good points galileogirl.
I was going to point out that there is a huge difference between a paedophile (someone who likes to have sex with children) and someone, such as Polanski, who apparently had sex with an underaged teenager. And he didn’t rape her either. If the girl had been 18, we wouldn’t even be discussing this, if she had been 17 it would be exactly the same story legally but of course we wouldn’t care as much. Yes, 13 is far too young, but it does not qualify the guy as a paedophile. The law could just have easily taken the age of consent from 18 (which is the US normal) to 16 (which is the EU normal) to 15 (which is normal in some countries) and even to 13. And then the guy would be legal. All I’m saying is that the problem is more legal than it is moral. I wouldn’t want my daughter anywhere near the guy even if she were 21, but that doesn’t make him a criminal. Sex with a 13-year-old does.
Also I am not sure if he might have to pay a price for running, perhaps he just gets the original trial?
And of course whether he’s famous, a Jew, or had personal problems should be no excuse, or affect the court in any way. But apparently it will (possibly against him). Let’s face it, the guy is extremely famous and has been evading justice for decades. It’s a big case and from the judge’s point of view it’s a chance to steal some of that fame (yes, judges are humans too, and just as flawed as any of us. And even more vain).
But I’m interested in two other aspects of the case:
1) how does this fact (and we have many other such examples) reflect on the artistic value of his movies? I mean they were really good quality films, but when you watch them (and regardless of what some artless prosecutor may say or do) don’t you still remember that it’s that guy who had sex with the little girl? I found that I’ve still enjoyed Woody Allen movies, for example, but somewhere in the back of my mind I find myself thinking about his personal life. Or that whole thing with Michael Jackson. I can never just listen to a song and not connect it to the paedophile charges. But does all of that take away from Polanski’s amazing contribution to the world of art?
2) What if you were Switzerland? btw I don’t think they have a permanent extradiction treaty with the US, but they agreed to extradite this guy. But would you do this? Seems a little cheeky to invite someone to a festival in your country when it’s a trap all along. What does this say about the festival itself? Regardless of the crime, Switzerland (known to offer asylum to WWII Nazis and all sorts of drug-dealers and terrorists throughout the 20th c) has always been neutral and refused to co-operate, even when asked to give simple information about the Al-Quaida accounts in its banks. But it seems that once they caved in to that, they’re becoming more co-operative, to the point where they’ll just squeal on you if you forgot to pay your parking ticket in Paris the previous week. I was wondering whether this is actually doing the country good in the long run (btw they recently also joined the Schengen treaty).
And I didn’t know about the girl herself and that she felt the 42 days were enough. I guess this goes back to my point that the case is about the judge’s vanity and not about her own welfare or justice.