The fate of Roman Polanski has been a heated topic among my friends and I for the past several weeks. They are equally divided, it seems, for and against Polanski, on the issue of whether he should be sentenced to jail time for the decades-old sex case he was arrested for last month. He has yet to be released from prison.

The debate hinges on the fact that some of the details of the case are not clear and there is some debate as to whether he forced himself on her or not. There are a few facts that are clear, though:

1. The girl involved has dropped the case, publicly forgave Polanski over 10 years ago, and appeared in the documentary, "Roman Polanksi: Wanted and Desired" in his defense.

2. Polanski was released from his 90-day prison stint for psychiatric evaluation early, after an evaluator deemed him mentally sound and unlikely to offend again.

3. The judge involved in the case was a notorious attention-hound, asked a reporter's opinion on what sentence he should give Polanski (?!) and was overheard bragging to his country club buddies that he would put away Polanski for life. The prosecuting attorney admitted, "I'm not surprised he left under those circumstances."

While there has been an uproar in the mainstream media over Hollywood's defence of the famed director, many of my friends have remained vocally supportive of him, despite the possible backlash from being seen as "pro-rape" or something equally stupid.

What surprises me is not that many of them are on his side (I do have mostly liberal friends, after all, who don't have the same twisted morals as the right-wingers would like to claim are divinely instilled in Americans, like dragging a case out for "ethical" reasons when it only hurts the "victim", the defendant, and their families.) What surprises me is that, love him or hate him, his films are considered masterpieces across the board.

This observation seems to negate what some argue is the reason why Hollywood is defending Polanski: solely on the merits of his creative genius. While some French officials have (sort of) used this point in arguing for his release, his talent has in no way shaped mine or many others' opinion. As for the others, before going on to say how he deserves to be in jail for life or even castrated, the first sentence to come out of their mouths is, "He's an amazing director, but..."

Artists and celebrities should absolutely not be exempt from the law, just as policemen, politicians, and clergymen should not be exempt, but why waste money, manpower, and valuable media coverage in chasing after a married, 76 year old man, when the woman has tried on several occasions to drop the whole thing? If it's justice the American authorities are after, I have to wonder, justice for whom? The bigger question remains: is he that much of a threat to American society (artistically, not criminally) that we must lock him up to quiet him?