Judge rejects Roman Polanski's request to be sentenced in Switzerland

On Friday, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge denied director Roman Polanski’s request to be sentenced while he remains under house arrest in Switzerland. This upheld the judge’s prior ruling demanding that the director return to the United States in order to reach resolution on the case. Polanski’s lawyers argued that the judge who originally presided over the case had plans to jail him for no more than 90 days — a short sentence that would not force the director to be extradited to the United States.

Polanski fled California after being convicted of having unlawful sex with a minor 32 years ago. He has been held in Switzerland since September, when he was arrested on his way to a film festival.


Tags:

Comments (52 total) Add your comment
Page: 1 2
  • Ron

    Geesh it happened over 30 years ago. Everyone’s been paid off. Everyone’s moved on. Why is this even being played out at this point? Is it really necessary to tie up the US judicial system with this case, nevermind the costs and security measures it will bring about? Keep him blocked from coming to the US and move on already.

    • at

      Agreed! Charge him with a huge fine and drop the case.

      • Bill

        A fine for child rape/sodomy? Seriously?

    • cr

      Your both morons, please stay in your trailer and let the rest of us be. A fine for a child rapist?? Move on already? He only drugged and raped a 13yo girl, and quite frankly had it been my daughter, their would be no body to extradite.

    • joanie Hedrick

      So you are saying that crimes against women even though the purp. got away for 30 years should be okay? What if that was your sister, your daughter or a loved one it would be okay to rape, sodomize as long as you pay for it.
      I have a feeling maybe you are a purp.

  • Chris

    Ron, He raped a teenager. If you had been raped as a teenager, I hope that the country would NEVER forget the violence perpetrated against you. He needs to be brought to justice, no matter how long it takes.

    • Gill Bates

      No, it was not rape. He was convicted of unlawful sex – not rape. Please get the most basic facts right.

      • Bill

        Polanski was originally charged with rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under fourteen, and furnishing a controlled substance to a minor. (L.A. Times, April 16, 1977)

      • Ab

        And those charges were withdrawn. Which means he has no criminal responsibility in them. You make it sound as though he’s guilty of these other counts by virtue of having been charged as such.

        That he agreed to a plea bargain doesn’t mean he’s also guilty of the withdrawn charges. It may be that the one charge he pled guilty to is all that he was guilty of.

  • Ab

    Chris, he *allegedly* raped a teenager. The case was always week. Medical evidence showed no sign of rape let alone penetration of the rectum. He pled guilty only to having sex with a minor.

    • Ab

      LisaMama says, “Sex with a minor is the same thing as rape in the eyes of the law.”

      No it isn’t. Otherwise there would be no such charge as “unlawful sex with a minor”.

      • LongBalls

        Actually, there is. It’s called “statutory rape” because a child cannot consent as a matter of law.

      • Ab

        re: Longballs

        Please read more carefully.

        My point was that if “unlawful sex with a minor” were the same as rape, then there would be no reason for a charge of “unlawful sex with a minor” to exist in law. Ergo, the two are not the same.

        And for your information, in California the offense is not called “statutory rape”. It’s called “Unlawful Sexual Intercourse”. It’s section 261.5 of the California Penal code.

  • Vernon

    Ron, the case never weak (not week). The girl testified before the grand jury that she said no, told Polanski to leave her alone and begged to be taken home before he performed oral sex, intercourse and sodomy on her. In 32 years he has never denied or rebutted a word of that testimony. The only reason he did not stand trial for six felonies, including -furnishing a controlled substance to a minor, performing a lewd act on a child under 14, rape by use of a drug, perversion or sodomy and couple of others is because the girl’s parents said they did not want her to suffer the ordeal of a public trial. So he got sweetheart plea bargain you refer to. Then he ran away like the cowardly, perverted little weasel he is before he could be sentenced. Also, justice does not come with a price tag or an expiration date. It costs the same to lock up an elderly pedophile priest as it does to lock up an elderly “acclaimed director.” But funny how nobody ever cites money or the passage of time as a mitigating factor for the priests. And one more thing, the fact that the rape kit showed no serious physical injury just lets us know the only thing big about this scumbag gnome is his wallet.

    • Ab

      Polanski *has* disputed certain parts of her testimony.

      If the reasons for the “sweetheart deal” were true, then why didn’t Polanski demand a trial? That way he puts the girl on the spot, the case collapses and he walks free.

      You make it sound as though he ran away before doing any time. You must know that did do those 42 days in Chino, which is a men’s prison. He returned from Europe to do this diagnostic study. He could have just as easily chosen not to return. Not what you’d expect from a coward, which is how you perceive him.

      Comparing priests to Polanski is like comparing apples and oranges. Entirely different situations.

      It’s not that the rape kit showed no serious physical injury. It’s that the rape kit showed no sign of rape or rectal penetration.

      And please… spare us the hypbolic language. I’m sure it makes you feel important.

      • Vernon

        OK, you make some valid points. Most people on here seem incapable of conceding that anyone else has a point but that’s not who I am. You’re right that Polanski did not act like he thought he was above the law for most of 1977-78. He stayed in LA, made all his court appearances, entered a guilty plea to a charge and reported as ordered to Chino State Prison for a 90-day psych evaluation that turned out to be 42. As for all this horrible judicial misconduct that supposedly made him change his mind and turn rabbit, I don’t know if it’s true or not. The judge is dead and can’t defend himself. And I need more evidence than a pro-Polanski French documentary to convict him. Bottom line, since Polanski is so brave and that mean old judge can’t hurt him anymore, why won’t he just man up and come back here and settle this.

  • LisaMama

    Sex with a minor is the same thing as rape in the eyes of the law. A teenager can not legally give consent. He got a 13-year-old girl drunk in his hot tub and raped her. And instead of facing his punishment, he ran away like a coward. He needs to be brought to justice.

    • Gill Bates

      AT that time 3 states in the U.S. had legal marriage for 13 year old girls. One state STILL DOES.

      • Bill

        You can’t equate marriage to rape, whether a person is 13 or 30.

  • Tom

    Does it matter to anyone that Polanski and the victim herself (now a grown woman) have found resolution with each other and in fact she has requested, on numerous occasions, that the case against Polanski be dropped so that everyone involved can move on.

    I think this pretty clearly indicates that all that’s being served at this point is the Los Angeles Superior Court’s need to not feel marginalized and ineffective.

    • Bill

      If Roman Polanski was not the talented director of “The Pianist,” but instead was a blue-collar worker at some local factory, I doubt you’d be so forgiving.

  • Vernon

    Yes. It matters to me. And we can all move on just as soon as Polanski grows a pair and comes back here and takes care of this. Until then, we can not set a precedent that rich perverts can rape children then run away. And if they have enough money to stay on the lam for over 30 years we just forget the whole thing. Also, when children are sexually abused, we are all the victim.

  • Ed Jolson

    Gee guys, give Roman a break. Being forced to live as a European is enough punishment. Besides, imagine the pain he must feel not being able to live in the same country that gave us Carter, Obama, Pelosi and Reid.

    • Vernon

      To Ed:
      And George W. Bush, and Dick Cheney and Larry (wide-stance) Craig etc… The rules say stay on topic. Your political views are beside the point and I’m not much interested in them.

  • Max Sanky

    This guy has suffered enough. After his parents were sent to concentration camps, he survived the holocaust by being shuffled around in hiding and enduring all measure of Nazi cruelty, including being used for target practice.
    and if that weren’t enough, his wife and unborn child were brutally slaughtered by the freaking Manson family while he was away working on a movie.

    So at some point 33 years ago, in some drug addled state he lost control and had sex with a minor.
    She’s forgiven him and everyone else should too.

    He’s 75 years old and the world has given him the business, like few of us could ever imagine.

    • Vernon

      The overwhelming majority of holocaust survivors did not go on to become child rapists. And if you visit any prison in the U.S. you’ll find people doing time who have stories as sad or sadder than Roman Polanski’s.

      • Lee

        Doubtful!

    • alig

      Would you let a man in his forties get away with having sex with your teenage daughter?

  • chillgirl

    Why should he be treated any different than those others perverts who aren’t actors or Jewish Holocost survivors. He made a choice to hurt a child in a very horrific way, for his own selfish desires, he should face the judge, his accusers and hid demons he’s been trying so desperately to leave behind. It’s called responisbility. I don’t care who he is, what he chose to do in my eyes overshadows anything great that he ever did that was.

  • Brendon

    He’s a convicted child rapist. It has dragged on so long because he chose to drag it on. He deserves jail, not sympathy.

    • BooBoo

      They go to prison not jail… Educate yourself…

  • Dan

    Mr. Polanski committed a crime; he was never fully punished for it. A judge does not have to accept sentencing recommendations from a district attorney. The victim has moved on, forgiven, whatever. Between the two points, I think the victim has the stronger “say so”. His crime affected one person, she is satisfied, and that should be good enough for society. A previous poster said more or less that the California courts were being marginalized, I agree, the courts pride has been hurt.

  • Daniel

    Some of you people need to actually read a little more about this case I am currently taking classes for criminal justice and I studied up on this case because what it doesnt say is this mans wife was murdered by the Charles Manson family, and later he committed this crime, he did not know the girl was underage at the time and he actually did do his time in prison because when he was arrested he made a deal to plead guilty for time served and to register as a sex offender and for probation, later however they changed the ruling and decided he would have to serve more time, that is when he fled the country, I feel he did his time and his deal was unjustly handled, he should be given a fine on the grounds that he skipped out on his probation otherwise he served his time, and should just be left alone already, he suffered enough for his crime and the crimes against him, plus i must mention for those who think otherwise he was not arrested for any other sexual offenses in the last 30 years unlike most sex offenders who become repeat offenders, or on any other charges that I know.

    • Daniel

      Let me go on to mention also that even though his time should already have been served, I feel it would be in the best interest of everyone for him to come back and settle it once and for all, I still feel however that he does not need to serve any more time in jail, only that the case needs to be closed and give him his fine for skipping out on his probation.

    • Ab

      Actually he did know how old the girl was. The mother signed a release form because she was under 18. Furthermore when Angelica Huston asked him how old she was Polanski replied that she was about to turn 14.

      That Manson’s family murdered his second wife is immaterial.

      Most of your other points are fine. You’re correct in saying that most people shooting their mouths off haven’t bothered to learn the facts of the case.

    • Vernon

      The claim that he did not the girl was underage is a flat out lie. He said at his plea hearing that he knew she was 13.

    • BooBoo

      I worked for Sharon’s mom in her hair salon. She was a nice lady. Her name is Gwen she passed away from a brain tumor. She was always talking about what happened and always fighting to keep the monster in prison

  • diane

    He is a rapest… He should return to USA and serve his time. If it is anyone else they would make them return. Why are their two set of rule of people.

  • Jim USDOJ

    I am concerned with the lack of concern and decency that seems absent in the previous posts. How would you react if it was your… that was the subject of Mr. Polanski’s ill affections? Regardless of talent fame or time it does not excuse his actions. And personally, if it was my daughter, I would have bought a plane ticket to France. I won’t say what would have happened once I arrived.

Page: 1 2
Add your comment
The rules: Keep it clean, and stay on the subject - or we may delete your comment. If you see inappropriate language, e-mail us. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field.

When you click on the "Post Comment" button above to submit your comments, you are indicating your acceptance of and are agreeing to the Terms of Service. You can also read our Privacy Policy.

Latest Videos

Advertisement

From Our Partners

TV Recaps

Powered by WordPress.com VIP