WHAT happens when old men touch down in a foreign country and suddenly get hit with a writ for crimes committed decades ago? Consider, if you will, the contrasting cases of Augusto José Ramón Pinochet and Roman Raymond Polanski.
The Chilean general staged a coup in 1973 against a democratically elected government and instituted some strange hybrid regime, fusing military dictatorship with Hayek’s supposedly libertarian economics.
Four years later in California, the Franco-Polish film director had sex with a 13-year-old girl. Under US law, that constitutes statutory rape, although testimony indicates that a degree of coercion may also have been involved. It is also uncontested that he tanked up the young Samantha Geimar with champagne and a Quaalude before getting her into the hot tub.
Pinochet remained head of state until 1990, and was unquestionably guilty of systematic and widespread human rights violations including mass-murder, torture, kidnapping and illegal detention. He may have been personally responsible for 3,000 deaths.
Polanski pleaded guilty in 1978 to a criminal charge of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. Under the terms of a plea bargain, the expectation of both the defence and the prosecution is that he would receive probation. When it became clear that he faced a lengthy prison sentence, he fled the country.
Pinochet visited London for medical treatment in 1998, at which point Spain requested his extradition. On account of his health, he was placed under what was tantamount to house arrest.
Polanski visited Zurich for a film festival in 2009, at which point the US requested his extradition. He has since last September been held in a Swiss jail.
Pinochet became a rightwing cause celebre, securing widespread support on the free market right, including such prominent backers as Margaret Thatcher and Norman Lamont.
Polanski became a leftwing cause celebre, securing widespread backing from the transatlantic liberal luvvie set, including such prominent backers as Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese, David Lynch, Robert Harris and – until she changed her mind, anyway – Emma Thompson. But a number of well-known feminist commentators have taken the opposite view.
In 2000, New Labour home secretary Jack Straw allowed Pinochet to return to his home country, justifying the release on medical grounds. Just how ill the erstwhile caudillo really was is a matter of some dispute, even to those physicians who examined him. But he lived on a further six years, reportedly in some wealth and comfort.
We don’t know what will happen to Polanski, who has been refused bail. Whatever his talents as an auteur, he has a case to answer, and it is right that he return to the US to answer it. There must be some sanction, even if only symbolic, for drugging a starstruck teenybopper and then making her have sex against her will.
But he should be treated leniently. His lawyers argue – apparently not without credence - that his conviction should be set aside on the grounds that the judge and prosecutors colluded improperly
Most importantly of all, his victim thinks the charges should be dropped, and that call has to carry due weight, even if a subsequent $500,000 pay off had something to do with it.
Finally, it should be stressed that Polanski is now 76, and hardly likely to remain a risk to LA Lolitas.
But whatever the outcome, the contrast with Pinochet remains glaring. If Polanski had restricted himself to attending the London Film Festival, he would not now be the slammer.
Posted at 14:21, 11 November 2009
Comments (16)
In cases like these, it's less to do with the nature of the crime and more to do with whether our Imperial Yank Overlords decide it offends their own morality.
Similarly, computer geek Gary McKinnon is being extradited, but convicted terrorist Luis Posada Carriles is not.
Describing support for Polanski as a "left wing cause celebre" is misleading. His supporters include right-wing French culture minsters, but are mainly figures in the film industry. This is basically all the luvvies rather seedily clubbing together, yes, but there is nothing even notionally "liberal" or "left" about it. David Lynch, for one, is no left-winger or liberal. And I haven't seen any attempt to defend Polanski outside this decidely narrow "cultural" demographic.
"Four years later in California, the Franco-Polish film director had sex with a 13-year-old girl. Under US law, that constitutes statutory rape, although testimony indicates that a degree of coercion may also have been involved. "
A bit of an understatement? The girl's testimony makes it very clear what Polanski did.
It is here, http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskib14.html
Offering someone some drugs is quite different from forcing them down their throat. And the judge of the time threatening to go back on POlanski's plea agreement and give him real time in such a nasty penal system was reason enough for one of the lawyers to tell him that if it was them they'd run.
Skid,
Offering a 13 year old drugs is morally dubious to say the least and some American socialists have called for Polanski to be locked up and the key thrown away.
As for Emma Thompson being part of a left wing, do me a favour. I remember watching her being interviewd by Clive James and it reminded me of
that scene from the Sergio Leone film, Once upon a time in the revolution, where the passenegers in the stagecoach are snobbishly talking about the peasants. She is your classic liberal, part of the enlighenment values (whatever the fuck that means) brigade.
Having said that he has made some great films when he should have been locked up. So on balance....
Being a born again Puritan, Dave, I am not best pleased with your phrase 'LA Lolitas'. I don't think Ms Geimar was gasping for it, and I don't think Polanski had any intention of a full-blown relationship. He was just being a dirty old man. Maybe, it's that slight perverse attitude that enables him to make what some consider great films. I have found, those films of his that I have seen, that his style is a bit too intense and twisted for my taste, but then on the other hand he did lose a lot of family in the Holocaust. If he had done the time when he should have done, it would all be over with now.
There's no equivalence between Polanski and Pinochet. We all know why Polanski's being crucified, and it's nothing to do with events when he was in his twenties.
Polanksi was directing an adaptation of the Robert Harris novel, Ghostwriter. A book about Tony Blair being a CIA recruit and war criminal.
Small point, Winston, but the sexual assault took place when Polanski was in the 40s, not 20s.
Simple really. Pinochet should have been either extradited to Spain or tried here. Polanski should either be extradited or tried in Switzerland if it's thought that the US legal system is bad. Gary McKinnon should be tried here and Tony Blair should be arrested and tried anywhere.
Marko - then perhaps everyone who has offered cigarettes or alcohol to kids of that age should be locked up. [This is not my view]. Just because some American socialists may have a Puritan streak doesn't make them right.
"then perhaps everyone who has offered cigarettes or alcohol to kids of that age should be locked up."
If in exchange for sex then yes.
(The american socialist bit wasn't directed at you though it looks as though it is)
" Polanksi was directing an adaptation of the Robert Harris novel, Ghostwriter. A book about Tony Blair being a CIA recruit and war criminal.
Posted by Winston Smith "
Yes, that's it.
Well I like to think I'm a socialist, but Je suis un citoyen du monde.
I find the support for Roman Polanski from the arts community to be sickening in the extreme.
He drugged and sexually abused a young girl, but because he's now regarded as a filmmaking guru then apparently this doesn't matter anymore to some people.
Disgusting.
I don't normally find Jenny Diski's articles that interesting but this is a good one about Polanski: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n21/jenny-diski/diary
Rulers always look after their own, which is why *insert gobshite here* is able to roam the world unmolested.
A better contrast is between Polanski and the staggeringly vile yet recently eulogised to the point of nausea Michael Jackson.