama!

  3. zavatone
    September 28th, 2009 at 2:59 pm

    Once a child molester, always a child molester. Same thing with Michael Jackson. He should have been in jail a long time ago.

  4. Gauldar
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:16 pm

    Nationalistic pride can go too far. Just because someone lived in a country/state/town does not free a person from a proven crime the individual committed. On what grounds are people in France and Poland protesting his crimes, are they just in complete and utter disbelief?

  5. dashon
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:20 pm

    His victim's "forgiveness" cannot be counted. Personally, I feel she just wants to forget about it, and publicly forgiving him seems the easiest way. It doesn't matter what her motives are though. Forgiveness doesn't undo the fact that he drugged and raped her. It was NOT consensual and the victim still holds to that point.

    If he were to be let off on those charges, what does that say to other rapists? What does that say politically? Celebrities get a freebie? If you run away long enough, you'll get away with it?

    No dice. The man is a coward on a number of levels and should be brought to justice.

  6. liberty
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:29 pm

    The real questions are...

    Should convicted pedophiles/child rapists be held accountable for their crimes? I say yes.

    Are famous and rich people above the law? I say no.

    The fact that ANYONE is defending this man disgusts me. He plead guilty - he should have done the time. I hope he comes back and serves his time.

    Interesting that you link the the Anne Applebaum column without noting that her husband is a Polish politician who has made great efforts to have Polanski's arrest warrant voided. Applebaum is not exactly a neutral party in this story.

  7. jdogg13
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:30 pm

    He should have to share a cell with Charles Manson.

  8. dooflotchie
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:30 pm

    What do I think about this whole drama?

    I think I'd rather be reading about it on CNN or MSNBC. This. Is. Not. Neat. :-|

  9. Candace Scott
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:32 pm

    He needs to serve his time, just like any other convicted child molester. How would he feel if Charles Manson ran off, and when they finally caught up with him years later, they said, well, it's been so long....why bother trying to send him to jail now? After all those people have been dead for YEARS! They don't really deserve justice any more.

  10. SofaCat
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:37 pm

    He had sex with a child. End of story.

  11. Minnesotastan
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:40 pm

    An opinion even more strident than the one at WaPo is in Salon today: http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/feature/2009/09/28/polanski_arrest  /

  12. mcsandwich
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:45 pm

    It's bad enough that he continued to be rewarded for films he made while he was on the run. We get up in arms when we hear a child molester being released early from a sentence on the grounds of "good behavior" because surely such a person is incapable of such a thing... Oh, but it's Roman Polanski, so we'll treat the person and the crime separately.

    It speaks more than a little to our hypocrisy as a society towards celebrities.

    But I gotta agree, I read Neatorama to unwind, not get wound back up. =(

  13. health
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:46 pm

    Kids are stupid. Polanski for president 2012.

  14. Grease Monkey
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:50 pm

    The particular concern here is that the victim wants the charges dropping after a civil suit was settled. This is perhaps even more disturbing than the original crime. That anybody thinks you should be able to buy off a victim in order to avoid criminal charges is a worry. That there is a legal system that formalizes this sort of thing is very, very scary.

    The compensation of the victim and the punishment of the offender are two completely separate issues and the one should never be allowed to affect the other. Justice must always be seen to be done, otherwise you have a two tier system where the rich can avoid criminal conviction.

    To patronize his work is to put money into the pocket of a paedophile.

  15. zazie
    September 28th, 2009 at 3:58 pm

    "Should Roman Polanski Be Arrested?" That shouldn't even be a question! He committed a crime, & should be treated like any other criminal.

  16. John Farrier
    September 28th, 2009 at 4:16 pm

    Call me a prude, but I have a problem with men molesting 13-year old girls. Yes, he should be extradited and incarcerated.

    As for the notion that he didn't know that the girl was underage: he received modeling waivers from the girl's mother. What did he think that they meant?

  17. LisaL
    September 28th, 2009 at 4:24 pm

    Throw his nasty ass in prison and let him rot along with all the other pedophiles, molesters, & rapists.

  18. seekshelter
    September 28th, 2009 at 4:35 pm

    did anyone else watch that HBO documentary about this last year? they had an interview with his lawyer. he says that polanski asked him what he should do because he was worried about getting a fair trial. the judge had lied to them already about the proceedings. because of this, he told him that he didn't think the judge was going to be fair and implied that the best thing for him to do would be to leave.

    as it was, he never denied that it happened and had done everything the judge had asked of him up until that point. the documentary is really interesting if you can track it down.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1157705/

  19. Larfin Jackarse
    September 28th, 2009 at 5:17 pm

    "Let's keep in mind that Roman Polanski gave a 13-year-old girl a Quaalude and champagne, then raped her"

  20. Nate
    September 28th, 2009 at 6:32 pm

    Actually, the evidence against Mr. Polanski was very thin. So thin, in fact, that the prosecutor agreed to a plea bargain of time served (42 days) and deportation if he pled guilty. He did just that but right before his sentencing the judge decided to rescind the deal without allowing Mr. Polanski to retract his guilty plea.
    He left the country, which is what his sentence would have been if the judge wouldn't have acted in such an unfair manner.
    Leave him alone. There is a reason why most of Europe thinks we are crazy on this one.

  21. Nate
    September 28th, 2009 at 6:39 pm

    By the way, even the girl who was allegedly raped believes that he should be let go.

  22. secret asian man
    September 28th, 2009 at 6:53 pm

    If the evidence against him was that thin, why didn't he fight it out in court?

    There are two schools of thought in this country.

    One says that the rich and famous should be allowed to ply children with drugs and rape them, get drunk, crash a car into a river, and leave a woman to die, stab your wife and her friend to death, or bomb a US military institution, and get away with it, because they are rich and famous.

    The other? We believe that all men are created equal.

  23. Aeroflotsam
    September 28th, 2009 at 7:00 pm

    These slimy trolls use the power of the casting couch to have their way with aspiring young girls (and boys as well I guess). This practice has run rampant throughout the movie industry for decades and letting this dirtbag off the hook shows kids everywhere that money and influence can indeed buy their virginity. Polanski deserves to spend the rest of his life locked up in my humble opinion. On the bright side his incarceration will not get in the way of an active sex life.... 'nuff said!

  24. dutchboy
    September 28th, 2009 at 7:13 pm

    I dont think the post is very Neatoramaish.

  25. SenorMysterioso
    September 28th, 2009 at 7:44 pm

    Id, like to hear from one of the people that voted no.

  26. Tempscire
    September 28th, 2009 at 7:46 pm

    "On the bright side his incarceration will not get in the way of an active sex life…. "

    Yay, more rape! Only this way, it'll be the good kind of rape.

    Yeah, that's the ticket.

  27. Dude
    September 28th, 2009 at 9:34 pm

    How is this neat?

  28. caveman
    September 28th, 2009 at 10:12 pm

    So why did they wait 30 years to arrest him?

  29. poneyup
    September 28th, 2009 at 10:29 pm

    Why should I, or anyone for that matter, form an opinion on this? The man has already been arrested, right? He is going to be tried whatever Neatorama readers say. Why not leave this to the courts and move on to something neat and interesting.
    Besides, everything about this case leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. It's the taste of American macho moral grandstanding mixed with the drugging and rape of a minor. This will sully anyone who talks about it.

  30. VSBM
    September 29th, 2009 at 12:16 am

    Can I rape him? I promise I'll get him drunk and give him some quaaludes first. And if he wants to dress like a 13-year-old girl, that's fine. Not my thing, but he obviously gets off on it.

  31. bradbury
    September 29th, 2009 at 2:55 am

    Yes, he should be arrested! No, America should NOT have jurisdiction over Europe!

  32. walrus
    September 29th, 2009 at 6:01 am

    "Is rape of a minor not a serious offense in those two countries?"

    Well, in both these countries the age of consent is much lower than most of the US or UK - at 15. In many areas of Europe it is 14. I'm not condoning or condemning, and obviously 13 is still a legal minor, just that attitudes are slightly different in different places. Is all.

  33. clinton robert labombard
    September 29th, 2009 at 6:06 am

    "The victim has since forgiven him and settled a civil suit against Polanski for an unspecified amount."

    Case closed. Find something else to be angry about.

  34. Jessica Hellerman
    September 29th, 2009 at 8:15 am

    This shouldn't be on Neatorama. I think we all come to this sight for fun, interesting, quirky, cool, different, innovative things. Just look at the comments. Filled with anger - justifiably so - which is nevertheless so counter to the Neatorama vibe.
    Whatever may happen to Polanski I do hope this is the last of its kind on Neatorama.

  35. hunch42
    September 29th, 2009 at 10:33 am

    First of all, like several posters here, I'm not sure this subject belongs on Neatorama. However, as it's here already...while I can't defend what Polankski did, I believe this is one of those crimes where the needs of the victim should be put ahead of the needs of justice. I agree with Dashon that the victim probably wants to just forget all about this, which was probably why she 'forgave' him. If that is the case, then arresting him now will just reopen old wounds - it serves little/no positive purpose as far as the victim goes.

  36. wit of a twit
    September 29th, 2009 at 11:11 am

    Apparently the girl who is now a grown woman, has asked for the charges to be dropped. I says she has suffered due to media coverage.

  37. Fran
    September 29th, 2009 at 12:05 pm

    What kind of message does it send NOT to arrest him?

    Run away and hide long enough and all will be forgiven?

  38. NewYork_007
    September 29th, 2009 at 2:23 pm

    The case was settled between him and the "victim"...I wonder what the "victim"'s parents were thinking when left a 13-year old with a much older male unsupervised at the celebrity mansion for such a long time!?!?! Seriously!?

    I am not defending Polanski in any shape or form, but her parents should be equally responsible.

    Roman Polanski was punished more than anyone deserves in his life. Now please leave him alone!

  39. Steve G.
    September 29th, 2009 at 3:05 pm

    For all those who voted "No" - would you still vote "No" if Roman Polanski was a Republican Senator?

    Well?

  40. JT
    September 29th, 2009 at 3:47 pm

    No...

    The failure is with the US justice system. He pled guilty, served his unfathomably short sentence, and then was told that the deal he had made was not going to be honoured. The district attorney in the case agreed that it was understandable for him to flee. In any case it is a mis-carrige of justice but ridiculous to arrest him 32 years later. At some point you have to let guilty people go free when the justice system fails. Shocking, but not as bad as a former NFL football player walking after a double homicide.

  41. Someguy
    September 29th, 2009 at 3:54 pm

    Given the chance how many of you would deny yourself the 13 year old model? Now come on people.

  42. Gauldar
    September 29th, 2009 at 5:26 pm

    I think too many people assume too much about what is featured on this website. Has anyone noticed there is no "About" section readily visible on this site saying what it is and what it is not? Apparently neatorama.com started on August 9th 2005 according to how far I was able to go back on the archives, and there was no such information about saying what to expect on this blog. Last but not least, did you complain about CSI: Las Vegas being broadcast on A&E leading taking in onto a downward spiral of it's currant state as a cesspool for reality TV? I think it's neat to read all this input on peoples opinions on the issue.

  43. ted
    September 29th, 2009 at 6:38 pm

    I agree with Gauldar - whoops, I think I just heard Hell freeze over.

    It certainly drew enough responses.

    Yes, the dude should be prosecuted. He committed a crime. A child is not deemed capable of making that sort of decision, and even if he is forgiven years later, he still ahs to face justice for his actions.

  44. Guest
    September 29th, 2009 at 9:12 pm

    wow... i just cant believe it... how can people say no to the punishment of a rapist? HOW??

  45. Jorge
    September 30th, 2009 at 8:04 am

    No one is above the law. We must treat everyone the same. He must be prosecuted and condemned according to the law. I am astonished by people who supposes to be against rapists but supports Polanski. Is unbelievable the support of Woody Allen, Pedro Almodovar, David Lynch, Martin Scorcese.... Do they believe themselves as superior men? Above the law? Consensual sex with a 13 y/o girl + alcohol and drugs?
    What if Roman Polanki were a catholic priest? or a politician?. No one is above the law. Hollywood, Church, Politics, Roman Polanski or John Doe.

  46. Qliphah
    September 30th, 2009 at 4:07 pm

    The one thing I take away from this whole situation is that you can commit a crime and get away with it if your famous enough. Why should we punish him now? Isn't it the fault of society for letting him go for so long? What point is there to punish him now?

    Honestly putting anybody over the age of 70 in prison is like providing free nursing home care at this point.

  47. TKS
    October 1st, 2009 at 12:49 pm

    For those of you thinking he should be let go...if we let him go, we have to let all other prisoners who haven't been sentenced go.

    See, he is a CONVICTED criminal. However, he hasn't served a sentence for his crime. When he ran, he did so to avoid sentencing...he had already admitted his guilt by taking a guilty plea. Regardless of who believes he should be let go or who is a victim or not...the bottom line is if we let him go, it undermines the entire justice system.

    He should be sentenced and carry out his sentence like any other criminal out there. What he does for a living, how much money he has, or where he lives means nothing...he didn't serve a sentence for his crimes and so he needs to now.

  48. NotSoNeat
    October 1st, 2009 at 5:28 pm

    I agree with those that vote this not so Neat-o-rama. It usually stays away from this troll and flamewar producing material.

    My vote: Not Neat

  49. easnow
    October 8th, 2009 at 2:09 am

    He drugged, raped, and sodomized a 13-year-old girl, then escaped justice by fleeing the country. He should be given a medal.


PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT

Neatorama Comment Policy
You don't have to register or login to comment, but it's easier if you do so. Comments aren't censored, but those that are abusive or off-topic may be edited or deleted.


Stay updated on the comments with Comment RSS