Column by Tim Riley

It only took 30 or so years, but the other shoe finally dropped. Since fleeing the U.S. in 1977 to avoid the penalty after pleading guilty to “unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor,” famous movie director Roman Polanski has skirted U.S. law and continued making films in France until this week. While attempting to enter Switzerland, Mr. Polanski was detained by the country’s police because of his outstanding U.S. warrant and could be subject to extradition for his crime.

The extreme circumstances of the case raise a number of valid questions about our judicial system and society in general. Most important among these is the issue of justice and proper penance. It has long been debated what the purpose of the punishments criminals receive is. There is the widely held idea that the goal of the justice system is to punish wrong doers, but many also believe its purpose is to rehabilitate those who commit wrongs against society.

In the U.S., a balance seems to be struck between the two, more often than not. The extreme criminals withstanding, most punishments seem designed to dole out the proper anguish onto the accused while simultaneously providing some good for them or society in general. A criminal sentenced to five years in prison receives his just reward for his actions, but in our nation there are also often ways for him to improve himself while incarcerated.

When it comes to Mr. Polanski though, how do we as a society decide how to properly punish him? Clearly, he has suffered because of his attempt to subvert U.S. law. Because he has not been able to enter the U.S. without being arrested in the last 30 years, he was not even able to accept in person his 2002 Oscar for Best Director; however, those are self-imposed pains. He was welcome to return to the U.S. and face the court again whenever he pleased.

Obviously, the U.S. court system frowns upon fleeing the country to evade charges, but how exactly does one separate what happened 30 years ago and all that has transpired since? If the goal of our justice system is to simply punish the accused, then the book should be thrown at Mr. Polanski, given the chance. He should face all the damages of the crime he originally plead guilty to, plus the penalty for fleeing justice so many years ago.

If rehabilitation and behavior correction is the goal, though, how exactly should such a situation be treated? Mr. Polanski has lived 30 years since he committed his crime. The person who committed those crimes is effectively dead. This entire aspect of the process of U.S. law would be seemingly as pointless as reprimanding a grown man for stealing from the cookie jar when he was 5 years old.

The balance of criminal processing breaks down in situations such as this. It is tough to dispute that society is still owed a debt for Mr. Polanski’s actions, but how exactly can all the factors involved in this highly convoluted system balance out to create equality for all? The long arm of the law does not forgive the convicted and unpunished, but logic and fairness to the felon must have some say in the argument.

The harmed party is still owed their rightful retribution against Mr. Polanski, and society is owed for the strain Mr. Polanski put upon it with his antics over the last 30 years. The main overriding consideration at this point can only be those two things alone. A fair evaluation of his debt must be assessed and extracted upon him given the opportunity. Even through all the confusion, an eye must be kept on that fact alone.

The circumstances of his flight do not bear consideration in this instance. His status as a Hollywood icon means nothing to the justice owed to a woman forever stained by his heinous actions. But at the same time, he does not deserve undue hardship because of those same extenuating factors either. His time for rehabilitation and re-entrance into society is rather moot at this point, but his unique positioning opens up other avenues for him to pay the societal portion of his debt instead of his personal improvement covering that ground.

Roman Polanski did his crimes, and it is far past time he did his time; however, he does not deserve to suffer the consequences for societies struggling to bridge the justice gap.