Quoted from Grandma Bear Maybe if Polanski could swing some deal trading his release for some oil... sort of like the Lockerbie bomber guy.

Yup, that would work.

He missed his opportunity to do some favors for George Bush and get himself on the pardon list too.

Quoted from Murphy He is not a felon on the run, he pleaded guilty and accepted his punishment.

I am afraid that is exactly what he is. He did plead guilty and then, because he says he believed the plea bargain was about to be reneged upon, he ran for it, and an international arrest warrant was issued. He did not accept his punishment because he has never been punished.

Do any of our American friends know if, once agreed, a plea bargain can actually be thrown out by the Judge? Everyone is claiming the Judge was a publicity hound who only wanted a trial so he could make a name for himself - Maybe the truth is that he felt that justice would not be done in this case if the facts could not be put before a jury and a verdict reached on the evidence.

For all any of us know, Polanski could have walked free had a full trial been held on the charges.

By the way, as he had pleaded guilty to the original offence, there will be no need of a trial now, he could just be taken straight to a Prison (assuming the original guilty plea stands given the circumstances of the case - has he ever actually been sentenced for the crime he admitted?) - but I assume he will face new charges of absconding from justice and could face a new trial on this.

Now that will be a media circus.

Quoted from mcornetto I don't think it's hollow at all. I have no sympathy for Roman Polanski at all but... In California where they are giving state employees IOUs in order to pay their salary,  where they are cutting back state services, where they are canceling highway and infrastructure projects, in a city where there is huge unemployment and tons of foreclosures, where the tax base is shrinking and they can't even afford to fix the schools pursing something that happened thirty years ago when the victim doesn't want it pursued, something that is going to cost a bunch of dollars is ridiculous. If it were a different time, then maybe, but for now just let it drop there's more important things to pay for.

While your financial concerns are definitely valid, Michael, I just don't see how or why we should put aside law and order for more prosperous times.

The reason why it takes place now - in a time where the economy is terrible - is indeed because he fled in the first place. To me, it just sends out a whole bag of wrong signals if he was allowed to walk away from this due to the state of the economy.

The O.J. Simpsons murder trial back in '94/'95 cost LA County an estimated USD 9,000,000. That was a trial that ran for almost two years for various (stupid) reasons. I have a hard time imagining this trial costing even a tenth of that. I doubt it'll break Californias "law and Order" budget.

This is about context. The attorneys and judge reached a plea agreement. Then the judge, for reasons specific to himself, changed his mind. Polanski was then looking at 50 years. Everyone was shocked, even the victim.

No, I don't condone what Polanski did, but I'm not going to draw and quarter him either. The sanctimony is a bit over overwhelming.

It seems anything that has anything to do with sex sends people off the deep end.

Seth

Sanctimonious? Last time I checked, it was an accusation of high-mindedness, hell, maybe I could even go as far as to say hypocrisy.   Considering the vast majority do not consider sex with a child - it's an odd charge.

Some people just feel that a grown man having sex with a 13-year-old girl is fundamentally wrong and have no problems with asinine charges subsequently being thrown at them for laying down the reality.

Andrew

Quoted from Andrew Sanctimonious? Last time I checked, it was an accusation of high-mindedness, hell, maybe I could even go as far as to say hypocrisy.   Considering the vast majority do not consider sex with a child - it's an odd charge. Some people just feel that a grown man having sex with a 13-year-old girl is fundamentally wrong and have no problems with asinine charges subsequently being thrown at them for laying down the reality. Andrew

Cases like this allow people to flex their "superior" virtue. And, of course, the ones who are most harsh in their desired punishment for the purp are the most virtuous.

It all seems a little self serving to me.

seth

Quoted from Seth Cases like this allow people to flex their "superior" virtue. And, of course, the ones who are most harsh in their desired punishment for the purp are the most virtuous. It all seems a little self serving to me. seth

We will have to agree to disagree here then, 'cos we clearly see this issue in a fundamentally and irrevocably different way.

Andrew

From what I have read, it should perhaps be noted that there is no proof that the Judge was going to throw out the plea bargain.

This story seems to have been based largely on what Polanski's lawyers have claimed they heard rather than any actual statement from the Judge - and one of the Prosecutors in the case now says that he lied about having had a conversation with the Judge about this subject, which has been the basis for most of the claims ever since!

If the plea bargain had been thrown out at sentencing and Polanski had received a longer sentence, his lawyers would surely have had grounds for a successful appeal.