And Here's Why You Should Never Meet Your Heroes

For those that don't know, the gentleman pictured to the left is Roman Polanski. Mr. Polanski has just been arrested in Switzerland on a 30 year old warrant from the U.S. which pertains to a case in which he pleaded guilty and then skipped the country. In the intervening time Mr. Polanski has lived in France, who refuse to extradite him to America, and has avoided any countries that may feel differently. However, recently he went to Switzerland and was unexpectedly nabbed.

The outcry amongst certain parts of the artistic community has been loud and proud. Various famous people have said that the arrest shouldn't have happened, that the case should have been forgotten about and that he should go free. But unfortunately for Roman, the criminal law doesn't work like that. It isn't possible to just 'forget' certain cases due to the passage of time or the fame of the accused. And in all the complaints I've seen about this arrest, nowhere have I seen anybody mention the original case which involved sex with a 13 year old girl, who had allegedly been plied with drugs and drink. And this brings me to the topic of this post, namely the tendency people have to confuse the professional with the human being. I have a great deal of respect for Polanski as a director, with masterpieces like 'Chinatown' and 'Rosemary's Baby' to his credit. It also must be borne in mind that he went through an unimaginable trauma when his pregnant girlfriend Sharon Tate was murdered by the Manson family.

No doubt the psychiatric evaluation that the court ordered him to undergo would have been revealing and helpful to him, but it was at about that time that he ran away to Europe. And the truth is that he pleaded guilty to the offence, so it's not as if he was contesting his guilt. So what are we left with ? Basically a very famous, very talented man who has slept with a child. Should he be excused from this simply because it was a long time ago ? I don't see why, because that would just imply that if you evade the authorities long enough you get a free pass. So should he be exonerated because he happens to be 76 years old ? Well he's still able enough to be working, travelling around and generally engaging with life. So no, not really.

Would a host of famous people be leaping to the defence of any old 76 year old ? No, so we can only assume that the argument is 'he's famous for God's sake so let it go !'. Not to say that this defence hasn't indirectly worked before, but it isn't exactly settled law. And if that's the argument, then I have to say, it isn't good enough. The case is so old because he's effectively been on the run for 30 years, and that accounts for his advanced age too. As for the rest of it, like I said above, it really doesn't do to confuse Roman Polanski the film director with Roman Polanski the man. That will only lead to severe disappointment. The law in this case will probably take its course, something that would by now be a distant memory had he stuck around to face the music in 1978.