Roman Polanski, France and Extradition

[B-Man]

Does anyone know what France's rationale (stated or otherwise) for refusing to extradite this convicted rapist is?

How can they justify sheltering a pedophile/rapist?

[davidross]

about the people who cheered his academy award victory, and booed Michael Moore???

[Clarkmeister]

"What does it say about the people who cheered his academy award victory "

Hey, I cheered for it!!! Of course, I bet on the guy at 12-1 odds. WooHoo!

[MMMMMM]

The better way to get the French to extradite Polanski would have been to tell them we'll never let him set foot on our soil again.

[HDPM]

I hate extradition issues. I have done my best to avoid knowing the details of extradition stuff. And since France is not an option for the defendants in cases I have been involved in, I really don't know anything about what the french are thinking. But I do know a potentially excellent policy regarding our criminals and France. Similar policies have been rumored to have been used within the US when having problems with another state, usually California.

The plan is this. On a large scale we start giving pretty bad criminals a choice. Not our worst criminals, but people who aren't looking at life in prison who figure to reoffend and cause problems wherever they go. The sentencing courts can give them a choice hard time or a business class one way ticket and exile in France. The exile could simply mean unsupervised probation with the defendant to remain in France. If he leaves france, a pre-signed waiver of extradition could kick in. Depending on the crime, the length of exile could vary. So maybe give a defendant a choice of 5 years in prison or ten years in France. The only glitch could be immigration issues. I don't know how to work out the required visas, etc... But maybe we just send our criminals as visitors who then illegally remain. They would have to figure how to live as illegal aliens. If they get caught, they are looking at prison, so maybe they will figure out how to hole up in cities and commit their crimes without getting caught this time. This would save millions of dollars in prison costs for us, would be nicer for the criminals, and would let france have more violent criminals since they seem to like them so much and support them. /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif

[Ray Zee]

great idea hdpm. and maybe we can send their lawyers with them and kill two birds with one stone.

you can stay of course.

[M2d]

Wasn't there something about this trick in A Alvarez's "Biggest Game in Town"? As I recall, a poker player at the WSOP was from Texas, but living in LV because a Texas court convicted of gambling and sentenced him to Vegas. Anyone know the details of this one? Ray? David?

[MS Sunshine]

They are both dead now, so I will pass on this jem. Johnny Moss told me about the night he was walking across Fremont St when he bumped into a steamed Bill Boyd. Johnny asked Bill where he was going and Bill replied "I'm going to get my gun to shot Homer Simpson(I don't remember the name, but it is a matter public record) for cheating me" Johnny reached into his pocket and handed Bill his pistol and said "No sense you going all the way to your room, here take mine"

Well, Johnny was wanted for questioning in the matter and had to go to Dallas for a period of time until it blew over.

MS Sunshine

[Cyrus]

"Does anyone know what France's rationale (stated or otherwise) for refusing to extradite this convicted rapist is?"

Do you know if the United States has officially requested his extradition?

[Punker]

I would have bet any amount of money on Michael Moore sounding like an idiot as usual.

[B-Man]

Do you know if the United States has officially requested his extradition?

I don't know, but assumed that to be the case because it has been reported that Polanski will not travel to Britain or Canada (and, I assume, certain other countries) for fear of being arrested/extradited to the U.S.

[Cyrus]

"It has been reported that Polanski will not travel to Britain or Canada (and, I assume, certain other countries) for fear of being arrested/extradited to the U.S."

I understand that in order to be arrested in a country for an offense commited elsewhere, there has to be an international warrant out, from organisations such as Interpol. Or a specific request by one country to another for arrest and extradition of a person. I don't think there's a warrant out for Polanski. I also don't think that there has been an official request from the United States to arrest or extradite Polanski, because there would have been a hearing of the case by a Judge or a Minister, in France, and we would have probably read about it. I think that the United States chose to quietly let Polanski off the hook.

Of course, I could be wrong.

[Ray Zee]

close to the real story anyway. it was back in the 60's and bill boyd shot nick simpson in the parking garage, but with his own gun i think. nick was a cheater and got everybody , as in his mind no one was immune. bill shot him in the neck i believe. didnt do much damage, too bad.

[HDPM]

Given what Ray related, it is very possible Moss explained his leaving town with that story as cover. I recently read in that book "Gambling Wizards" where Doyle Brunson indicated that Moss had to leave town one time because he was caught cheating. I was surprised to see that mentioned by Doyle about Moss. True or false? Anyone else have info?

[B-Man]

According to this column, the U.S. requested extradition, but France does not extradite French citizens (Polanski is a citizen of France).

Don't know if this is accurate, but most of the information in this article appears to be corroborated by other articles I have read.

Article on Polanski (http://cowdery.home.netcom.com/polanski.htm)

[brad]

also i might guess that france wont extradite for something not in violation of french law.

so if age of consent in france is 13 (not an unreasonable assumption for france although just a guess), then france probably couldnt extradite him for the crime of having sex with a 13 year old.

p.s. how old was the girl?

[B-Man]

Whether it was a violation of French law shoudn't have anything to do with it; the crime was committed in California, and it was a violation of California law. He pleaded guilty in a California state court (and fled before sentencing).

The girl was 13. You can read her deposition at thesmokinggun.com.

[brad]

'Whether it was a violation of French law shoudn't have anything to do with it;'

no , a lot of countries wont extradite for something that they dont consider a crime.

also some countries without death penalty wont extradite if the death penalty may result.

[B-Man]

no , a lot of countries wont extradite for something that they dont consider a crime.

The fact that some countries wont do this doesn't make it right. Besides, he pleaded guilty to rape, which I am pretty sure is a crime, even in France.

This is not a death penalty case. The maximum he could have received was fifty years.

[Clarkmeister]

Not that it matters, but didn't he end up marrying the girl?

[brad]

no what i mean is that in france 13 year old girl might not be statutory rape.

would you like to be extradicted to some country for 'hate speech, hate crime'.

you see what i mean.

of course i could be wrong. just a theory.

[B-Man]

Not that it matters, but didn't he end up marrying the girl?

No, I don't think so, you must have this incident confused with something else. He pleaded guilty, went through a psychiatric evaluation, then fled the country before sentencing.

I read that after he fled to France, he then started a relationship with 15 year old Nastassia Kinski. At least he learned his lesson...

[M.B.E.]

<font color="purple">Whether it was a violation of French law shoudn't have anything to do with it; the crime was committed in California, and it was a violation of California law.</font color>

No, this is absolutely wrong. In extradition law there's something called the "double criminality rule". As far as I know it's universal -- all civilized countries observe it. The rule is that you can be extradited from country A to country B only for alleged conduct that is a crime in both country A and country B.

For example, suppose there's some country where the age of consent is 21. An American tourist goes to that country and, not aware of the local laws, has sex with a 20-year-old. If the tourist is later charged with statutory rape, do you think the United States should extradite? I certainly don't.

The double-criminality rule makes a lot of sense, but sometimes can have unintended consequences. A few years ago a man in Vancouver was identified as a Nazi war criminal. He had been convicted long ago in the Netherlands of the crime of "collaborating with the occupying regime", or something like that. The problem was, Canada doesn't have that crime in our Criminal Code (since we've never had an occupying regime). So he could not be extradited. I can't remember how this was resolved. I think the Canadian government launched proceedings to strip him of his Canadian citizenship on the grounds that he had obtained it under false pretences. Once he was no longer a citizen, he could be deported.

(By the way, I have no idea what the age of consent in France is. In Canada it's 14.)

[M.B.E.]

<font color="purple">Besides, he pleaded guilty to rape</font color>

That's false. He was charged with rape, among other things, but he pleaded guilty to the lesser offence of unlawful sexual intercourse.

This web page seems to be a fairly reliable compilation of facts about the Polanski case:

http://www.vachss.com/mission/roman_polanski.html

Also I found the original indictment online here:

http://news.corporate.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/polanski/capolansk31977iind.pdf

[M.B.E.]

<font color="purple">I don't think there's a warrant out for Polanski. I also don't think that there has been an official request from the United States to arrest or extradite Polanski, because there would have been a hearing of the case by a Judge or a Minister, in France, and we would have probably read about it. I think that the United States chose to quietly let Polanski off the hook.

Of course, I could be wrong.</font color>

Yes, you are wrong. The US has requested extradition, but France does not extradite its own citizens. This condition is probably written into all of its extradition treaties. Several countries observe the same policy.

[B-Man]

Thanks for the information, it is very interesting if accurate, and makes some sense.

However, that is not the rationale/excuse for France refusing to extradite in this case.

From the link you posted (corroborated by another article I read):

The Los Angeles District Attorney's Office announced yesterday it will seek to have Polanski extradited from France.

However, a spokesman for the Ministry of Justice in Paris reaffirmed that French citizens may not be extradited under any circumstances although, he added, French judicial authorities could decide to try the case in France.

So, the reason given was that "French citizens may not be extradited under any circumstances." What do you think about that rule?

[B-Man]

That's false. He was charged with rape, among other things, but he pleaded guilty to the lesser offence of unlawful sexual intercourse.

My facts were slightly askew, but the point behind them wasn't--my point was that he pleaded guilty to a serious sex crime, in fact, one punishable by up to 50 years in prison: Polanski spent 90 days under psychiatric observation. But just before sentencing, facing a possible 50 years in jail, he jumped bail.

Whether or not he committed a serious sex crime is not in question (even if it wasn't "rape" under CA law).

[M.B.E.]

<font color="purple">So, the reason given was that "French citizens may not be extradited under any circumstances." What do you think about that rule?</font color>

Countries have the right to set whatever conditions they like in their extradition treaties. International law does not require a state to enter into an extradition treaty. Rather, the requirement is that states must abide by the extradition treaties that they do agree to.

France is not the only country that refuses to extradite its own citizens. I think that's a reasonable policy choice, although I wouldn't necessarily lobby in favour of it for my own country.

I suspect that France would have written this condition into all of its extradition treaties, and of course it would generally be reciprocal. That is, the United States could refuse to extradite its citizens to France. (I haven't examined any of France's extradition treaties; I'm just making the assumption.)

[Cyrus]

Appreciate learning that. And thanks to B-Man also for the link.

...France does not extradite its citizens. If this is a blanket rule, without exceptions, that's equivalent to immunity as long as you're home, or more precisely chez soi. I understand that they don't extradite as long as the crime the accused is wanted for, is not a crime in France or may result in unduly harsh punishment.

Then, French who commit crimes against humanity are supposed to be extradited to the Int'l Court. Again, I could be wrong.

[Jimbo]

Then, French who commit crimes against humanity are supposed to be extradited to the Int'l Court. Again, I could be wrong.

If this was true everytime a French couple gave birth to a French child they would be prosecuted in the International Court.

[M.B.E.]

<font color="purple">...France does not extradite its citizens. If this is a blanket rule, without exceptions, that's equivalent to immunity as long as you're home, or more precisely chez soi.</font color>

I don't quite understand what you mean by this. The term immunity has a specific meaning in international criminal law, and the situation between the U.S. and France is not an example of immunity.

<font color="purple">I understand that they don't extradite as long as the crime the accused is wanted for, is not a crime in France or may result in unduly harsh punishment.</font color>

No, your understanding is wrong, or if not wrong then misleading and incomplete. As I understand it, France will not extradite its citizens to the U.S. under any circumstances. France has this right under its extradition treaty with the U.S., and the U.S. also has the right to refuse to extradite U.S. citizens to France under any circumstances.

The other part of your statement, about refusal to extradite if the crime alleged is not a crime in the extraditing country, is a general rule that applies to all international extradition (not just involving France). A U.S. court once described this "dual criminality" rule as "central to extradition law": Brauch v. Raiche, 618 F.2d 843, 847 (1st Cir. 1980).

I have not reviewed the U.S.-France extradition treaties. I did find unofficial copies on the Internet here:

http://www.usextradition.com/france.htm

Note that sometimes these unofficial copies of legal documents have typos and such; you should be very careful about relying on them.

Here's a link to a good summary of extradition procedures between France and the U.S.; this document is designed primarily for the converse situation of the Polanski case, where France wants to extradite someone from the U.S.:

http://www.juriscope.org/publications/etudes/pdf-extr/OK-USA.pdf

Section 14 of this document refers to the exception whereby the U.S. does not need to extradite one of its own citizens to France.

[M.B.E.]

Here's some links I found on the Internet that are relevant.

Bilateral agreements on extradition, by country (http://www.uncjin.org/Laws/extradit/extindx.htm)

Unofficial list of U.S.A.'s extradition treaties with other countries (http://www.uncjin.org/Laws/extradit/usa.pdf)

Annotated U.S. Code - chapter 209 (extradition) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/pIIch209.html)

U.S. Code notes re extradition (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/3181.notes.html)

Procedure for extradition between the USA and France (in French) (http://www.juriscope.org/publications/etudes/pdf-extr/OK-USA.pdf)

www.usextradition.com (a defence lawyer's web site with info about extradition) (http://www.usextradition.com/)

Unofficial text of U.S.-France extradition treaties, from the same site (http://www.usextradition.com/france.htm)

[Cyrus]

Again many thanks for the extra information and the links you've provided. Most educational. I will now consider very carefully what to do in which country...

Your characterization, though, of my understanding as "misleading" is puzzling. I already admitted that I do not know much about extradition and that I'm speculating about the particular case ("I could be wrong"). I could be misled but I'm not misleading.