Roman Polanski escapes extradition to the US

[sp1814]

Is he any less guilty of being a child abuser in 2010, than he was in 1977?

http://news.bbc.co.uk...and_arts/10601930.stm

[Count-A-Strong]

You might like to have a look at last years discussions:

http://www.theanswerb...k/Question813271.html

[jno]

and today's...

http://www.theanswerb...k/Question915933.html

The answer is no; but it seems as though some suggestion of impropriety in the original proceedings against him has led the Swiss to refuse extradition.

On the whole, I think that's right. That he should apparently get away with something as unpleasant as this is regrettable; but that the justice process might have been twisted is worse. (Though I'm only guessing that this is what was happening.)

[tara20]

The Swiss asked for witness statements which were refused by the US court. So, without these they made their decision to let him go. No evidence, no extradition. Their own fault.

[Trotbot]

Whilst I regret that any alleged child abuser does not face a proper and fail trail and / or escapes appropriate punishment, the blatant double standard of the US policy on extraditing its own citizens versus demanding foreign nationals be extradited to the US is well documented. The Swiss seem to have applied the US standards, which seems reasonable

[LeMarchand]

Don't worry, sp1814, I thought that posting a question on something that was in the news in the "News" section was perfectly legitimate.

As for Polanski, no he isn't any less guilty. It's terrible that no country wants to be the one to send him back to face his crimes. Hopefully the US will apply for his extradition in any country that he travels to until one of them agrees to send him for trial.