Originally posted by FMF
Should they have sent Polanski to the U.S. despite the objections they presumably had and the jurisdiction/technicality that they enforced in order to avoid U.S. anger like the anger this has caused you? Is this a 'bad ally' type transgression by the Swiss nation? Serious questions, not picking at your scabs here.
I don't know all the ins and outs of the case. But "we're releasing him forever because you didn't show us some documents we asked for" seems a bit trivial to me.
As far as I'm concerned, extradition between countries who basically trust each other's justice systems should be enforced unless there's a clear miscarriage of justice. Considering that the evidence is pretty clear that Polanski did something here, I don't think it appropriate for Switzerland to, in effect, usurp this case from the jurisdiction of the United States. The incident happened in the US and he fled pending charges in the US. For Switzerland to say "well, show us every scrap of evidence and we'll decide whether he's guilty before extraditing him" shows an incredible lack of faith in the US justice system.
Switzerland shouldn't extradite him to avoid US anger. They should extradite him because it's the right thing to do. Unless we're dealing with a lawless country, if one allegedly commits a crime within the borders of another sovereign nation, that nation has the right to try him. If Switzerland's position is that the US is a lawless country, that's where the sanctimony comes in.
Edit: Regarding the other things, maybe the Nazi gold thing was a bit uncalled for, but it does bother me that Switzerland intentionally enforces banking rules that encourage citizens of other countries to avoid lawful taxation by their home countries. Same for the Caymans, etc.