So Roman Polanski gets busted on the statutory rape charge from 1977, and…
The Swiss media have rounded on the authorities.
"Switzerland let a guest walk into a nasty trap. We should be ashamed," said tabloid newspaper, Blick.
Daily paper Le Temps said Switzerland had "shocked film buffs and friends of the arts with its kindly and efficient co-operation with US justice. It has angered Poland and France".
This would be in the country where the Swiss People’s Party got 29% of the vote in 2007 after using posters like this in their election campaign.
The minister who ordered his arrest is also an SVP member. She didn’t have much choice in the matter, since it’s covered by an extradition treaty. But:
On the right, Toni Brunner of the Swiss People's Party expressed anger at what he sees as Switzerland's eagerness to carry out US instructions.
"It's ridiculous and just shows what happens when we try to serve foreign masters," said Mr Brunner. Ah, right.
Whoop up anger against “foreigners who commit crimes” unless you have an actual foreigner who has committed a genuine crime covered by an international treaty, in which case protect him.
The Swiss government refused to extradite Dr Timothy Leary in 1973 when requested to do so by the Attorney General of the USA John Mitchell. They imprisoned him for a month and after release he voluntarily left the country.
Posted by: Fellow Traveller | September 28, 2009 at 05:34 PM
Yeah well. Timothy Leary was a silly but mostly harmless acid head. Polanski was charged with raping a 13 year old and, I understand, pleaded guilty.
The Swiss government could be acting quite consistently in responding differently to the two cases.
Posted by: chris y | September 28, 2009 at 05:44 PM
"foreigners who commit crimes"
The word we're looking for here is "placatory".
Not sure I'd call it the mot juste, this being a different part of Switzerland, where the mountain men burble away in a dialect of their own perverted invention.
Posted by: bert | September 29, 2009 at 02:24 AM
No links, huh?
It was this: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=110092,00.html
Posted by: bert | September 29, 2009 at 03:09 AM
@chris y: only if you're the kind of loony who believes that any sexual act with someone short of their 16th birthday is inherently rape.
He pleaded to consensual-but-unlawful sex. Whether you reckon that's the most evil thing ever and he should be horsewhipped through the streets and castrated, or whether you think that it's a bit sleazy and to-be-discouraged but hardly end-of-world material, it certainly isn't rape.
Posted by: john b | September 30, 2009 at 08:37 AM
He pleaded to consensual-but-unlawful sex
As part of a plea bargain while facing a rape-rape charge where his defense team was planning to use the 'but she's a slut' defense against a 13-year old girl.
Then again, I tend to have trouble finding an alternative word for getting a woman drunk, giving her tranquilising drugs, and then proceeding to fuck and bugger her against her explicit requests for him to stop.
Posted by: Richard J | September 30, 2009 at 09:36 AM
@RJ, surely the 'explicit requests to stop' part is alleged, not proven?
Posted by: john b | September 30, 2009 at 02:23 PM
Alleged in grand jury testimony under oath, in respect of which a civil lawsuit has been settled - we're not exactly talking about speculation on blogs here.
Posted by: dsquared | September 30, 2009 at 02:44 PM
Like a lot of people, I gave John Band a sort-of pass for his hilarious 'let's put the Jews in a gas chamber' joke, since he clearly had a lot of growing up to do. But on all available evidence, he is quite determined not to grow up, so we can safely leave him in the file marked 'ignorant little contrarian: too boring to matter'.
Posted by: Dan Hardie | October 02, 2009 at 04:04 PM