Polanski free to go

http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=polanski

Originally posted by zeeblebot
http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=polanski

Surprised, not shocked.

I can't be bothered to go to the link. Was Polanski subjected to due process? Is there any illegality involved in him 'going free'?

Originally posted by FMF
I can't be bothered to go to the link. Was Polanski subjected to due process? Is there any illegality involved in him 'going free'?

Hell man! We had a lengthy thread on that a several months ago. One that you participated in quite a bit.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
Hell man! We had a lengthy thread on that a several months ago. One that you participated in quite a bit.

On this latest occasion, can we now say that Polanski has been subjected to due process? And is there any illegality involved in him 'going free'?

Originally posted by zeeblebot
http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=polanski

The Swiss are probably bitter that the IRS went after UBS last year. Technically, the Swiss had the right to do what they did. It's their jurisdiction, they can do what they want. But it was a calculated slap in the face to the United States. They were stalling on the extradition question and they let him go on a technicality.

Whatever. Let the Swiss go ban the minaret and then turn around and get all sanctimonious about our criminal justice system. It's just the ugly Americans up to no good, such as wanting to bring a child rapist to justice. Maybe we can send the Swiss all of our child rapists. They're welcome to them.

Let them keep their bloody Nazi gold and continue to be a haven for American tax evaders; then maybe they can raise their level of sanctimony next time we want to try a child rapist in order to drown out their amorality.

I hope the IRS puts UBS out of business.

Originally posted by sh76
Technically, the Swiss had the right to do what they did. It's their jurisdiction, they can do what they want. But it was a calculated slap in the face to the United States. They were stalling on the extradition question and they let him go on a technicality.

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.

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.

why was the Nazi gold thing uncalled for?

Originally posted by zeeblebot
why was the Nazi gold thing uncalled for?

Because it's an old wound not really ongoing (they'll never really be able to pay back everything they owe; the debts are too uncertain) and not relevant to this case.

Originally posted by zeeblebot
http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=polanski

good for him.

Originally posted by sh76
Because it's an old wound not really ongoing (they'll never really be able to pay back everything they owe; the debts are too uncertain) and not relevant to this case.

+ penalties and interest!

Originally posted by FMF
On this latest occasion, can we now say that Polanski has been subjected to due process? And is there any illegality involved in him 'going free'?

Perhaps not, just a bit of immorality.