To the Editor:
Re “Why Arrest Roman Polanski Now?” by Robert Harris (Op-Ed, Sept. 30):
As an American living in Europe, I have been surprised and dismayed by the willingness of many Europeans to leap to the defense of Roman Polanski—undoubtedly a great film director, but also a fugitive from justice who pleaded guilty to having sex with a minor.
What sort of nonsense is it to portray Mr. Polanski as the victim, to argue he has somehow “atoned” for his transgressions, to view his artistic achievements as more important than his serious and unpaid debt to society?
It makes no difference whatsoever that the authorities chose this moment or that particular film festival to arrest him; it matters not how aggressive or otherwise the “manhunt” was over the course of his 32-year evasion.
Most disturbing is the blitheness with which many of these commentators have simply dismissed his actions as being of no consequence, as if he had failed to pay his parking tickets. Mr. Harris states weakly, “Of course what happened cannot be excused, either legally or ethically.”
But in arguing that Mr. Polanski should be absolved of culpability and allowed to put all this messy business behind him, that is precisely what Mr. Harris is proposing that we do. Shame on him.
Judy Kuszewski
Buckinghamshire, England
Sept. 30, 2009
Note from KBJ: To those who say that Polanski should be left alone, I ask: Would you say the same if the charge were murder? To those who say that he should be extradited and punished, I ask: Would you say the same if the charge were larceny? I have a hunch that most people who say that he should be left alone don't think that statutory rape is a serious crime, and that this colors their judgment. I also have a hunch that most people who say that he should be extradited and punished think that statutory rape is a serious crime, and that this colors their judgment. It shouldn't matter what the crime is. Those adjudged guilty must be punished.
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 