Sparkycat saidMy understanding is that he left the country because a judge, now deceased, had agreed to let him plead guilty to a charge of unlawful intercourse, but then started backtracking and acting like he might do something else that would lead to a long prison sentence. So, to avoid that Polanski left the country. I certainly don't approve of what Polanski did, but he was trying to take some responsibility for it. He fled when he thought he was going to be screwed over by the legal system. He's 76 years old and not a danger to society. I say let him plead to some minor charge and just get the whole mess over with. No point in spending lots of taxpayer dollars on this, especially in California.
Guys, he admitted to the crime. The fact that his plea deal went south does not change his admission of guilt. No one's suggesting that evidence was manufactured. If he had been innocent, he should not have admitted guilt. No one's suggested he was tortured into a false admission. Certainly the statements of the victim verify the crime. And being wealthy and well connected, a class of people to whom justice is usually better given in the US, it's not like he was some poor schmuck who had only an overworked public defender.
And there are statutes of limitations to bringing charges but certainly not for serving your sentence. Once convicted, you don't get a walk just because you evaded justice for many years. In fact, you usually serve extra time.
As for being 76 and no danger to society, last I read our local newspapers, there were pedophiles in their 70's. Bernie Madoff's in his 70's and in jail (different crime obviously).
Not that the rape of a 13 y. old is precisely comparable to war crimes, but society across the world continues to pursue Nazi criminals, most of whom have lived quiet lives since then.
His treatment should be no more but no less than any other person, regardless of wealth or fame or personal tragedy.