Polanski
October 5, 2009
The news of his arrest in Switzerland last week was surprise and a shock to some. The media coverage in Switzerland and France was extensive. Let me summarize the facts.
Roman Polanski, a well known, some say brilliant, movie director was a fugitive. He fled from the United States more than 30 years ago when it became clear to him that he would have to serve time for the crime he committed in raping a 13-year old girl. He claims that the judge was going to ignore a plea bargain deal he had made with the prosecution and sentence Mr. Polanski to a long jail time. Mr. Polanski admitted at the time of having had sex with an underage girl.
The governments of France and of Poland (he is a citizen of both) came to his defense, as well as a large number of directors, actors and actresses.
Those reactions of support and requests that he be set free pose some serious ethical questions. Let me list just a few:
1. Does the fact that the defendant is a well-known artist in anyway diminish the severity of his actions? In my view, if it does, it would violate the concept of equal justice.
2. Does the fact that the alleged crime happened more than 30 years ago, exonerate the defendant from having to face justice and to pay for his crime? The law does provide status of limitation for crime that may have happened a long time ago, because both the prosecution and the defense can no longer rely on people’s memory after a number of years. However, in this case, Mr. Polanski admitted having had sex with a minor, which in California is considered “statutory rape.” Furthermore, if the document I read of the testimony of the victim is authentic, then Mr. Polanski’s action would constitute rape even if the victim has been an adult.
3. Does the fact that the victim has forgiven her aggressor reduces his culpability?
From a legal point of view, it is irrelevant because rape is not only a crime against the victim but against the State. However from a moral point of view, it is significant. The forgiveness of the victim might influence a jury in a trial and a judge in the sentencing.
4. Are plea bargains ethical? According the Justice Department, 90% of criminal cases end up in a plea bargain where the defendant admits to a lesser crime in exchange for a lesser sentence. It is, in my view an agreement of convenience. It guarantees a minimum sentence that is acceptable to the prosecution and relieves the courts from having to try in an insurmountable numbers of crimes. It also offers the defendant the possibility of a lesser sentence. But is it justice?
I believe Mr. Polanski should take the responsibility for his actions, face the court and serve whatever sentence is imposed.
As Martin Luther King once said:
“Justice denied anywhere diminishes justice everywhere.”
I believe this quote does apply to the Roman Polanski because by becoming a fugitive he denied justice to have its course.
Comments (4)
October 5th, 2009 at 4:41 pm Posted by Kristin
As a survivor of a similar crime, I’d like to thank you for your support.
Just because someone is well known, great at what they do, a pillar of the community or a generally ‘nice’ person does not give them the right to sentence their victim to a life of despair and self-loathing - which is what happens in the greater majority of cases.
That people have used the ‘great artist’ defence makes my blood boil. It was I believe, the similar defence used by my offender when he too eventually faced prosecution (and finally jail) some 30 years later.
We (the world, not just the victims) need more people to stand up for the children in these cases, no matter their current age. These acts of violence are NEVER acceptable, no matter what excuses are proffered.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:30 pm Posted by Priya
I definitely agree with you, Emmanuel. While reading some articles last week, I came across this quote:
“My personal thoughts are let the guy go,” said Peg Yorkin, founder of the Feminist Majority Foundation. “It’s bad a person was raped. But that was so many years ago. The guy has been through so much in his life. It’s crazy to arrest him now. Let it go. The government could spend its money on other things.”
It’s bad enough that many celebrities support this man, but when the founder of a feminist organization wants to “let it go,” it sets a tone for how situations like this will be viewed by the public.
October 16th, 2009 at 5:24 am Posted by Sylwia Presley
I think Polanski needs to take responsibility for his deeds and even though his art achievements are impressive, law is law and we are equal in its eyes.
I happen to be Polish but do not agree with Polsih governments statements on the case.
I also happen to be a victim of domestic abuse (short term, and rather quickly reported in the UK, where the law is very supportive) and I have experienced in the past, I actually still meet people who misjudge my ex based on how he acts. Moreover, I met lawyers who believe that domestic abuse - which legally is a crime - should not be punished.
Which comes back to the original post of yours - if we do not punish crimes, or become selective in doing so, how can we provide security for people who live according to commonly accepted ethics from those who do not even grasp the concept of good and wrong?
I lived with a person who abused his family simply because he never, in his 30 years of life, faced a single punishment for his wrong deeds.
Hence why I believe in the equality of law and educational power of punishment.
December 12th, 2009 at 1:54 am Posted by Michelle Ma
It is both awful and incredible that such abuses of a child’s integrity could occur.
Though there is the possibility of redemption, the living reality of memory haunts the very soul.
For many people there is no justice, and for that, there is no appeal.
Post Your Comment
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)