Swiss refuse bail for Roman Polanski
Film director Roman Polanski, fighting extradition from a Swiss prison to the United States in a case from three decades ago involving sex with a teenage girl, has lost his first bid to have his arrest overturned.
Folco Galli, a spokesman for the Federal Office of Justice in Bern, the Swiss capital, said today that his office has rejected Polanski's request for a reconsideration of the warrant leading to his arrest.
At the same time, the office of justice also recommended Monday to a federal criminal court that Polanski's application for release from prison be denied.
"We are still persuaded that there is still a danger that he will escape, and that liberation on bail could not guarantee his presence through the extradition proceedings," Galli said.
Polanski, the Oscar-winning director of such classic films as "Chinatown" and "Rosemary's Baby," was taken into custody Sept. 26 in Zurich, where he had gone to accept a lifetime achievement award at a film festival. The arrest came at the request of authorities in Los Angeles, who want Polanski back in court 31 years after he fled the U.S. before he could be sentenced for unlawful sex with a minor.
Lawyers for Polanski, 76, have suggested that he be released from jail and allowed to spend his detention at the home he owns in the Swiss resort town of Gstaad.
In a statement today, Herve Temime, Polanski's Paris-based attorney, insisted that Polanski would "not leave the Swiss territory during the whole extradition procedure, and [would] respect all the obligations that may be imposed upon him in order to guarantee that commitment."
But legal experts say that such a decision by the Swiss court would be highly unlikely and that Polanski will probably have to stay in prison for several months while extradition proceedings play out.
-- Henry Chu in London and Devorah Lauter in Paris
More breaking news in L.A. Now:



I don't see why the Swiss authorities believe he is a threat to not appear in the extradition process if freed from jail. Polanski's attorney said he would stay at his house. What's the problem?
Posted by: faye schlift | October 06, 2009 at 08:57 AM
So happy to read that the Swiss authorities are not allowing bail. If Polanski ran once he has every intention of running again.
Posted by: michelle | October 06, 2009 at 08:57 AM
The police may not catch you today, and they may not catch you tomorrow, and they may not catch you next week, but the police never give up, and eventually they will catch you. Too bad, so sad, Polanski, you rapist.
Posted by: Adam Vant | October 06, 2009 at 09:01 AM
Why does the LAT dance around the word "rape"? He didn't have sex, the incident wasn't "involving sex"--he drugged and raped a 13 yr. old girl. The testimony shows that she did not consent, which is moot because of her age.
Is this a style-book thing?
Posted by: Belinda Gomez | October 06, 2009 at 09:20 AM
Ironic (and wonderfully so), Polanski could end his jail misery by simply agreeing to immediate extradition and then face a much more sympathetic court and sentence in California. If he doesn't insult the court with his phony tears of alleged injustice, then he would probably serve less time here than he now will in Swiss jail just waiting to finally come to California! He has no case to argue in Switzerland.
Posted by: tony s. | October 06, 2009 at 09:22 AM
YES ! ! ! Who says all news is BAD news?
Posted by: gjdagis | October 06, 2009 at 09:27 AM
"sex with a teenage girl" ??? that implies she could have been 19,18,.. why not "rape" or at "least statutory rape"??
Posted by: JD | October 06, 2009 at 09:51 AM
Go ahead, give him bail. But make it hurt if he runs. Put up the title to the house plus triple the value, all on cash deposit inside Switzerland. If he runs, he forfeits it all. That should make him really think about his wife and kids. If his Hollywood buddies really love him, they'll pay to make it good.
Posted by: Bill T | October 06, 2009 at 09:53 AM
Faye I hope you're being sarcastic. I recall reading in this newspaper about two Americans that went to Cambodia to have sex with minors. They were arrested and brought back here to the U.S. to stand trial. I don't see Polanski being any different. He committed the crime a long time ago. He should be charge for two crimes, one; for the rape, two; for fleeing.
Posted by: Jose Rodriguez | October 06, 2009 at 09:55 AM
@Faye Schlift:
Polanski has a history of running away from criminal proceedings.
Further, he has the money, the connections, and the legal protections to keep himself safe from the extradition proceedings for the rest of his life in France, which is just, at most, a few hours drive from where he's held in Switzerland.
Polanski's attorney may be telling the truth -- that Polanski said he would remain at his house in Switzerland -- but that doesn't guarantee that Polanski himself was telling the truth.
Posted by: PierreLA | October 06, 2009 at 09:59 AM
"sex with a teenage girl"?????
This is called rape - she wasn't 19, she was 13.
Posted by: Marcelo | October 06, 2009 at 10:01 AM
RE: faye schlift
The problem is that he has an obvious history of fleeing from justice. The Swiss made the right call. Anyone associated with him should turn their back in shame unless they too want to be associated with the idea that sleeping with a 13 year is something that should be allowed.
Posted by: Chris H | October 06, 2009 at 10:10 AM
The opening sentence is entirely misleading in that it implies something far less insidious than the actual facts of the case: "in a case from three decades ago involving sex with a teenage girl."
To the uninformed reader, this might be read as to mean sex with a girl of 19 years.
In truth, it wasn't sex at all. It was rape. Rape of 13 year old girl. Polanski gave her alcohol, gave her drugs, and then raped her vaginally and anally. That is called rape. Not sex.
Is this an example of poor writing or defense by obfuscation?
Posted by: Andrew | October 06, 2009 at 10:14 AM
This is disgusting, all he did was drug and rape rape a 13 year old. Shame!
Posted by: moe shirazi | October 06, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Let's see. About the time that Polanski did his deeds, Americans sent hundreds of thousands of their people to Vietnam to kill, bomb, spray poison, rape, pillage and to lie about it. Are we ready to put them on trial for these crimes? Why not? What's the problem? Crime is crime, regardless of man-made borders.
Posted by: Richard Ivey | October 06, 2009 at 10:23 AM
The Swiss authorities are right. He has a history of evading government. That's why he has arrived at this juncture. I am thankful the Swiss are working with the U.S., they are doing things in a responsible way and I applaud them.
Posted by: Teenage Rape Survivor | October 06, 2009 at 10:24 AM
good. it's about time he was dealt with.
i only hope he is placed in general population and that all his fellow prisoners know he is a child rapist.
he's had something coming to him for decades now. it's about time he received it.
hope he rots.
Posted by: stonermoog | October 06, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Sorry. I forgot that he ran away for 30 years. My bad.
Posted by: faye schlift | October 06, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Oh, enough of this internet lynch-mob already. If the Swiss don't let him go, I'm never eating their chocolate again.
Posted by: FZ | October 06, 2009 at 10:29 AM
Execute all Rapists. Castration is not enough. Why waste money on prisons?
Posted by: Steve | October 06, 2009 at 10:30 AM
I don't see why the Swiss authorities believe he is a threat to not appear in the extradition process if freed from jail. Polanski's attorney said he would stay at his house. What's the problem?
Posted by: faye schlift | October 06, 2009 at 08:57 AM
Faye Schlift. YOU ARE AN IDIOT. A STUPID IDIOT.
Posted by: hello | October 06, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Faye, you are joking, right?
I totally agree with Tony S... Polanski is probably going to spend more time in a Swiss jail than if he would just come to the US and end this case.
Posted by: Janice | October 06, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Let me inform the victim's defenders that if Polanski would have been a regular Joe, he would have been free from the beginning. Here in Texas, statutory "rape" is as common as the common cold. A police officer "raped" a 13 year old and his sentence? Probation. How those bleeding hearts that want Polanski bunrned at the stake like "them apples?"
The list is as long as the reasons of those with secret agendas state here why Polanski should stay in jail. If justice was fair and impartial, Bush and his whole administration would be in jail for life. In another story about a another minor being not only raped but killed, her father said:"Why couldn't he left her alive?". Worst yet, why these bleeding hearts and the hypocrites of always don't care a bit about the thousands of children being pimped every day in every town, small and big, in America. When people want justice, it has to be for the proper reasons, fair and without politics being involved and that my friends is impossible.
Posted by: Jorge | October 06, 2009 at 10:51 AM
Awesome!
Posted by: baccaratt | October 06, 2009 at 11:03 AM
haha yeah its not like hes ran from the law before right...
Posted by: david | October 06, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Hollywood - please say "NO" to child rapists! Whoopie, can I get a Rape Rape?
Posted by: moe shirazi | October 06, 2009 at 11:36 AM
To those apologists that want to let him go free... Please do not let the facts intrude on your psyco/sexual rape fantasies. The girl was 13. She said “No” repeatedly. Please check the Grand Jury transcripts at the www.thesmokinggun.com. Polanski, agreed with her testamony that she said “no” and asked to be taken home repeatedly. No does not me yes. Experienced does not mean slut who wants it. Apparently some famous Hollywood celebrities have some sick fantasies.
Posted by: moe shirazi | October 06, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Times, you are way out of line for just calling the child victim a "teenage girl". The sensitivity of the victim's age is emphasized by this statement at the top of this Comments page: "If you are under 13 years of age you may read this message board, but you may not participate."
Posted by: Brent Poirier | October 06, 2009 at 11:39 AM
Poor roman. He likely had a hot date with some other child. It amazes me hollywood would get behind this guy. Well no it doesn't, hollywood is where it happened. In the home of a famous actor. What does Jack have to say. Hey I wasn't there, the drugs and booze who knew he would use them?
Let roman drag it out and then come back here and serve a couple years. The message needs to be clear. Leave children alone. I think her statements at the time, that she was afraid, and how manipulative he was before he raped her, should be posted front page until he is in jail. Then we could say the NY Times is on the right side of this.
Thank you Switzerland.
Posted by: Buzz | October 06, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Now the authorities can after Ted Nugent.
Posted by: Larry Linn | October 06, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Society must recognize that money and power do not make wrongs right. Accepting responsibility for your actions means showing up in court.
Too bad Roman Polanski did not learn what Victor Frankl learned, his past sorrows do not justify his sins. If he felt like a victim, you do not have to choose to victimize others-that is how he let them win. I hope he has or will grow beyond this and come back to get the day in Court done.
Posted by: Kris H | October 06, 2009 at 11:45 AM
Let's end this now... get a rope!
Posted by: EB | October 06, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Having been a rape victim from the age of 4 to 13 by older men, I say, "Thank - You"! Especially to the Swiss Courts for not setting a bail. This victim does not want to get involved with reliving the case, and the unwanted press questions. We victims most often want to be left alone, to forget. The problem is, that you do not forget. It blurs a little, but crops up in nightmares, and with little mind triggers. She was drugged, maybe that helped her to get on with her life a little bit easier, but your soul has been harmed and it does not forget. If I had the chance to prosecute my rapists, now that I am old enough to deal with them face to face; I would gladly! Just to be able to end some of my fears. I am in my late fifties, and it remains a wound that is scared over, but underneath...not healed.
Posted by: Val | October 06, 2009 at 11:46 AM
I agree that "sex with a teenage girl" sounds overly deferential. He's not charged with sex with a teenage girl, though. He's charged with "unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor," which is also referred to as statutory rape, depending on the jurisdiction.
Posted by: Andrew | October 06, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Justice is, when Dirty Harry shoots the bad guy at the end of the movie and that's what most of the people are looking for. But couldn't there be another ending?
Posted by: Jim Steinman | October 06, 2009 at 12:13 PM
The prosecution and Swiss authorities have a history (30 years) of missed (ignored) opportunities to get Polanski. He walked away from weak and confused LA prosecutors and lived a public life. He didn't go into hiding. The timing of the prosecution is flea market law at best. Now the prosecution wants to flex its muscles? Please twitter me the time and date we march to the town square with our shovels and rakes. The only good timing here is the dollar getting weaker by the day.
Posted by: Whatever you say I am | October 06, 2009 at 12:16 PM
It's a no brainer that Polanski poses a serious flight risk.
Worse, Polanski has been a danger to the public's safety as a fugitive convicted child rapist in flight for more than 30 years now!
It's almost laughable to even consider that he deserves a bail out pending extradition.
There should be a public plea for anyone who witnessed, experienced or suspects abuse, to come forward, get help and protect others
Posted by: Catherine | October 06, 2009 at 12:28 PM
It's a no brainer that Polanski poses a serious flight risk.
Worse, Polanski has been a danger to the public's safety as a fugitive convicted child rapist in flight for more than 30 years now!
It's almost laughable to even consider that he deserves a bail out pending extradition.
There should be a public plea for anyone who witnessed, experienced or suspects abuse, to come forward, get help and protect others
Posted by: Catherine | October 06, 2009 at 12:28 PM
Let's not forget the mother of the 13 year old girl put her "minor" in a very dangerous situation to be rich and famous herself. The difference here is that Polanski admitted guilt. The mother has been on the run from her own guilt for 30 years. Can we get a guilty plea? Can we get accountability and justice from the mother 30 years later?
Posted by: Whatever you say I am | October 06, 2009 at 12:47 PM
"sex with a teenage girl"...You mean "RAPE"? Polanski RAPED a teenage girl. There was no sex involved, only RAPE.
Posted by: Eve | October 06, 2009 at 12:55 PM
It wasn't "sex with a teenage girl." It was drug a 13 year old girl and rape, sodomize her . . .
Posted by: kc | October 06, 2009 at 01:03 PM
This commetn won't see the light of day either. When comments hit the bottom line of newspapers, they have as much chance of being published as finding Nemo in Mars.
Posted by: Jorge | October 06, 2009 at 01:09 PM
How would the people who signed the petition to drop these charges against him feel if it was their daughter or grand daughter? Since they do not think rape is a crime maybe they will get lucky and have it happen to their family since this would not be problematic since they signed a petition saying so. When he receives the Life Time Achievement Award this can be added as part of his great achievements.
Posted by: Helen Lewis | October 06, 2009 at 01:18 PM
The Swiss are following the law thank goodness..Roman Polanski made a film
called Rosemary's Baby, oddly enough Woody Allen's former wife Mia Farrow
who was not married to Allen at the time, stared as the victim.
The story is about a young mother impregnated by the devil after she is drugged by an intellectual Satanic Cult; finally to give birth to the Prince of Darkness. I loved the film it portrayed a powerless victim surrounded by powerful people giving her drugs...a horror film.
Phil Spector was brilliant in the music business, a legend..Roman Polanski
a famous Oscar Winning Director for the Pianist...both with incredible creativity, yet in the end they defined who they really were at heart.
Phil Spector - The Murderer
Roman Polanski - The Child Rapist ... I ask myself, was Rosemary's Baby Art for Art's sake.?
Posted by: Robbie | October 06, 2009 at 01:22 PM
Of course the Swiss won't release Polanski. They only arrested him now to curry favor with the U.S., to get the Justice Department off their case regarding Swiss enabling of tax evasion by Americans.
Posted by: larry | October 06, 2009 at 01:22 PM
Nice move :)
That one charge he pleaded to was the plea agreement. They dropped the 6 charges the Grandjury indicted Polanski on after review of the incident, which held the possiblity of a life sentence.
Time to pay up!
Posted by: Charles | October 06, 2009 at 01:26 PM
to Whatever You Say I Am?
How on earth would you have any idea what the mother is going through? There are plenty of stage mothers out there (there probably wouldn't be any child actors if there weren't) but that's no excuse for a child being raped.
Posted by: Victoria | October 06, 2009 at 01:34 PM
KEEP HIM IN JAIL!
Posted by: eric | October 06, 2009 at 01:50 PM
". . . involving sex with a teenage girl . . . "?
How about "for drugging and raping a seventh grade child . . . "
Posted by: Patrick Joyce | October 06, 2009 at 01:52 PM
Speaking of Polanski, did anyone see his film "Tess (1979)" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080009/ ? A young woman is lured away from home and seduced by two powerful older men. Ends in tragedy. The book is very old (1891), but Polanski chose to make it into a movie in the late 70s.
It was made at about the time the alcohol/drug/rape incident occurred. It must have been pressing on his mind around that time.
Posted by: Bill T | October 06, 2009 at 02:29 PM
Do these writers know the difference about having sex or being rape? The victim was only 13 years old!!!
Posted by: Scoutballer | October 06, 2009 at 02:32 PM
Answer to faye schlift; Roman Polanski promised to show up for sentencing in LA, did he? I'm Swiss, and let me tell you one thing; Polanski can't fool us! If I want to go in and out of Switzerland I have no problem to do so. There are thousands of hiking trails who cross over to Italy, Germany or France without any control. If I know them you think Polanski is a dummy? A rapist belongs in jail, period.
Posted by: Ronaldo | October 06, 2009 at 02:51 PM
Thirteen thru nineteen all teen years tho, n'est-ce pas?
Posted by: Tommy Tuck | October 06, 2009 at 03:01 PM
To: PierreLA Chris H Ronaldo
Grab your Funk & Wagnalls and look up sarcasm. Also see Section D: duh
Posted by: faye schlift | October 06, 2009 at 03:59 PM
There's no doubt there are stage mothers with good intentions. Some are smarter than others. There is absolutely no excuse for raping a child and that alone weighs heavy in peoples minds. Pimping your child to elites in entertainment for your own interests is a stupid idea whether legal or not. Exploiting your child has consequences and the mothers of Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears are no better.
Posted by: Whatever you say I am | October 06, 2009 at 06:33 PM
It's a little odd that they are pushing this issue after three decades and even more absurd that it happened while arriving to get a life time achievemen award. I guess its unfortunate that he didn't resolve the issue decades ago...now he is an old man who may end up dying in prison.
http://www.basinpipes.com
Posted by: basinpipes | October 06, 2009 at 08:59 PM
To Renaldo,
Do you say that you are Swiss?
Do you know the Swiss law?
Do you know that until 1993 in Swiss law
you didn't recognize life with a teneger
as a rap or forbiden relationship?
Where are you living?
YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE AND BAWDY!!!!
Why don't you tell to the people that until 1998 the women hadn't right to vote!!!!! The "BIG DEMOCRACY" Schweintzerland!
Posted by: patrick | October 07, 2009 at 04:45 AM
To Whatever you say I am
Please get your facts right before posting - you simply sound either stupid or a Pedofile wanna be...
After Roman rape raped his 13 year old victim, he sent his cronies and sycophants to her school where they released the pictures he took of her with the words LOLITA and TEASE written on them. She was in 7th grade. She was humiliated and basically "raped" again. He attacked her Mom as well in the media. Why is it her Mom's fault that he raped a 13 year old girl after drugging her? He said in an interview filmed in 1978 of the victim that "She wanted it" basically calling her a slut. Roman used these classic rape defense tactics to send her a message and smear her character. Again, she was 13 and in 7th grade. How can you be ok with him releasing pictures of her to her schoolmates with words like Lolita on them? This is the reason why she is "media shy" and wants to walk away from this, because she is scarred and afraid he and his freinds (and people like you) will do it again. It sounds like you are ok with these sick tactics Polanski used which are typical for a pedofile. Please stay away from children.
Posted by: moe shirazi | October 07, 2009 at 06:02 AM