Comments on: What rights are we talking about?

By: Joe Tetreault

Joe Tetreault — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:10:17 +0000

If the law makes no distinction between going on the lam for three weeks or three decades, then there is no reasonable basis for giving him more time. First step, fulfill the plea-agreement he entered into of his own free will. Second, determine what punishment best suits his secondary crime. Six to Eighteen months is better than him walking for evading justice. I see no reason to be overly punitive, because the punitive measure would best be directed to the offense that he has already pleaded to. Patterico can contradict me, should he read my comment here, even if the LA County DA wants to vacate the agreement and then proceed to trial, there is no good strategy to get an appropriate punishment for what he did 30 years ago. There has been plenty of speculation about other victims of Polanski, but without more than internet scuttlebutt, the DA is (in my not so humble opinion) will take the one in hand and then go after the flight charge. I’m not specifically in favor of this scenario, but this is how the law is written. I don’t see much else as an alternative if people want justice, this is the best they are likely to get. And Polanski’s apologists should recognize, as Lt. Caffy told Cpl Dawson, six months, (”it’s a hockey season, Harold”) is not a terribly long period of time, especially if its in a minimum security club fed installation, which it will be. N.B. I’m not entirely sure if Caffy was referring to the regular season or the post season, which I suppose only seems like its six months when your team has not drunk from Lord Stanley’s Chalice since before Polanski was still just that Hollywood guy whose wife was killed by the Manson family. Your mileage may of course vary.

By: Sonny Bunch

Sonny Bunch — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:20:58 +0000

You don’t think there should be an additional punishment for going on the lam for so long? That strikes me as overly optimistic. I’d be a little surprised if he got less than 6-18 additional months. Which is a number that, admittedly, has no basis in law. It’s just one I’ve seen tossed around.

By: Joe Tetreault

Joe Tetreault — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:50:39 +0000

I can only speak for me, the logical solution I see, is that he should be incarcerated to serve the time that the plea agreement stipulated (all 48 days) which would run concurrently with his trial for jumping bail or whatever they charge him with for his flight (not from prosecution) but from sentencing. Why his apologists fail to see this as a just outcome is beyond me.

By: Sonny Bunch

Sonny Bunch — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:09:26 +0000

But isn’t that what we’ve seen so far? The procedures are being followed, as far as I can tell.

By: Will

Will — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:03:27 +0000

I don’t want to speak for Freddie, but I think one of our commenters said it best:

“Follow procedures, then hang him!”