Bail for Roman Polanski met with surprise from some legal experts

Roman Polanski is expected to spend the holidays under electronic monitoring at his posh Alpine chalet after a Swiss court agreed to a $4.5-million bail request by the famed director.

Legal experts said the bail is likely to lengthen what is expected to be a fierce battle over whether Polanski should be extradited to Los Angeles to face sentencing for unlawful intercourse with a 13-year-old girl more than three decades ago.

The decision also raises other questions, given that Polanski fled from the U.S. just before his sentencing in 1978. Swiss justice officials have repeatedly denied his bail requests, saying he’s a flight risk.

Under the terms of the bail, Polanski would be restricted to a chalet he owns in Gstaad, a ski resort in the foothills of Mt. Blanc. The town has long been known as a celebrity hangout, with David Niven, Richard Burton and Roger Moore among its frequent visitors in the past.

Dmitry Gorin, a former prosecutor who has represented people overseas facing charges in Los Angeles, said he was surprised the court would grant bail given Polanski's record of fleeing justice.

Others agreed.

“It is very rare to get bail in an extradition case and especially in cases where the person’s fled,” said Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor and Loyola law professor. “This is a little like giving bail to O.J. [Simpson] after the Bronco chase.”

Levenson said she believes the bail could prolong the extradition process, because Polanski would have less of an incentive to resolve the issue if he is out of jail.

“This will dramatically slow down the extradition process,” she said. "A Swiss chalet is a lot nicer than a jail here.”

Details about why the court decided to grant bail remain unclear. The Ministry of Justice had argued that Polanski should remain behind bars until extradition is resolved. Switzerland’s justice minister told the Swiss national TV that it was not going to appeal the court ruling.

-- Richard Winton

More breaking news in L.A. Now:

Homeless man deemed sane during 2005 killing of LAX officer

L.A. faces $1-billion deficit by 2013; budget chief calls for pension reforms

Neighbor smelled smoke from Hemet home where human remains were discovered

L.A. elementary school photo carried on space shuttle to return to Earth

Comments

[Joe]

Polanski should have been hunted down like a rabid dog thirty years ago, and should still be peering out between the bars of a dismal prison. He is despicable, and perhaps the only other thing that should have been done to him is castration.

I hope he gets back here soon so that justice can be served for both crimes!

[Bob in Santa Monica]

OK then, try this: After Polanski raped an American 13 year old, he initiated a sexual relationship with a 15 year old while in his 40s. He now has a teenage daughter. Keeping Polanski away from her is a service.

As for the harm being done to Polanski's American victim, the harm is being caused by his continued evasion of justice. He had recourse to the courts 30 years ago, like he does now. He's chosen to hold hmself above the law, and so far he's gotten away with it.

Let's hope Cooley prosecutes him for the flight as well as the rape.

[jerr]

Money talks Any one else no way this whats wronge with law

[Patrick]

No Johnny, Polanski did not do his time, he fled sentencing. And fleeing prosecution has nothing to do with how the victim feels now. You and everyone who repeats this argument, please educate yourself and read up on the case.

[Joe Garcia]

BS...why use OJ as an example? Are we not talking about a rich, white man? Oh yeah!!! This is why why he got bail a second time.

[Greg]

I'm fairly shocked that anyone would argue against a child-rapist facing justice. How or where Polanski was apprehended, the length of time since the offense, the success of his career, any political aspirations of the DA, etc are all irrelevant. Polanski is a child-rapist and a coward who fled justice - bring him to justice now, kicking and screaming if necessary. Give him life in prison (I hope) and let him rot there.

Yes, set an example with Polanski as well. Make an example that if you commit a crime, particularly one as vicious as this against a child, you will face a very stiff penalty. Make an example that fleeing justice will never, ever serve to escape it. These are examples that it would serve our society well to see. If our society is lenient with Polanski, that would also set an example - a very poor one.

Furthermore, how could anyone suggest there is no possibility he might do harm to another child in the future? If a person is comfortable with drugging and raping a child, its hard for me to imagine them having any moral qualms about committing any other crime - against a child or an adult.

[K.E.]

I'm thrilled the DA went after Polanski, whatever his reasons. Polanski drugged and raped a 13 yer old. If he'd done that to my daughter, I doubt he'd make it down his own driveway, let alone to Switzerland.

PS - it's the Swiss (and the French) who look bad here, not the US. Anyone else would never have gotten his original plea deal, let alone bail at this point.

And I could care less about his 'traumatized childhood' excuse. He knew very well what he was doing, and I doubt the girl was his first or last for that matter.

Keep the heat on Cooley, I hope you get your man!

[Barnacle Bob]

Polanski has a film for release in the U.S. in 2010. This is great free press -- a little tough to organize -- but free

[DT]

Sometimes, there are issues that have grey areas that are debatable. Abortion, single payer healthcare, legalizing pot, etc. But there are others arguments that are so clearly wrong that only delusional people would support it, like 911 conspiracy theorists and holocaust deniers.

Unfortunately, in a world of 6 billion people, no matter how outrageous the idea, you can always find a few individuals to support it.

I see three groups of people supporting Polanski:
Hollywood suck-ups.
Women who usually spend their time writing and visiting serial killers in prison.
Men who've raped children before and think it's not really rape because:
it was so long ago, the child wanted it, they've had a hard life, they haven't raped anyone in 10 years now so they're no long a danger, they've done great things with their life, the police officer investigating them is looking for fame, because the victim was too embarrassed to testify, etc...

[Bruce]

It's high time Polanski gets back here, checks into the slammer, assumes the position, bites the pillow, and gets what's coming to him. I wonder if he will be as forgiving of his rapist as his victim is of him.

[BaDaBing]

THE SWISS WHO HAPPILY DID BUSINESS WITH THE NAZIS DURING THE WAR HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AVAILABLE FOR THE RIGHT PRICE. THE SWISS ENJOY A REPUTATION FOR BEING THE SCUM OF EUROPE AND FOR EXCELLENT REASONS. POLANSKI'S JUST ANOTHER ONE.

[Victoria]

Drugged, raped and sodomized a 13 year old girl. I repeat: a 13 year old girl. Convicted of a felony and then fleas the country.

He needs to come back to this country and take his responsibility like a man.

Case closed.

[Bob in Santa Monica]

Chedman writes as if there was some "undeniable fact" of judicial misconduct, when in truth the act he's writing about never happened. Polanski fled before the judge did what he supposedly feared the judge would do. And, of course, if there had been any impropriety, Polanski could have appealed on the spot. He chose to flee instead, because he wasn't looking for fairness or justice, he was looking to get away with raping a child, which so far, he has.

To blame the DA for the victim's present posture is absurd, considering Polanski has made use of his second crime (the flight from justice) to drag out HIS public humiliation of her for thirrty years, and has also taken advantages of his wealth to buy her cooperation with a reported half million dollar payment.

Any other crime, andy other criminal, and he'd be properly charged with witness tampering and flight. Where's our Extraordinary Rendition program when we need it?

[Bob in Santa Monica]

Chedman writes as if there was some "undeniable fact" of judicial misconduct, when in truth the act he's writing about never happened. Polanski fled before the judge did what he supposedly feared the judge would do. And, of course, if there had been any impropriety, Polanski could have appealed on the spot. He chose to flee instead, because he wasn't looking for fairness or justice, he was looking to get away with raping a child, which so far, he has.

To blame the DA for the victim's present posture is absurd, considering Polanski has made use of his second crime (the flight from justice) to drag out HIS public humiliation of her for thirrty years, and has also taken advantages of his wealth to buy her cooperation with a reported half million dollar payment.

Any other crime, andy other criminal, and he'd be properly charged with witness tampering and flight. Where's our Extraordinary Rendition program when we need it?

[Charles]

He didn't "flee justice." He fled injustice. The judge in his case was a corrupt, attention-starved imbecile. Since his original sentence involved no jail time he avoided nothing when he departed for France -- in fact, he has suffered a far worse punishment due to his voluntary banishment from the US.

This should have been thrown out long ago. The Swiss should put a stop to this.

[Brian]

Do the legal experts have expertise in the laws of attraction?

It was consensual sex by a sexy and lusty teenager and Roman Polanski.

The actress Anjelica Huston walked in and out of their performance- and sex continued uninhibited after Huston's exit.

Was the teenager mesmerized and in a trance, or was she suffering from learned helplessness, or was she simply enjoying it.

The mother should have supervised her "child" in a photo shoot, or not let it happen at all

Has anyone in Los Angeles heard of temptation?

Lead me not into temptation, deliver me from evil.

It is very human to succumb to temptation It is also very human to be unjust and take advantage of another's weakness. But who was taking advantage of who?

I hope this case is dismissed soon by Los Angeles. It has reeked of injustice for 32 years