From a strictly legal standpoint, the United States, on behalf of the state of California, has every right to seek the return of a fugitive from justice. But everyone knows that in matters of the law, many other considerations affect how strenuously cases get pursued. There would be no plea bargaining if this were not the case nor would there have been a presidential pardon for another fugitive, Marc Rich. Like one of his best films, Chinatown, the case of Roman Polanski is convoluted and the request that the Swiss government apprehend and extradite him adds one more layer to the conundrum. In 1977, Polanski pled guilty to having sex with a minor - statutory rape. He was placed under psychiatric observation where he remained for 42 days, at which time he was judged to be sane, competent and suitable for sentencing. Although the plea bargain was supposed to count the days in observation as time served, Polanski suspected that the judge was about to betray him and rather than face a prison sentence, he fled the country to France. A documentary film which aired last year confirmed that there were improprieties between the judge and a prosecutor but the judge is now dead.
For the past thirty-two years, Polanski has lived in Europe, worked steadily, received an Oscar as best director of The Pianist (2002) and avoided any brouhaha that would remind the public of his original crime. This doesn’t mitigate the fact that he fled sentencing but it does put in some perspective which criminals belong on the back burner for zealous prosecutors. Just a month ago, the state of California discovered that an eleven year old girl who had been kidnapped eighteen years before was alive and still living with her abductor, a paroled convict who had served time for the exact same crime. What made the story so horrifying was that the young imprisoned woman had borne two children by this rapist whose home had been visited regularly by parole officers and intermittently by firemen, the sheriff’s department and the police - none of whom ever investigated what was happening literally in the man’s back yard. The contrast between the stunning incompetence in searching for Jaycee Dugard and the Javert-like international stalking of Polanski highlights some questionable priorities in the D.A.’s office. On its own turf, the state of California did a shockingly bad job of police work. In Europe, they now snag a 77 year old French citizen whose lawyers are actively appealing the recent California decision refusing the request to move Polanski’s criminal case out of L.A.
Could the United States have afforded to let this judicial process play itself out? Was there anything particularly pressing about getting Polanski this year instead of next? At a time when we are looking for support from our allies to combat existential issues related to Iran, did we need this diplomatic trifle to deflect from more serious matters? Polanski hasn’t approached the U.S. in thirty-two years - he certainly wasn’t taunting the authorities in a way that would force this action. Too much media attention will be focused on this and too much legal energy spent on a largely symbolic act with no immediate consequence of note. The state of California is in an economic stranglehold which will force the release of tens of thousands of criminals in the coming months. All department of correction efforts should be directed towards pre-emptive systems to cope with this potential nightmare. Oddly enough, Roman Polanski would be the right filmmaker for this menacing subject.
Have PoliticalMavens.com delivered to your inbox in a daily digest by clicking here
