home

Roman Polanski Loses First Bail Appeal

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 01:58:00 PM EST
Tags: Roman Polanski (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A Swiss appeals court has denied Roman Polanki's request for bail.

Polanski has 10 days to appeal the decision on his release to Switzerland's highest tribunal. He also can continue attempts to persuade the Swiss Justice Ministry to release him. More court proceedings are expected after Washington files its formal extradition request, which it has until Nov. 25 to submit.

Polanski's attorney said Tuesday's decision was a disappointment. "It's probable that Mr. Polanski will appeal," Herve Temime told reporters in Paris. "I repeat that Mr. Polanski has firmly and strongly stated that he will remain in Switzerland during the entire extradition procedure, regardless of its outcome."

[More...]

The court found Polanski to be a flight risk and that his offer for bail wasn't sufficient:

In its 17-page verdict, the Swiss court said Polanski offered to surrender his travel documents, wear an electronic monitoring device and submit himself to daily police checks. Those measures were seen as insufficient to prevent his flight because he could always obtain a new passport or even travel to his French home without papers.

The Swiss court also was concerned that Polanski could leave Switzerland and avoid the extradition process if he fled by helicopter or private airplane.

Lawyers for Polanski offered up the director's Gstaad chalet as collateral, saying it represented more than half of his personal wealth and that it would definitely guarantee his remaining in the country because he has two children he must support through school.

Swiss authorities wanted Polanski to put up cash.

The Swiss Justice Ministry said it would examine any new request Polanski submits and evaluate whether it represents a "concrete, realizable" offer as the court ruling suggests. But, spokesman Folco Galli reiterated that detention is only lifted in exceptional cases.

< Bernie Kerik : Bail Revoked, Jailed Pending Trial | Supreme Court to Hear Case of Uighurs Held at Guantanamo >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Roman Polanski Loses First Bail Appeal | 34 comments (34 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Have him offer his current (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Fabian on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 02:48:00 PM EST
    project as collateral.  There's apparently a lot of money invested in that - and a lot of investors to answer to.

    It's questionable whether the chalet is really an assurance.  If Polanski fled to France again, he'd probably never return to Switzerland again - so all the chalet would represent is lost money.  How much is freedom worth?  Half your wealth - sounds like a deal to me.

    The reference to his children - very heart wrenching.  I'm so touched.  

    Not.

    I'm pretty sure his children (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 02:50:38 PM EST
    could attend France's taxpayer-funded public schools at no charge to Polanski...

    Parent
    And half his wealth (none / 0) (#8)
    by Fabian on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 03:14:48 PM EST
    should suffice to support them.  They are teens now and will be adults within a decade.

    Parent
    Hopefully he gets bail (none / 0) (#29)
    by Watermark on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 09:19:40 PM EST
    I don't really care how he doesn't go to prison, just as long as the monsters in our justice system don't touch him.

    Parent
    Monsters?! (none / 0) (#31)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 11:33:10 PM EST
    Say what?

    Parent
    Yessssss, monsters! (none / 0) (#33)
    by Fabian on Wed Oct 21, 2009 at 04:47:03 AM EST
    The kind with slavering jaws and venomous claws!

    Don't know if they are referring to the guests of the system, the lawyers, the judges, the bail bondsmen or the court clerks.  
    </snark>

    Parent

    oculus, oculus where art thou, oculus (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by MO Blue on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 03:55:54 PM EST
    Are you really going to abstain?

    you know she hasn't seen this..... (none / 0) (#12)
    by vml68 on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 04:45:09 PM EST
    if she has not commented yet... :-)!

    Parent
    Are you kidding? I linked to it earlier today. (none / 0) (#13)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 05:40:55 PM EST
    link to link

    Parent
    That was in an open thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by MO Blue on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 05:46:39 PM EST
    not a dedicated Polanski thread.

    Still using restraint regarding editorializing?

    Parent

    Yes, ma'am. I have been (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 06:02:56 PM EST
    chastened.

    Parent
    Please don't stop. It makes me smile (none / 0) (#22)
    by vml68 on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 08:24:01 PM EST
    everytime I see one of your comments on Polanski, Gates/Crowley....:-)
    I did see your link earlier on the open thread. I was referring to you not having seen this post.

    Parent
    I figure fair and balanced is important. (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 08:27:11 PM EST
    Somebody has to give the prosecution's perspective here.  Or maybe not.  

    Parent
    you do that quite well (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 08:35:00 PM EST
    :)

    Parent
    Why, thank you. (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 08:56:21 PM EST


    Parent
    You'd think, at this point, (none / 0) (#2)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 02:48:33 PM EST
    that Polanski would realize he's going to be extradited no matter how much he spends on his lawyers.

    That said, maybe his lawyers realize it but fail to share that info with Polanski...

    bail for a fugitive? (none / 0) (#3)
    by diogenes on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 02:49:09 PM EST
    Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.

    i can't help it (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by pitachips on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 06:29:53 PM EST
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ux3DKxxFoM

    Parent
    Why doesn't the LA DA (none / 0) (#5)
    by me only on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 02:56:42 PM EST
    come out and tell Polanski they will count his time in Swiss jail, up to 60 days, if he will drop his appeal and face the music?

    Seems like the best possible outcome is for this to be resolved quickly.  Polanski seems to be willing to sit in Swiss jail forever to avoid the US system.  I doubt they are going to put him in San Quentin.

    Does Polanski (none / 0) (#6)
    by Fabian on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 02:59:31 PM EST
    seem like he'd agree to that?

    I'm not sure if what we are seeing is Polanski talking or his lawyers talking, but either/and/or seem determined to fight.

    Parent

    Well no, he doesn't seem (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by me only on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 03:14:31 PM EST
    entirely rational in regards to this case.  If his lawyers are trying to claim that Polanski needs to finish his movie, the only logical conclusion is to come back to America and face the music sooner rather than later.

    I would literally fall out of my chair laughing if Polanski spends more time in jail fighting this than he is sentenced to (assuming he is convicted).

    Parent

    The DA's office can't bind the court. (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 06:35:18 PM EST


    Parent
    But it can dismiss the case (none / 0) (#19)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 06:53:52 PM EST
    If it files a motion to dismiss the case after he's done 60 or 90 days in a swiss jail, the court would have to grant it.

    Parent
    Video arraignment on FTA. (none / 0) (#20)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 07:35:22 PM EST
    Concurrent sentencing on underlying PC 261.5 conviction and FTA.  DA's office requests credit for time served, no probation.   I don't think the court is compelled to dismiss the cases though.

    Parent
    misses the point (none / 0) (#26)
    by diogenes on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 09:07:10 PM EST
    Polanski should be facing additional charges for being a fugitive.  The main purpose of bringing him back is to deter others who would consider being fugitives; hopefully at his age he wouldn't be raping too many 13 year olds in a 60 day period, so containment for 60 days is not such a big deal here.  He is not really rehabilitation material.  And even I don't support criminal sentences for revenge.

    Parent
    FTA=Failure to Appear. What you (none / 0) (#27)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 09:14:12 PM EST
    are labelling a "fugitive."

    Parent
    O.K. Now it is beginning to feel (none / 0) (#30)
    by MO Blue on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 09:58:28 PM EST
    like a real Polanski thread.

    Parent
    Is it common (none / 0) (#9)
    by Steve M on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 03:40:19 PM EST
    for someone to be granted bail when they are currently a fugitive?

    Evidently the Swiss do not think so. (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by MO Blue on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 03:53:35 PM EST


    Parent
    Well it would seem to be a pretty good indicator (none / 0) (#16)
    by Socraticsilence on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 06:17:23 PM EST
    of past behavior.

    Parent
    Please clarify this comment. Confusing. (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 07:36:04 PM EST


    Parent
    The court found Polanski to be a flight risk (none / 0) (#28)
    by Watermark on Tue Oct 20, 2009 at 09:16:31 PM EST
    LOL

    Polanski taken to a hospital (none / 0) (#32)
    by Andreas on Wed Oct 21, 2009 at 01:50:34 AM EST
    The WSWS writes:

    Last Friday, the 76-year-old Polanski was taken to a hospital to receive "medical treatment" for reasons that have yet to be made public. The episode was carried out with a degree of secrecy. Swiss Justice Ministry spokesman Folco Galli refused to clarify the matter while speaking with the Reuters news service, saying only that "[Polanski] is still in detention. If necessary he has all the medical care (needed). It can be in prison or in hospital, in general."

    Polanski's attorney in France, Herve Temime, also spoke with Reuters and was himself apparently unaware of his client's exact whereabouts, saying "All I know is that he has been taken from prison for medical attention. I don't know where he is or when he will be returned to prison."

    Temime had visited Polanski in prison the previous week, and came away with serious concerns about his client's health. The attorney spoke with reporters telling them Polanski was "in an unsettled state of mind" and that he was "depressed" and "dejected."

    That Polanski is suffering under the trauma of imprisonment will elicit no sympathy from the right-wing and middle class liberal elements who have combined to conduct a campaign of vilification against him. It will no doubt delight more than a few who have been calling for Polanski's head since his arrest in September.

    Roman Polanski refused bail by Swiss court
    By Hiram Lee, 21 October 2009

    Heh. (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Fabian on Wed Oct 21, 2009 at 04:51:43 AM EST
    Do they report on all criminal cases like that?  

    Hyperbole and melodrama - they should write for the theatre.

    Parent

    Roman Polanski Loses First Bail Appeal | 34 comments (34 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment