Swiss criminal court to Polanski: No dice
posted at 1:36 pm on October 20, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
The odds of the successful extradition of Roman Polanski from Switzerland to the US increased today with a ruling by the top Swiss criminal court that denied Polanski’s bail request. Polanski’s attorneys attempted to wheedle the judges with offers of electronic surveillance and the collateral of a chalet in Gstaad as guarantees of Polanski’s good behavior through the extradition process. However, the court took the entirely reasonable approach that a man who went on the lam for over 30 years probably wouldn’t keep his promises to stick around this time, either:
Roman Polanski’s three decades as a fugitive are coming back to haunt him.
Noting his previous escape from U.S. authorities, Switzerland’s top criminal court on Tuesday rejected Polanski’s appeal to be released from prison because of the “high” risk that the 76-year-old director would try to flee again.
Polanski’s offers of bail, house arrest and electronic monitoring failed to sway the tribunal. Even a Swiss chalet in the luxury resort of Gstaad was brushed aside as insufficient collateral to guard against Polanski fleeing the country, as the United States seeks to have him extradited for having sex with a 13-year-old girl in 1977.
“The appellant has already once in 1978 eluded American criminal proceedings by traveling to Europe,” the Federal Criminal Court said in its 17-page verdict, adding that Polanski’s transfer to the U.S. could also cause family trauma and cost investors millions of dollars in losses.
“As a result, the motivation to flee is high,” it said.
No kidding!
One point in the article raised my hackles a bit. Polanski’s attorney said that continued incarceration would cripple the effort to finish his latest film, causing Polanski to go bankrupt and investors to lose $40 million. That cut no ice with the court — and rightfully so. The people who backed a fugitive running away from a statutory-rape conviction should have thought twice before investing that kind of cash, regardless of who they are or what kind of director Polanski is. They took the risk that Polanski would continue to avoid arrest and extradition, gambling that his name would produce a profit on their investment. They chose …. poorly.
Interestingly, the US has not yet submitted a formal extradition request to Switzerland after Polanski’s arrest. The Obama administration has until November 25th to do so, or the Swiss will be forced to release Polanski. Over the next five weeks, we will see if the White House is more interested in appeasing its Hollywood backers or enforcing the law.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Just wait on that pardon from Barry.
mankai on October 20, 2009 at 1:39 PM
Yes, because the administration cares so much about the rule of law
nyx on October 20, 2009 at 1:40 PM
If Polanski’s worried about his investors, he should have Scorsese or Woody Allen finish his picture for him. Help a brother out, bien pensants!
Mr. D on October 20, 2009 at 1:41 PM
That’s an easy one, Ed. Obama has to think about it. And by the time he makes a decision, the deadline will have already passed.
In this case, it’s easier to ask for forgiveness than to seek permission.
Tennman on October 20, 2009 at 1:41 PM
Good.
Next, this group is going to sue BigGovernment for ruining their investments in El Salvadoran child performance artists.
mankai on October 20, 2009 at 1:41 PM
I can foresee a scenario in which the extradition request magically appears on 26 Nov, along with Robert Gates and complicit media claiming no one was made aware of the timeframe requirements until it was too late.
I sure hope I’m wrong.
Snowed In on October 20, 2009 at 1:42 PM
It’s so odd to see the Swiss act like this.
Perhaps they are tired of all the passivity and want to get tough?
I wonder who these judges are over there making these decisions?
I want them for SCOTUS.
Badger40 on October 20, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Well…you see, his civilian advisors advised that he should wait until there is a “political” solution b4 sending more troops, er an extradition order, etc.
JAM on October 20, 2009 at 1:43 PM
They’ll wait it out and he’ll go free. The Obama administration is far too fond of pedophiles to hold him accountable.
Monica on October 20, 2009 at 1:43 PM
Don’t worry, Obami is going to forget to file an extradition request for Polanski.
I can see Gibbs blaming Fox News, for this future ‘screw up.’
Lance Murdock on October 20, 2009 at 1:43 PM
Present!
cs89 on October 20, 2009 at 1:44 PM
As I vaguely recall (I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong), the perp (that’d be Polanski) was allowed to travel to Europe by the judge, so that he could work on something or other. The judge set conditions – no wild partying, low profile, keep it DOWN! or else.
Polanski proceeded to party and publicly diss the judge.
When this was reported, the Judge went ballistic and started mumbling darkly about nullifying the incipient deal and tossing the perp in the stripey hole.
Polanski then freaked and ran for it.
30 years later, he appeals for bail so he can work on something.
But it seems Swiss judges are not real stupid. Pity.
mojo on October 20, 2009 at 1:45 PM
Let’s see, Nov. 25th the day before T-Day, I’m betting on no extradition. Let it fly under the radar of a holiday weekend and take the reduced heat the following Monday.
PatriotRider on October 20, 2009 at 1:45 PM
was thinking the same thing…
cmsinaz on October 20, 2009 at 1:45 PM
If he doesn’t request extradition, I will be furious! I want Garrett or Tapper to ask Gibbs how Obama would feel if it were HIS 13 yr. old daughter?
JAM on October 20, 2009 at 1:46 PM
Over the next five weeks, we will see if the White House is more interested in appeasing its Hollywood backers or enforcing the law.
the former i would presume, but it may be more than just appeasing… i suspect a chain of blackmail…
Polanski has dirt on someone, that someone has dirt on someone… and all down the line…
lotta diiiirrrttty ridin’goin’ on … and could include the whitey tape who knows?
max1 on October 20, 2009 at 1:46 PM
“Over the next five weeks, we will see if the White House is more interested in appeasing its Hollywood backers or enforcing the law.”
Cue the Hollywood lobbyists…here.
perroviejo on October 20, 2009 at 1:47 PM
Sadly enough I could see Obama voting “present” on this one. He doesn’t wanna piss off Hollywood and he probably believes(and I think he’d be right) that this is a story that’ll blow over after a few days.
Doughboy on October 20, 2009 at 1:48 PM
Who does the left hate more?
Roman Polanski
Mel Gibson
Show your work.
perroviejo on October 20, 2009 at 1:49 PM
As we say here in Texas ‘what goes around comes around’. Eventually the price for ones transgressions have to be paid.
docdave on October 20, 2009 at 1:49 PM
I for one can hardly wait until he’s back in custody in the US. There’s been one unanswered question I’ve been waiting thirty years to hear the answer to. “Who helped him flee the country?” I’m sure the police in California will want to sweat him over this one. I’ll bet there are a lot of big-wigs in Hollywood who are sleeping uneasy and trying to figure out how to hire a Hit-Man. Do you suppose someone is trying to shop this as a screenplay, who will direct?
Tommy_G on October 20, 2009 at 1:49 PM
Roman Polanski is a great artist, as well as a great pedophile and a great convicted rapist of a 13 year old girl. He’s great.
Paul-Cincy on October 20, 2009 at 1:50 PM
Sorry for the O/T, but this is getting very serious:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/20/obama-praises-karzai-decision-accept-runoff-election/
When SECDEF comes out openly disagreeing with POTUS in the national media, there is gonna be nothing but trouble. think back to all that mess with McArthur. Something serious is going on here in the background and it appears to me that no one is getting in to see Obama about this.
Johnnyreb on October 20, 2009 at 1:50 PM
Polanski is an “elite.” Obama’s functionaries see him as one of them, and they will not be inclined to aid in the enforcement of laws that in their eyes don’t give appropriate deference to Polanski’s exalted social status. It will be a bitter pill for them to have to proceed with extradition for political reasons, if they do at all.
Cicero43 on October 20, 2009 at 1:51 PM
If Obomber and his co-conspirators allow Polanski to go free, there would be a backlash against the left that will be truly titanic in its effect. In that regard, I hope it happens. On the same note, it would be almost as enjoyable to watch Hollywood’s collective heads explode when this guy goes to San Quentin.
J.J. Sefton on October 20, 2009 at 1:53 PM
It will be interesting to see if Obama votes present so that Polanski gets released. Is Obama that stupid?
aikidoka on October 20, 2009 at 1:53 PM
With a Justice Department that is thoroughly politicized, I wouldn’t lay any bets on that.
Cicero43 on October 20, 2009 at 1:55 PM
If he is pardoned, the follow up questions will be worth a ticket: “Mr. President, if Sasha was drugged and forcibly raped, would you give a pardon to her attacker after 30 years?”
MikeInBA on October 20, 2009 at 1:56 PM
Yeah. Charlie Gibson could ask that question.
Cicero43 on October 20, 2009 at 1:57 PM
To the Swiss:
Don’t stop. You are doing a great service to the world. What is that you ask? First you are keeping a rapist from running again, and second, keeping Polanski from making another film.
TQM38a on October 20, 2009 at 1:57 PM
In an effort to bring your relevant yet OT comment back on comment, I foresee Robert Gates being unemployed before Roman Polanski steps on American soil again.
Snowed In on October 20, 2009 at 1:57 PM
This will all be sorted out once Eric Holder ascertains Polanski’s political affiliations.
Doorgunner on October 20, 2009 at 1:58 PM
Nah, they need to bring back Bernard Shaw for that one, and then we could see if Obama could outdo Dukakis in weasel-like answering.
Snowed In on October 20, 2009 at 1:59 PM
When the extradition request is not filed in time it will be the fault of…wait for it…Boooosh!
johnnybgood on October 20, 2009 at 1:59 PM
Interestingly, the US has not yet submitted a formal extradition request to Switzerland after Polanski’s arrest. The Obama administration has until November 25th to do so, or the Swiss will be forced to release Polanski. Over the next five weeks, we will see if the White House is more interested in appeasing its Hollywood backers or enforcing the law.
We better point this out to people, just so the Obama Administration does not forget.
Mr. Joe on October 20, 2009 at 1:59 PM
Time to bombard the WH and DoJ with requests for Polanski’s extradition.
And, too, ask for an ABC ‘poll’ to learn what America thinks.
Grab the Enemy Party by the nose and kick ‘em in the a$$!
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 1:59 PM
Than Barry would be a pedophile too. I guess the best way for Barry to look at this is through the eyes of his own daughters.
BigMike252 on October 20, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Polanski was overheard whistling “Thank Heaven for Little Girls” in the Swiss courtroom.
Percy_Peabody on October 20, 2009 at 2:00 PM
RE: my last post…Never mind.
If the Swiss do this, it’s only because they’re part of the vast right-wing conspiracy! /sarc
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 2:01 PM
I’m cheering the Swiss for following the law.
As for this administration following through on it’s part to extradite, and follow through with upholding the law, I’m not expecting much at all.
4shoes on October 20, 2009 at 2:01 PM
This administration couldn’t be that stupid, could it?
CarolynM on October 20, 2009 at 2:02 PM
But he might not flee-flee.
lorien1973 on October 20, 2009 at 2:02 PM
Come on, Barry. Pardon the guy. Commute his sentence.
Please, demonstrate for everyone just who you really are.
TheUnrepentantGeek on October 20, 2009 at 2:02 PM
Thanks for making me spew my sip of coffee all over my desk.
Too funny; awesome; spot-on!
LOL
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 2:03 PM
This is a White House that’s willing to spark a trade war with China in order to throw a bone to the unions. Yes, they are that stupid.
Doughboy on October 20, 2009 at 2:03 PM
Yes. But only because, in their minds, there’s a greater issue at hand.
Details at 11:00
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 2:04 PM
Roman has five weeks
To work out the proper bribe…
The Chicago Way.
Haiku Guy on October 20, 2009 at 2:04 PM
We already know the answer to that…
Rusty Bill on October 20, 2009 at 2:04 PM
Unless the LA and/or Calif authorities press hard for extradition, it won’t happen under Obama’s watch. No need for a pardon, just casually let the deadline expire.
jwolf on October 20, 2009 at 2:08 PM
Well, ACORN is on record as a willing enabler of child prostitution. Why shouldn’t Obama look at another case of statuatory rape as just a minor issue when big dollar donors are involved.
a capella on October 20, 2009 at 2:08 PM
We’ve seen how twisted the current DoJ is. There’s no way they’re going to request extradition.
p0s3r on October 20, 2009 at 2:09 PM
Good for the Swiss. Nice to see some common sense in Europe.
And if Dear Liar does not seek extradition, then The Whine will be on the side of convicted child rapists.
rbj on October 20, 2009 at 2:10 PM
The best way? It’s the only way this narcissist can see anything. And for that reason only he’ll not appease Hollywood, because he’s got his own girls reminding him. No one else’s girls would mean anything, but his own, of course.
Next year, the Nobel Committee will give him their new Nobel Father of the Year medal, recognizing the extraordinary efforts he has made in protecting his own daughters from predatory 3rd rate directors.
CarolynM on October 20, 2009 at 2:10 PM
- should be statutory
a capella on October 20, 2009 at 2:10 PM
The Swiss acted stupidly.
faraway on October 20, 2009 at 2:12 PM
Well, Obama can keep his “mop” handy, to clean up this mess Clinton left behind by forgetting to pardon Polanski back in 2000.
av8tr on October 20, 2009 at 2:13 PM
I just wrote the WH. I want Romie brought back for his conviction hearing.
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 2:15 PM
Slam the WH and DoJ. Let’s get Romie back. And tell friends, and maybe push the MSM to do a poll on this.
Hit ‘em where they hurt!
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 2:17 PM
Fox news will remind team Obama of the deadline.
meci on October 20, 2009 at 2:17 PM
Holder will get him to agree to make a documentary about the brave Black Panthers and their
get the votersget the vote out efforts.MamaAJ on October 20, 2009 at 2:22 PM
It’s sort of funny that I hadn’t even considered that this would be a tough call for The Won. This will be interesting.
Cindy Munford on October 20, 2009 at 2:23 PM
They acted stupidly.
Seriously though, what gets me is the idea that a Polanski film is of such artistic and commericial importance that it should trump 30 years of not so subtly evading extradition and, at times, reveling in the fact that he was on the lam. It wasn’t like it happened during production of this particular film and, IMO, anybody who gave Polanski one dime should be tried for aiding and abetting a fugitive.
highhopes on October 20, 2009 at 2:24 PM
When in Rome…
…
f^%k a Roman.
I just hope that, while he’s awaiting extradition, he’s getting plenty of “prison love.”
Roc on October 20, 2009 at 2:25 PM
Send him to Pelican Bay State Prison. It is a supermax state prison just perfect for those bail jumpers.
scrubjay on October 20, 2009 at 2:28 PM
I suspect this is making sure all the ducks are in a row legally the same way the Dr. who killed Michael Jackson has yet to be arrested.
That, or given this administration’s inability to make a decision, they are dithering hoping the whole thing will go away before they have to seek extradition.
highhopes on October 20, 2009 at 2:30 PM
Way OT, but as a sci-fi fan, I was shocked by that phrase for a moment until I put it in the context of the rest of the comment.
Snowed In on October 20, 2009 at 2:34 PM
I wonder, could the investors sue Polanski personally to recover their losses by claiming he cavalierly and recklessly made known to the public his upcoming trip to Switzerland and, as such, he should have known or reasonably expected that, by doing so, it could precipitate his arrest resulting in complete loss of their investment?
Dusty on October 20, 2009 at 2:34 PM
Just emailed the AG.
Let’s do it! We want this guy back for all the proper and correct reasons.
Hit ‘em up! Please, friends! It takes only a few minutes.
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 2:35 PM
Defense Secretary Robert Gates tells reporters aboard his plane to Tokyo that the administration cannot “sit on our hands” with regard to troop levels in Afghanistan.
Gates is right. They physically cannot sit on their hands considering the oriface where their heads are located these days. Rumsfeld must be laughing at all of this which would be great except for the fact that Obama is killing Americans as he dithers over the poltical ramifactions to his legacy. It’s a shameful disregard for the very individuals that should be a priority for any President.
highhopes on October 20, 2009 at 2:35 PM
So, like, a film is exculpatory?
A lawyer like that needs to be_____…
(insert option)
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 2:36 PM
So because a guy on the lam for 30 years got caught, a civil wrong occurred? I’m telling you these investors were aiding and abetting a fugitive and should be prosecuted for such.
highhopes on October 20, 2009 at 2:37 PM
Wow! And also make a decision on Afganistan and Iran? Maybe we are asking to much of our Der Leader.
Dire Straits on October 20, 2009 at 2:38 PM
Samson Obama Refused British Visa Over Attempted Sexual Assault
Jim Treacher on October 20, 2009 at 2:38 PM
And think of the loss to the film world. Polanski not being extradicted would deny him the ability to tell films about the justice system from the viewpoint of a convicted rapist of young girls. It’s an opportunity that shouldn’t be squandered.
highhopes on October 20, 2009 at 2:41 PM
Hell, if the Swiss kick him loose, just send bounty hunters after his ass. Gotta be a reward.
Maybe we could talk the Mossad into doing the wet-work…
Nah. Probably not.
mojo on October 20, 2009 at 2:42 PM
Barry will cave and blame Holder for “forgetting” to issue the proper paperwork.
GarandFan on October 20, 2009 at 2:42 PM
Why can’t Schwarzeneggar do this? He is the Governor of the state Polanski was convicted in.
redshirt on October 20, 2009 at 2:44 PM
I see no need for that. Let’s just pressure DC to get Polanski’s child-rapist ass back here.
It’ll be a show trial, to be sure. The way getting to the result will be interesting; we can ‘showcase’ the libs even more.
I sat get him back, and let results fall where they drop.
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 2:47 PM
Better, friend, hit the WH and DoJ–free speech in action. Don’t let B. Hussein get away with it. Polite emails to the WH and DoJ can accomplish much; they take only a few minutes to write.
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 2:49 PM
So, it’s a win-win. Nice.
Kafir on October 20, 2009 at 2:52 PM
“Polanski and his family will go bankrupt if he has to remain in prison, his lawyers told the court. They said continued incarceration would prevent him from finishing the film starring Pierce Brosnan as a fictional British leader and Ewan McGregor as the politician’s ghostwriter.
Investors stand to lose $40 million if Polanski isn’t freed, they said.”
———-
Well, that’s what you get for doing business with a fugitive child rapist.
Perhaps the investors should do background checks on people they wish to invest millions of dollars with.
I will be royally pi$$ed if the US does not extradite this scumbag and throw him in prison.
Dave Rywall on October 20, 2009 at 2:56 PM
It’s nice to know we agree on some things, at least. :)
Snowed In on October 20, 2009 at 2:57 PM
Sorry if someone has already brought this up (at work) but maybe Mr. Obama will say that the time served in the Swiss jail as of Nov. 23 will have been more than the 45 day plea agreement and that Mr. Polanski has served his intended jail term.
Cindy Munford on October 20, 2009 at 2:58 PM
Wait a minute. The Obama administration has to submit the formal extradition request to Switzerland (i.e. Eric Holder) by 11/25/09 or else this dirtbag sodomizer and rapist will go free?
Hell, the Swiss might as well let him go right now then…
Fuzzlenutter on October 20, 2009 at 3:00 PM
Doc, I am hoping that includes “reach-arounds”. I mean, it just would not be civilized for Polanski’s future cell partner to not offer him some form of mutual gratification.
VoyskaPVO on October 20, 2009 at 3:01 PM
Sorry if someone has already brought this up (at work) but maybe Mr. Obama will say that the time served in the Swiss jail as of Nov. 23 will have been more than the 45 day plea agreement and that Mr. Polanski has served his intended jail term.
Cindy Munford on October 20, 2009 at 2:58 PM
——
I highly doubt it. The only people (idiots) who are on Polanski’s side are about 4 dozen Hollywood dooshbags. The vast vast vast vast majority of Americans want him in jail.
He can be also charged with the fugitive thing too, no? That would entail additional jailtime.
Dave Rywall on October 20, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Excellent point, thanks.
Cindy Munford on October 20, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Are the child molester Polanski’s backers too big to fail?
Jerricho68 on October 20, 2009 at 3:10 PM
He can be also charged with the fugitive thing too, no? That would entail additional jailtime.
Dave Rywall on October 20, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Excellent point, thanks.
Cindy Munford on October 20, 2009 at 3:08 PM
—–
I ain’t no lawyer. Change the would to could. No, actually change the would to hopefully will.
Dave Rywall on October 20, 2009 at 3:11 PM
For more fun, hit up the SecState to get this rapist back into our hands. Hillary champions women’s rights, doesn’t she?
Let’s hammer Washington to get this admitted rapist back.
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Hi!
We have so much on the run in this it’s incredible! To the fear of libs, both sides are on common ground. If the Left blows us off, we hurt them. If Lefties join us here, they become fragmented.
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 3:14 PM
We need to hammer the WH, DoJ, and SecState on this. Emails take only a few minutes. Slam them all, to get Polanski back.
Another Tea Party, maybe?
As John Lennon sang, Power to the People! Let’s do it, make it real! This is the best chance we have of getting Polanski back to face his due penalty. We’ll never have another.
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 3:20 PM
I am grasping at any and all straws, I’m going to keep good thoughts.
This one isn’t ideology for me, strictly justice. Now, if Mr. Obama fails to do the correct thing, I am sure I will blame his ideology but I have to believe a man with two beautiful young daughters wants to send a message.
Cindy Munford on October 20, 2009 at 3:20 PM
It’s justice for me, too. That could have been my daughter. I want this admitted baby-rapist back for what the courts have decided.
Screwing the Left is a mere ancillary.
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 3:23 PM
When will he have been held for 42 days? At that point, it would seem to be over — he would have served the sentence as I understand it — Time served?
EconomicNeocon on October 20, 2009 at 3:23 PM
That ‘deal’ was never decided in a court of law. Polanski bailed. So, no sentence was handed down; the judge was denied his place, by Polanski’s flight, to make final determination. It’s an open thing to this day, 30 years after Polanski’s plea
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Mr. Rywall makes excellent point at 3:11 P.M.
Rainbows and Unicorns, Mr. Obama will do the right thing. Hopefully.
Cindy Munford on October 20, 2009 at 3:28 PM
Polanski was convicted in a state court, California, of a state charge. The only one for whom the Swiss jail time or the fleeing charge should matter is the new state court judge who hears the case. The feds should only be involved because extradition is handled nation to nation via treaties. It’s part of a president’s duties to enforce treaties (or withdraw from them), including extradition treaties. There may be geopolitical reasons for fudging the edges some times. But this ain’t one of those times.
rbj on October 20, 2009 at 3:29 PM
Please tell me you’re being sarcastic here, lest I conclude you’re a lib.
Liam on October 20, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Isn’t Barry busy trying to decide what to do about an ongoing war in Afghanistan? It’s taken far longer than five weeks to figure that out (or, more accurately, to re-figure that out since, we all thought, he’d figured it out before making his “war of necessity” speech).
Can he decide two things at once?
Isn’t that asking a bit much?
Even of The Man Who Would Be King?
IndieDogg on October 20, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »