Quote:
Originally Posted by pig
I don't know dippin: I think if he hadn't fled, but had stayed...received the stiffer sentence, wouldn't he have been allowed to appeal on the grounds that he was given a plea deal that was accepted and then thrown out by prosecutorial misconduct? Personally, I am sensitive to the argument that you, and I believe roach in part are putting forward regarding the reasons why he fled the country, but I don't think that allowing someone to flee the country because they they wanted to call shennanigans on the court is a good precedent to set. Furthermore, as I previously stated, I think that Polanski's conduct over the past 30 years directly acerbated the situation to where the DA / US. DoJ would almost have to go after him. He didn't just get out the country because he was given a softball deal and a chance to flee and live in relatively quiet anonymity, he chose to keep himself in the spotlight.
|
Pig, Im not saying that he should get off free, nor do I think that the precedent should be set where people are allowed to flee if they are certain of judicial misconduct. But I also think that the penalty for fleeing justice should be proportional to the sentence he fled. The plea agreement was for up to 90 days psych evaluation and probation, and he fled peacefully. You can't correct the mistake of the original DA by giving him the max for fleeing justice, which would be significantly more than the original sentence.