Switzerland arrests Polanski for the LAPD after 30 years

[uppi]

(but of course, the reason why CH just arrested him now can't really be what they tell. I mean a technicality like "we didn't know that he was in Switzerland before when he stayd here for holidays for several weeks, but this time, we knew he was coming", I'm sorry, that's ridiculous...)

Probably because they had a fresh arrest warrant supplied with a time and place to arrest him. The police cannot just ignore that. It's one thing to not actively search after a suspect mentioned in 30 year old, dust-catching files, one can always claim ignorance or lack of resources or whatever.

But ignoring a fresh warrant that just requires sending an officer with handcuffs to the airport would be a bit hard to justify without undermining the whole extradition treaty.

 

[Gilder]

If I were to hold up a bank, or kidnap someone in return for a hefty ransom, and then fled the country for thirty years, could I get off scot free too? The victims just want it put behind them, it would be so long ago. I mean, anyone can see that a guy who flees the country after being convicted is obviously innocent.

 

[Miles Teg]

I love how you keep repeating the word "sodomized" as if it changed something on the picture. From what I gather, there were serious concerns about the way the case was handled in the US, so I guess this is why France refused to extradite him (plus, France would be stupid if it began extraditing its own citizens).

He anally violated the girl because he didn't want to stop long enough to get a condom, and let her get away. I approve of any words VR might want to use in this case.

 

[bhsup]

I say sodomized because that was what he did. He raped her vaginally, then anally, then vaginally again. Anal sex is sodomy. Not sure why the use of a word that means just what he did would be an issue.

 

[Elrohir]

Excellent news. He should be extradited, tried, and should spend the rest of his life in prison.

Gee, this is crazy. So he had sex with a pretty developed 13-year-old girl, big deal. The girl is now a mid-aged woman and she allegedly want the case to be dropped. The guy hasn't touched any underage girls since then, which makes it clear it was an isolated mistake.

Why are you trying to placate a distorted US perception of "justice"?

Somehow, I'm not surprised that you're pro-rape.

 

[Bill3000]

What's the statute of limitations on child rape in California anyway?

 

[Winner]

Excellent news. He should be extradited, tried, and should spend the rest of his life in prison.

Somehow, I'm not surprised that you're pro-rape.

Yeah, that's definitely true. Wait, I'll go rape (with sodomy included!) some innocent Christian girl right now because I want to make it clear to the true American believers (tm) that we immoral atheists are nothing but pure evil

Get a grip. I am only arguing against making a fuss out of it now, because some Americans need to satisfy their addiction to medieval punishments. If the case is solid, let the Swiss try him. Otherwise release him.

 

[Godwynn]

So... why didn't France extradite him?

Did France just let him walk around their country freely after knowing of this?

 

[Winner]

So... why didn't France extradite him?

Did France just let him walk around their country freely after knowing of this?

Maybe the US didn't provide any actual evidence for them to build a case?

 

[Elrohir]

Yeah, that's definitely true. Wait, I'll go rape (with sodomy included!) some innocent Christian girl right now because I want to make it clear to the true American believers (tm) that we immoral atheists are nothing but pure evil

The problem isn't that you're an atheist - it's that you're immoral and disgusting, because you're defending the raping of a child. You can be an atheist, and find that disgusting - plenty do, including many here. I don't have a problem with you because you're an atheist, (Or a European - was that implied?) I have a problem with you because you're a bad person.

 

[Godwynn]

Maybe the US didn't provide any actual evidence for them to build a case?

He plead guilty.

 

[Winner]

The problem isn't that you're an atheist - it's that you're immoral and disgusting, because you're defending the raping of a child. You can be an atheist, and find that disgusting - plenty do, including many here. I don't have a problem with you because you're an atheist, (Or a European - was that implied?) I have a problem with you because you're a bad person.

And I have a problem with your strawman.

 

[Winner]

He plead guilty.

To having a sex with an underage girl, not to raping her. A subtle difference. I suspect the US insisted on trial in the US and refused to give the French anything that would allow them to start their own proceedings, so they showed the US the middle finger too and let him go.

That's what I'd have done too.

 

[Gilder]

So... why didn't France extradite him?

Did France just let him walk around their country freely after knowing of this?

I think the extradition laws between the US and France are fairly limited. I mean nearly all the French ministers have commented on how surprised they are, so they probably weren't keen on doing it thirty years ago either.

They nabbed him in Switzerland because they couldn't do it in France.

 

[uppi]

So... why didn't France extradite him?

Did France just let him walk around their country freely after knowing of this?

I don't know about the French, but German law forbids the extradite German citizens to foreign states (there are exceptions for EU states and international courts). Maybe the French have something similar.

 

[downtown]

This isn't a matter of age of consent here...it isn't like these two were lovers or something. He raped her. It would be wrong if she was 13 or 30. There is nothing medieval about wanting to punish a rapist. I'm actually a little alarmed that people are defending him.

 

[Miles Teg]

To having a sex with an underage girl, not to raping her. A subtle difference. I suspect the US insisted on trial in the US and refused to give the French anything that would allow them to start their own proceedings, so they showed the US a middle finger too and let him go.

That's what I'd have done too.

So to clarify, you believe the girl was telling the truth about the sex, but not about anything else?

Winner, you've taken a legitimate argument for a lower age of consent and turned into a ludicrous parody of yourself over a barely related case.

 

[Elrohir]

And I have a problem with your strawman.

The only strawman I see in this thread is your rather bizarre accusation that I'm somehow against you because you're an atheist. Come on Winner, this isn't hard - rape, especially of children, is bad. You don't need to believe in Jesus to think this.

 

[Miles Teg]

The only strawman I see in this thread is your rather bizarre accusation that I'm somehow against you because you're an atheist. Come on Winner, this isn't hard - rape, especially of children, is bad. You don't need to believe in Jesus to think this.

I'd like to personally endorse that statement.

 

[innonimatu]

So, whas it the right thing to do? Is 30 years too late after the events? Will he be brought back to LA and spend his last days in prison?

Of course it is too late. Civilized countries have statutes of limitations for very good reasons. Justice is not revenge, not even intimidation.

Did Switzerland get something in return from the US? Was pressure put down on the Swiss authorities by the US or was it a trade? (hint: Polanski had been in Switzerland a few times for skiing)

I suspect it did. There has been quite a lot of "horse trading" over the banking and tax issues lately...