Polanski must appear in US court

Abaddon

Deity
Joined
Apr 20, 2002
Messages
31,182
Location
NES/FG/SF Activity:Arguing the toss
Polanski must appear in US court

Film director Roman Polanski has lost his bid to be sentenced in a US court without having to return.

He faces an arrest warrant over his conviction, 32 years ago, for unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl.

A judge ruled on Friday that Mr Polanski, 76, must be present in court if he wants to resolve the case.

Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza said he was acting to protect "the dignity of the court." Mr Polanski's lawyer said he would appeal the ruling.

Mr Polanski was arrested in Switzerland last September over his 1977 conviction for unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl.

He left the US in 1978 before he could be sentenced and has never returned.

Judge stands firm

The director, who was originally charged with six offences including rape and sodomy, pleaded guilty to unlawful sex following a plea bargain in 1977.

He is under house arrest and is fighting extradition.

In the past year, his legal team has had a request turned down to have a hearing on the rape charge heard outside the US.

Mr Polanski's lawyer Chad Hummel and Lawrence Silver, who represents victim Samantha Geimer, tried to convince the judge to change his mind.

But Judge Espinoza cited a law stating that someone who fled was not entitled to the processes of the court unless they returned.

'Prolonged suffering'

Mr Silver told the court Ms Geimer wanted the case to be over.

"I implore you to end the 32-year prolonged suffering of this victim," he said, citing a state constitution amendment known as Marcy's Law, meant to protect victims' rights in criminal cases.

But the judge said he did not think that particular law "was ever intended for this use" and found that her rights had not been violated in the current proceeding.


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/entertainment/8476612.stm

I am annoyed how low this scanned on the BBC.. it was in the "entertainment" section of the news!

I am very glad the case is slowly, but surely moving to court.

He raped a 13y.o girl. He should go to jail for a long time, with time added for the skipping of justice.
 
*Hit and run post*

This demonization of pedophiles pisses me off.

I do not think he should face trouble simply for consentual sex.
 
*Hit and run post*

This demonization of pedophiles pisses me off.

I do not think he should face trouble simply for consentual sex.

...it wasn't consensual. He drugged her and she said no. It would have been rape even if she was 18.
 
a 13y.o. cannot give consent.
 
No statue of limitations for rape. Especially child rape. Often child abuse is discovered many decades after the fact when all involved are grown. To prevent child abusers from getting away scot-free they can be charged at any time.
 
They got off here in New York. :(
 
Well, its a bit pointless after the first time...
 
I don't think he can refuse.. he is already arrested.
 
Back
Top Bottom