After several tries, U.S. officials finally nab Roman Polanski in 1970s rape case [Updated]
Three decades after he fled the United States following his arrest for unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl, Roman Polanski was taken into custody in Zurich this morning and faces extradition to Los Angeles.
Polanski, the famed film director whose career continued to flourish even after fleeing for Europe, was arrested as he arrived in the Swiss city to accept an award at the Zurich Film Festival.
The Los Angeles County district attorney’s office learned last week that Polanski had plans to travel to Zurich this weekend, said Sandi Gibbons, spokeswoman for the district attorney’s office.
Prosecutors sent a provisional arrest warrant to the U.S. Justice Department, which presented it to Swiss authorities. On at least two previous occasions, the district attorney’s office has received reports that Polanski had travel arrangements to countries with extradition treaties with the U.S. and prepared paperwork for his arrest, Gibbons said.
“But in the end, he apparently found out about it and didn’t go,” she said.A source familiar with the investigation told The Times that the U.S. Marshals Service had come close to arresting Polanski half a dozen times or so over the past few decades -- though several of those opportunities presented themselves in the last two years.
"For one reason or another, it just didn't work out," said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the case was ongoing. "There are so many variables."
The source said Polanski always was very careful about when and where he traveled. But as new questions arose in recent years about the fairness of his case, the source said Polanski appeared to become more at ease about travel.
Thomas Hession, head of the Marshals Service's Los Angeles office, would not comment on specifics of the case but said authorities moved quickly on each lead. "Any time information was developed, the L.A. County district attorney's office and the Marshals Service immediately acted on it."
Asked if prosecutors would ask that Polanski be sentenced to time behind bars if he were returned to the U.S., Gibbons said, “We’ve always maintained this is a matter between Polanski and the court. … We initially recommended prison time for him, but I can’t see into the future.”
An attorney for Polanski, Chad Hummel, declined to comment. “Right now, we’re not in a position to say anything,” he said.
[Updated 1:00 p.m. : In a statement, three Los Angeles attorneys representing Polanski indicated the arrest came as a surprise. The lawyers have been representing him in an ongoing attempt to have the case against Polanski dismissed on the grounds of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct.
"We were unaware of any extradition being sought and separate counsel will be retained for those proceedings,” wrote attorneys Douglas Dalton, Chad Hummel and Bart Dalton. Their request to have the 1977 charges against Polanski dismissed is currently pending before the state Court of Appeal.
The organizers of the Zurich Film Festival expressed “great consternation and shock” over Polanski’s arrest and said the program honoring his films would go on in his absence.
A spokeswoman for the event, Nikki Parker, wrote in an e-mail that neither Polanski nor the organizers considered his legal status in the U.S. an issue in attending the festival because he often traveled to Switzerland and even owned a home there.
“There was no concern whatsoever,” Parker wrote.]
Polanski, now 76 and a married father of two, asked the court to throw out the entire case based on new allegations of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct detailed in an HBO documentary last year. The L.A. district attorney’s office argued that he could not make such a request while a fugitive, and an L.A. judge earlier this year agreed. A 1997 attempt at settling the case also failed.
Polanski was arrested 31 years ago at a Beverly Hills hotel after a 13-year-old girl accused him of sexually assaulting her during a photo shoot at actor Jack Nicholson's house.
A 1978 arrest warrant, issued after he failed to appear at his sentencing on the statutory-rape conviction, is still in effect, and he would be taken into custody upon arrival on U.S. soil. The director of "Chinatown" and "Rosemary's Baby" has not returned to the U.S. since then but continues to work as a director, winning an Oscar for "The Pianist."
Polanski’s stay in Switzerland could be brief if he opts to return to Los Angeles.
“If he agrees with an extradition, he could be sent to the U.S. in the next days,” said Guido Ballmer, a spokesman for the Swiss Federal Department of Justice and Police.
But if Polanski declines to come back without a fight -- perhaps a more likely scenario given his three decades as a fugitive -- the court process could be quite lengthy, Ballmer told The Times.
The appeals process has several layers and could last months, if not longer.
-- Harriet Ryan and Andrew Blankstein
Photo credit: A Polanski fan waits for Zurich's Filmfestival. Polanski would have been awarded tonight with the "Golden Eye Award" for his lifework. Ennio Leanza / EPA
More coverage:
Roman Polanski's attorneys stunned by arrest
Samantha Geimer on being the victim of Polanski and the media








What's the point?
Posted by: Melaine Samson | September 27, 2009 at 04:49 PM
For the LA Times to use the phraseology of "finally nab" Roman Polanski wreaks of prejudice. The woman -- now 45 years old -- does not want him prosecuted. Even prosecutors concede of the failure of ethics of the original trial judge. Polanski may be "guilty" or he may not be. But the LA Times is exhibiting "gotcha" justice. Oh, and if the "truth" is paramount, what kind of courage will you show in being unrelenting in confronting actor Jack Nicholson -- in whose home Polanski and the woman were staying? Then again, it may be that the LA Times can name their choice of bad guy, and thru it's silence covers up its own sacred cows.
Posted by: Michael Dillin | September 27, 2009 at 04:52 PM
He RAPED a 13 year old !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: peter | September 27, 2009 at 04:59 PM
This is a very simple and straightforward case. He pled guilty and was convicted of raping a 13 year old girl. He then became a fugitive before he could be sentenced by the court. No one yet on this board has adequately explained why these basic facts should be overlooked and/or why Polanski should be above the law in this case.
If Polanski was a plumber instead of a film director would European public be as outraged at his arrest? Do Europeans object to the Los Angeles District Attorney going after fugitive felons in general or do they just object to going after fugitive felons who also happen to be famous celebrities?
Perhaps, France, Switzerland, Poland and other European countries have cultures and a histories that accepts that certain classes of people are above the law. And maybe Americans are more egalitarian and think that the law should apply to everyone?
Posted by: Parker | September 27, 2009 at 05:05 PM
And thousands of violent street gangsters are not being pursued by our justice dept ..... but they got their man after 32 years for a crime that will be impossible to prosecute!
LOL ....
Posted by: syscom3 | September 27, 2009 at 05:19 PM
For all of the posters who are sarcastically "celebrating" the capture of this "dangerous" criminal, consider this: there is ample evidence that sex offenders, pedophiles in particular, are highly resistant to treatment and often commit multiple sex crimes over the course of their lives. It is not implausible to think that Mr. Polankski continued to commit child rape after 1978 (in fact, he is known to have had sex with then-15 year old Nastassja Kinski after his escape, though that was legal in France at the time). Those could have all been prevented had he received a REAL sentence in 1978, and not used his position of influence and power to secure a extremely favorable jail term, and subsequently flee the country when that agreement evaporated.
The bottom line is that he HAS NOT paid for his crime; he has lived a life of privilege and ease for 31 years after commiting an atrocity of a crime. 42 days in jail for drugging and raping a 13 year old is patently unjust-- to the victim, to future victims, and to society. (And to those who argue that since the victim has moved on, so should we: good for her, but that's not how serious felonies work. What if she were dead, rather than forgiving? Would that still obviate the need for punishment?)
Posted by: John | September 27, 2009 at 05:20 PM
Pedophilia is a crime that cannot be dismissed by virtue of the perpetrator's fame or perceived talent. Would you be okay with a famous person raping YOUR 13 year-old daughter?
Posted by: RichnAge | September 27, 2009 at 05:29 PM
This has something to do with the death of Susan Atkins. If you don't think so you've got your heads in the sand! Sharon Tate is not even mentioned in this story. Think about it.
Posted by: DB Boy | September 27, 2009 at 05:35 PM
He even looks like a paedaphile !!!Well done the justice system,just dont fail now.
Posted by: captain grumpy | September 27, 2009 at 05:42 PM
It is fine that the victim doesn't want him jailed, but we need to remember that Polanski paid off the victim. As a society, if we don't stand up against pedophiles drugging and anally, orally, and vaginally raping thirteen-year-old girls, we're not much of a society at all. The fact that the French seem to think that raping girls is ok as long as the rapist is a famous artist shows just how great the divide is.
Polanski fled the country instead of facing his sentence. However long the extradition takes it is at least a few more days in prison for a man who deserved to spend many, many years in prison for a crime like this.
There's also the reality that pedophiles continue to abuse, and you can only wonder how many other girls were raped by this nutjob who apparently gets his kicks from sex with children.
Posted by: Ziggle | September 27, 2009 at 05:43 PM
Hollywood libs love slime balls like child molesters' Polanski, woody Allen, and Michael Jackson, and murderers like O.J. Simpson, DUI killers like Ted Kennedy. Westly Snipes got a teensy slap on the wrist for ripping off the US by 10 million dollars. (Recently a conservative christian didnt pay $400,000 in taxes-he didnt keep it like snipes, instead gave it to his employees to take care of it--and he is in prison serving a 10 year sentence!)
To liberals it is OK to hurt others if you are liberal, famous, rich, and talented.
No matter how much time has passed, the fact remains Polanski admitted to being guilty of drugging, raping & sodomizing a 13-year old girl. Whether the victim wants him behind bars is irrelevant.
Posted by: Sha | September 27, 2009 at 05:46 PM
"
This is simply a case of the Los Angeles County District Attorney trying to make a name for himself. It is not in the interest of "justice." The United States has by far more prisoners per capita than any other Western nation; throwing people in prison has become a "pastime" for our judicial system.
The United States has many, many problems that are far more important than chasing down a famous film director. It is a waste of money and time, especially considering that the case will probably be either dismissed or thrown out of court on appeal.
Posted by: David | September 27, 2009 at 01:32 PM"
We are also the safest... coincidence?
Posted by: Casey | September 27, 2009 at 05:47 PM
He has to be punished because the public is getting fed up with the rich getting away with murder and other crimes. We live in a country where the legal system is for the rich and we see in case after case where these rich bastards can get the best lawyers money cn buy and walk in the end.
If this bum and child abuser walks in this case it will just reinforce the public's perception that money talks, BS walks and justice does not exist.
Posted by: MICHAEL Cohen | September 27, 2009 at 05:47 PM
he was arrested for having sex with a girl who is too young to participate on this message board...
have fun in prison pervert...
Posted by: gilly | September 27, 2009 at 05:48 PM
I hop[e the pedophile loving morons posting on this have their daughters drugged, raped, and sodomized by a person of means who can flee the country and hide out for 30+ years! Then post your inane comments - money is no substitiute for justice and punishment is the duty of the state that represents the people. Why not let manson go too - he isn't a threat anymore!
Posted by: Jonas Kniger | September 27, 2009 at 05:49 PM
Firstly to David.."throwing people in prison has become a pastime for our judicial system" David,in case you havent noticed,that is their job.!!!
Secondly...Note the T Shirt in the picture! WHO apart from the ego inflated would wear a T Shirt with their own picture and the words WE LOVE YOU on the front. I think the T Shirt pretty well shows the arrogance of the man. ( man in little letters ).
Thirdly.. Im sick of the Hollywood crowd thinking they are above the commoners!!!!!Stick him in prison,not for the rape which has already been decided but for not showing up in court like normal folk have to.
Posted by: captain grumpy | September 27, 2009 at 05:51 PM
Ray's comment is right on the mark.
Posted by: Andy | September 27, 2009 at 05:54 PM
Sharon Tate's family fought for victim's right after the death of their daughter which they should be commended. They worked hard to ensure the Mason family members were held accountable for the crimes they committed. However, what about a child's rights and the fact Mr. Polanski has never accounted for this victim's crime. The Tate family appears to support the HBO special Roman Polanski Wanted and Desire which leans towards letting Polanski move on without any judicial consequences.
Posted by: Mary | September 27, 2009 at 05:59 PM
how ironic if you are under 13 you cant post a comment on this site BUT youcan be raped by Roman!
Posted by: Bryan | September 27, 2009 at 05:59 PM
No statute of limitations on this?
Posted by: sailbyme | September 27, 2009 at 06:01 PM
I am disgusted by those who seem to be arguing that his crime was not worthy of punishment or that it was the fault of the victim or her parents or that just because the victim has worked through many of her issues, that rape of a child should not be punishable, no matter how much time has passed. Even if this man has been a model citizen, which is possible, but not likely, and 30 years have passed since the conviction, he still needs to serve his time in prison. The fact that he had the means to leave the country and evade extradition for this long really makes me want to see him serve his time in prison, just like any other convict with fewer resources would have had to. Those who say we in America are being extreme or radical in upholding the law are moral relativists who seem perfectly willing to give this criminal a pass, just because he is a film maker and not a brick layer, which really shows the exceptional character of America over that of the rest of the world.
Posted by: Jason | September 27, 2009 at 06:05 PM
Does this mean Jack Nicholson is an accessory?
Posted by: meesterbig | September 27, 2009 at 06:13 PM
Jake T,
"In matters of criminal justice, America is the Saudi Arabia of the western world."
And the pursuit and subsequent arrest of this child molester is evidence of that? You have a very warped understanding of "criminal justice."
Posted by: CommonSense | September 27, 2009 at 06:14 PM
The rich and well connected deserve to have their day in court as well as the rest of us. Congrats to Law Enforcement!
Posted by: Ed Ingle | September 27, 2009 at 06:17 PM
If you are a 31 year old man and have sex with a 13 year old - it's ALWAYS a crime!!! A 13 year old cannot consent to a sexual relationship with an adult. He was convicted of breaking our laws and ran from punishment like a coward and has hidden for decades like the rat he is. I hope he enjoys the treatment that convicted child molestors get in prison. Where have Europe's standards gone?
Posted by: Swampy | September 27, 2009 at 06:18 PM