Swiss arrest Polanski on US request in sex case

ZURICH – Director Roman Polanski was arrested by Swiss police as he flew in for the Zurich Film Festival and faces possible extradition to the United States for having sex in 1977 with a 13-year-old girl, authorities said Sunday.

Polanski was scheduled to receive an honorary award at the festival when he was apprehended Saturday at the airport, the Swiss Justice Ministry said in a statement. It said U.S. authorities have sought the arrest of the 76-year-old director around the world since 2005.

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090927/ap_on_en_mo/eu_switzerland_polanski


He raped a thirteen year old girl and then fled the country. The real scandal here is that France gave him shelter and Hollywood continued to honor him. He was on his way to recie still another award when he was arrested.

In the coming days keep tack of the moral outrage over his arrest by people who have been pilloring the catholic Church over the Homosexual Priest Scandal

Lock him up and throw away the key.

Why’d it take so long, I wonder?

From my memory, keep in mind two things.

This was a statutory rape; not a violent rape.

The 13 year old was already “experienced”

Oh, well that just changes everything. :rolleyes:

did i read that France and Switzerland are upset over this arrest as well?

he has had his freedom for many years. i saw a program once about this case. should it make a difference where the 13 girl was experienced or not? no. she was 13.

i don’t understand why he receives so many awards. what has he done that has been that great a contribution to the cinema?

Does the US government not have bigger things to worry about?

It has nothing to do with the US Govt. The Los Angeles DA notified Switzerland that a fugitive from justice was traveling to their country. This happens every day.

Hopefully you are not suggesting that raping a 13 year old girl is not something we should be concerned about.

I don’t think rape is something we should not worry about, but I do think a statutory rape case from 30 years ago involving a 76 year old man who has left the country isn’t something we should be putting our energy in.

Oh my gosh, did this words just escape you! Do people really still think like this!? Excuse me while I barf!

This man drugged her, then he sodomized her. She was 13!:mad:

Do you know what a thirteen year old girl looks like?:mad:

The ways of this world and how people think really frighten me.

RAPE is rape no matter how old you are and how “experienced” you are. Please do not ever forget that little fact and do not ever use that excuse again.

He drugged her and so I don’t see how that is considered statutory rape. But for arguments sake lets say it was “just” statutory rape. She was 13 and I don’t think any 13 year old is able to come to this agreement on their own. The adult in this situation should have been adult enough to stop it from happening. How many other 13 year olds did he do this to?

Yes, we do need to put our energy in getting these scum bags off the streets.

(A) Your memory is faulty.

Investigators in the United States say Polanski drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl in the 1970s. Polanski pleaded guilty in 1977 to having unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, but he fled the United States before he could be sentenced and settled in France.

cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/28/zurich.roman.polanski.arrested/index.html

(B) Even if your memory was correct, he was in his 40s, and he had sex with a 13-year-old child. How could you possibly call that non-violent?

© She was experienced at being raped? How does that work? Or are you arguing that anyone who has lost her virginity can be raped with impunity?

He didn’t “leave the country;” he fled it to avoid being sentenced after he had already pleaded guilty to a reduced charge. He is on record as saying he would love to come back here, if only this charge (and presumably another one, for fleeing to avoid prosecution) weren’t hanging over his head.

As for putting energy into the case, we have to uphold the law, or it becomes worthless. Just because a lot of people in Hollywood love the man’s movies doesn’t mean we ignore what he did. He lived high on the hog where U.S. justice couldn’t touch him, and he finally got caught; great. Let the wheels of justice turn.

if he is in his 70’s now and this happened 30 years ago he would have been in his 40’s and i would add old enough to know the difference between right and wrong and that any contact with a 13 year old was inappropriate. i have never heard his side of the story or if he admitted any guilt. i think i did hear an interview with the woman who was 13 at the time and her side of the story. i wonder what she is thinking now. she would be in her 40’s.

i agree with you. even if he were 96, he needs to be held accountable for what happened a long time ago. since he has lived in europe for so many years, you wonder if there have been any other under age girls who have been victimized by him.

I certainly agree there is “no consensual” sex with a 13 year old.

My attempt was to give a little perspective for those that know nothing about the case.

I just reviewed her grand jury testimony…

Many of the news articles talk about him drugging her. Per her own testimony, they shared a single quaalude. She was asked how she knew it was a quaalude. She replied that she had taken one before. There was also champagne being ingested by both. During her testimony she told them that she had had alcohol before and had been drunk before.

She was not an innocent 13 year old. She was certainly way over her head. He should never have touched her and deserves to face justice.

As far as her feelings are concerned, she has publicly stated that she does not want him prosecuted.

As the father of two daughters i could not disagree with you more. We have diocese being bankrupted becuase of homosexual rape of 13 year old boys and you tell us we should just ignore this because it was a long tme and Polanski is old???

The effects of drugs and alcohol are greater on children than they are on adults.

Doesn’t matter what the victim wants if a felony has been committed.

yes, but just because she was not innocent did not give him the right to take advantage of her and her vulnerability at the age of 13. especially since he was a 40 some year old man and knew the law considering her age.

i said in an earlier post that france and switzerland were upset over the arrest and actually it is france and poland - not switzerland where he was arrested. i guess he is trying to fight the extradition.

i do not know how far this case got in the legal system. however, i would think that fleeing the country to avoid prosecution would be considered serious even if it happened 30 years ago.

I don’t think you need to give that caveat because Polanski is indisputably guilty for a terrible crime against a girl. it doesn’t matter about her behavior as a teenager. Everything else is just a euphemism in between for apredatory act by a 40 year old man on a child who had just entered her tumultuous teenage years and had it taken away from her.

So I would however be cautious about what you read in terms of the defense’s characterization of the girl. And not saying this to be challenging or undermine your post, because I at times am easily swayed by what I read in terms of “both sides to the story…” However the more I thought about this case, the more I thought, “wait a minute…no this stuff brought up by the defense and the media details on the victim is irrelevant” When you’re dealing with the devil, (i.e. the lies of Hollywood and the media) you have to be careful about presuming to be cautious for nuance…THERE IS NO PERSPECTIVE NEEDED in this case. I realize from the BS peripheral stuff the media likes to play up, and their insistence on Polanski’s innocence by writing “alleged rape” suggestively–all stems from them angling for an opening for any kind o sympathy for the beloved director who got caught.

Anyway, what makes me angrier about the Polanski’s case is this twisted amorality of Hollywood’s defense of the guy and the willingness** to not** empathize with the girl.
http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m2/jul2005/0/7/000F1158-BDB0-12E4-A7580C01AC1BF814.jpg

(Society is supposed to protect THESE ones ^^ Hollywood forgot that… Instead they’re bawling their eyes out cuz their artistic hero finally might have to serve the time. Oh the horror :rolleyes: )

I’m not falling for it.
1 ) He was a sexual predator,
2) Minors are minors for a reason, so the characterization of the girl is STILL irrelevant because it takes two to tango and one of them was an adult, while the other was a budding adolescent. Polanski obviously the adult in the situation didn’t act like a moral man, which concludes my third point

** Here’s the real question people unfamiliar should really think abou**t in terms of getting REAL perspective on the matter, and to highlight/ and WATCH OUT FOR in terms of the disgusting moral opining of the lefty media for future Hollywood cases like these…

  1. EVEN IF what the defense stated and the Hollywood types continue to say about the girl who was raped was the case. SO WHAT?

Was Polanski forced to say yes to her? Was he not responsible for his disgusting actions ?
Her telling him “no” all of a sudden gets lost in their minds because she was a misguided girl of 13?

It boggles the mind how twisted they get when you start listening to their side. (In fact it can poison it if you’re not careful) And I have to say to people on the forum… No it was not just statutory rape, it was rape. .
(and reading about the case and the actions of Polanski I believe the girl was innocent in her situation, and just see the defense vainly characterized the actions of the 13 year old as the instigator)

As far as her feelings are concerned, she has publicly stated that she does not want him prosecuted.

The girl doesn’t want to have him prosecuted anymore because of two things :

  1. she already had a settlement, therefore she is compromised in what she can say about the guy legally

telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/6237442/Roman-Polanskis-victim-is-mother-who-wants-charges-dropped.html

In January, Mrs Geimer filed a legal declaration in Los Angeles formally requesting that the outstanding charges against Polanski be withdrawn.

She said Los Angeles prosecutors’ insistence that Polanski must return to the United States before dismissal of the case could be considered as a “cruel joke being played on me”.

She also voiced anger that authorities had detailed her grand jury testimony in related hearings to the case.

“True as they may be, the continued publication of those details causes harm to me, my beloved husband, my three children and my mother,” she said, adding that it was time for closure.

“I have survived, indeed prevailed, against whatever harm Mr Polanski may have caused me as a child,” she said. Polanski had taken flight, she said, “because the judicial system did not work.”

  1. the media hoopla during the storm and controversy, let alone the fact that she was FORCIBLY raped and preyed on by a 43 year old sicko, probably had given her enough grief to recover from, she likely doesn’t want to deal with OLD WOUNDS …
    after moving on with her life…bottom line is the girl was also smeared by a Polanski sympathizing media.
    So why would she want to relive that again?
    The last part of her quote sounds like she really felt justice was not served…so obviously she isn’t saying she doesn’t want to pursue it because she feels he’s innocent of what she did to him…and she changed her mind about it all of a sudden… sounds like she just felt the ordeal was over

People need to wake up and have common sense…some things are black and white still. The actions of Polanski were clearly badddd…no excuses.
Her activities are a teenager were irrelevant to the fact that on that particular night, she told Polanski “no” many times and he still had his way with her.

Fact is Polanski was a sick sexual deviant who premeditated the whole thing and his actions involved drugs and taking advantage of a child who only had her mother around to raise her.
Hollywood is so messed up with their logic, I think if anyone finds themselves agreeing or nodding their heads to what they say in terms of moral cases well they need to reevaluate their moral compass. No…It’s not okay to commit a crime and NOT do the time if you’re a talented artist…

As the father of two daughters i could not disagree with you more. We have diocese being bankrupted becuase of homosexual rape of 13 year old boys and you tell us we should just ignore this because it was a long tme and Polanski is old???
[/quote]

I think it’s also relevant because it’s flushing out Hollywood and Journalistic wackos ( the ones who are protesting his arrest as we speak. )
And while I do think there are other things going on right now that might be given less light due to this story, this news/issue does put a pulse on our country 30 years later, in terms of our laws and attitudes towards protecting our children as well the backwards twisted attitude toward justice by these artists.
Hollywood is going to argue we’re not like Europe or France or something, or that old b.s. about societies used to being lax about minors etc. This is a time to be very vigilante when these moral questions arise, especially when we’re in a time of spiritual and societal regression.

I’ve seen it mentioned from others that he had a second romantic relationship with a 15 year old Nastassja Kinski and cast her in his movies over there in Europe in 1979.:eek:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.