on statutes, limitations, and extradition

Sep 29, 2009 18:00

Okay.  We all know I'm not a lawyer, right?  That said, regarding the case of Roman Polanski:
  1. He pled guilty in 1977 to "unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor."  Leaving aside the grand jury testimony and all the awful things he could have been charged with had he not chosen to waive his right to a trial in order to accept a plea agreement, ( Read more... )

gender

Leave a comment

Comments 17

spicedrum September 30 2009, 00:31:00 UTC
AGREED!

to all of this

Reply

spicedrum September 30 2009, 00:39:19 UTC
p.s. May I link some friends over here, or would you rather I didn't?

Reply

silveraspen September 30 2009, 01:00:22 UTC
I have no objections -- link away!

Reply

spicedrum September 30 2009, 01:02:42 UTC
will do!

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

silveraspen September 30 2009, 01:02:50 UTC
VERY good point about the state of the law back then. I may try to find it out of curiosity, but as you noted-- the point re: fleeing still stands, so.

Just-- argh. You know?

Reply


cincodemaygirl September 30 2009, 01:15:25 UTC
Excellent rundown of the facts--thank you.

Reply

silveraspen September 30 2009, 02:06:41 UTC
You're quite welcome. I was glad to do it. I just wish his actions hadn't made it necessary in the first place.

Reply


meril September 30 2009, 01:26:28 UTC
...OK, how did they manage NOT to get him successfully extradited over the past 31 years?..wait, should have RTFA, apparently LA County has an epic case of communications fail.

(I know nothing about this case, other than this post, and if your particulars are correct this guy is definitely on a list of America's Stupidest Fugitives. If not for the County being overloaded w/cases, but the guy should know what countries have valid extradition treaties if he's going to flee a sentence.)

Reply

silveraspen September 30 2009, 02:08:11 UTC
It's fairly amazing how freely he's traveled all these long years; I suppose it's a challenge to get a warrant for a jet-setter and match it to the place where he would be.

Kudos to Switzerland for being on the spot with the document in hand when all the pieces came together.

Reply

embitca September 30 2009, 02:57:51 UTC
According to what I've read, they've only actively pursued him since about 2005. And since then, they've had a hard time tracking his movements. Either they don't get word that he's going to be someplace until it is too late to get the paperwork in order, or they got the paperwork in order and then he never showed up.

The only reason they managed it in this case is because it's been publicized for months that he was going to be accepting this award in Switzerland.

Reply

meril September 30 2009, 15:06:57 UTC
they've only actively pursued him since about 2005

I'm still trying to decide if that makes them look even worse at this point.

Reply


antigone_ks September 30 2009, 01:31:47 UTC
spicedrum pointed me this way, and thank god for voices of reason. You're so much more articulate than me. I can just about manage a keyboard smash.

Reply

silveraspen September 30 2009, 02:08:56 UTC
Oh, keyboard smashing definitely has its place! Especially in situations like this.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up