Lawyers probably should not be seduced into believing that there is anything equivocal about Polanski’s position. As has been widely reported, three decades ago Oscar-winning film director Roman Polanski admitted to drugging a 13-year-old girl with quaalude (the original roofie) and alcohol before proceeding to have sex with her. After being turned in, he first pled down the charge and then did a runner (to London as it happened) to avoid sentencing.

Yes, there are questions as to why authorities have left it 30 odd years to bring him to justice but should there be any question over the fact that they have finally done it per se? For lawyers there is no reason no to expect that he should be let off just because of the passage of time.

But the seduction of ‘high culture’ and celebrity appears to be pretty powerful at pulling in supporters. A French minister no less has joined the throng and Hollywood has seen a number of celebrity petitioners rush in to defend him, seemingly believing his evasion of justice is just fine. As you would expect, the arrest has been hotly debated on American legal blogs. Above the Law has done a pros and cons list in its article – "The Roman Polanski Prosecution: Keep On Keeping On, or Drop It Like It’s Hot?" and news commentators can’t get enough of it. We’ve pulled together a few of the more interesting articles below…

The Roman Polanski Prosecution: Keep On Keeping On, or Drop It Like It’s Hot? [Above the Law]
Polanski defenders above petty notions of morality [Chron]
Legal Expert Says Roman Polanski Arrest ‘Doesn’t Make Any Sense’ [ABC News]
Court rejects Polanski motion to disqualify ‘biased’ judges [CNN]
Marcia Clark (Marcia Clark!) Throws Twist Into Polanski Matter [WSJ]