« "Elena Kagan Will Be Obama's Supreme Court Pick: Mike Allen" | Main | Notable (and justified?) attack by old Maryland governor on current governor concerning death penalty »

May 8, 2010

The latest legal plot twists in the Polanski prosecution

This New York Times piece, which is headlined "Polanski Transcript Plea Opposed by Prosecutors" provides the latest update on the real-life legal drama that Roman Polanski is helping to create through his various efforts to undermine his prosecution three decades ago.  Here are the details:

The legal battle over Roman Polanski’s possible sentencing in the United States on a 33-year-old sex charge continues, as prosecutors on Thursday registered opposition to Mr. Polanski’s request that recent secret testimony in the case be unsealed.  Mr. Polanski, who fled the United States before sentencing in 1978, and his lawyers have asked the Los Angeles County Superior Court to provide them with transcripts of testimony by Roger Gunson, the original prosecutor in the case.

 In court filings, Mr. Polanski’s lawyers have said Mr. Gunson described a plan under which Judge Laurence J. Rittenband intended to use Mr. Polanski’s time in prison for psychiatric evaluation as his punishment in the case. In their brief on Thursday, District Attorney Steve Cooley of Los Angeles County and his deputy David Walgren asserted that the testimony should remain sealed and noted that the authorities in Switzerland, where Mr. Polanski is being held pending possible extradition, had not requested transcripts of the sealed testimony.  A hearing on the request is set for Monday.

May 8, 2010 at 08:18 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The latest legal plot twists in the Polanski prosecution:


i'm certainly they do oppose it. if this statement is even close to true!

"Mr. Polanski’s lawyers have said Mr. Gunson described a plan under which Judge Laurence J. Rittenband intended to use Mr. Polanski’s time in prison for psychiatric evaluation as his punishment in the case."

THEY NEVER WANT IT RELEASED. In fact it wouldnt' suprise me to have the records suddenly become "missing" since they prove this entire 2 year mess was a fraud!

Posted by: rodsmith | May 8, 2010 6:45:33 PM

Los Angeles former prosecutor Roger Gunson's testimony reportedly contradicts the current DA Steve Cooley. If Cooley made false representations in regards to extraditing Roman Polanski, the California voters have a right to know this, and thus the County of Los Angeles court should unseal Los Angeles Prosecutor Roger Gunson's testimony in Polanski's Case.

As stated in this article on May 10 2010 there is a court hearing in County of Los Angeles Judge Peter Espinoza's Courtroom in Los Angeles over the original Los Angeles Prosecutor, Roger Gunson's sealed testimony obtained from Roger Gunson in depositions early this year 2010.

Polanski's American lawyers want to send a copy of Los Angeles Prosecutor Roger Gunson's sealed testimony to Swiss Authorities. But Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley does not: See below
for the 51 page document by the DA's office.


However the Swiss say they don't need it to resolve the issue of whether the extradition request is allowed under the treaty with the U.S. as the Swiss have presumed that prosecutors seeking extradition of Roman Polanski are telling the truth.

I believe Roman Polanski's lawyers have objected to the Swiss Authorities ASSUMPTION.

TO REPEAT the people of California have a right to know whether Los Angeles District Attorney, Steve Cooley, who happens to be running for state Attorney General, made false statements in the extradition request of Roman Polanski to Swiss Authorities last year.

Los Angeles former prosecutor Roger Gunson's testimony reportedly contradicts the current DA Steve Cooley. If Cooley made false representations in regards to extraditing Roman Polanski, the California voters have a right to know this.

For more on whether the Swiss Should Deny Extradition See:


Posted by: Anon | May 8, 2010 10:24:56 PM

My cocaine hell, by the beauty [Charlotte Lewis] who partied away her glittering film
Written in United Kingdom Sunday Mirror, Apr 6, 1997 by Henrietta Knight

Looking gaunt and vulrable, Charlotte Lewis hangs her head and whispers: “I used to have the world in the palm of my hand.
“But I discovered cocaine and just couldn’t stop.
“Everywhere I went there were drugs – at parties, at restaurants, on the sets of movies and at my friends’ homes. I couldn’t get away from it. It took over my whole life and then wrecked it.”
It is the first time British-born Charlotte – who shot to fame at 18 after starring with Eddie Murphy in his film The Golden Child – has spoken of her battle against drugs…and the Hollywood party-go- round that drove her to the edge. Now recovering at the pounds 3,000 a week Priory Clinic in Roehampton thanks to her close friend Eric Clapton she says: “It is only now that I am really willing to admit that I had a problem.
“I have tried to stop taking cocaine twice before, but only in a half-hearted way.
“I used to think that it was something I just did at weekends.
“But living in Los Angeles is like being at one long party, and it’s difficult to get away from it.
“I got to the stage where I was wondering, ‘What is the point of living here? All I have is temptation’.”
Charlotte was just 15 when she was thrown out of the exclusive Bishop Douglas School in North London – and went to Paris to pursue a modelling career.
At 5ft 7in she was too short to be a catwalk model, but found plenty of work in fashion magazines.
She also found a ready supply of drink, drugs and late-night parties.
“I was rebelling against everything,” she recalls.
“After six months I pulled myself together because I realised I looked about 110 years old.
“I stopped drinking, smoking and taking drugs and didn’t really start again until I landed in LA.”
Charlotte made her screen debut when she was just 16, starring in Roman Polanski’s film Pirates. She was immediately hailed as the new Natassja Kinski. When she co-starred with Eddie Murphy in The Golden Child the following year she was acclaimed as the next great Hollywood leading lady.
But along with the fame came the party invites. Everybody wanted to know her.
She became a well-known figure on Los Angeles’ celebrity circuit … and she was seen on the arm of some of the world’s most eligible men.
She had an 18-month affair with Charlie Sheen and romances with Mickey Rourke, dancer Mikhail Baryshnikov and INXS rocker Michael Hutchence.
She lived with wealthy video producer William Annersley and was engaged to millionaire film boss Mario Sotela for a year.
She used to go night-clubbing with Liz Hurley. She was close to Sly Stallone’s ex, Janice Dickinson – and Emily Lloyd was a good friend.
But while she took small film parts to pay her rent, her friends were landing parts in big budget films made by the major studios.
And drugs were destroying her.
Last summer, after staying up all night with a girlfriend drinking and snorting cocaine she decided to quit.
“We were high as kites doing one line of cocaine after the other,” Charlotte recalls.
“When the light started coming up over the Hollywood Hills we decided that enough was enough.
“We had spent hours discussing it and decided rehab was the only solution.
“The two of us staggered into the Cedars Sinai Medical Centre in Beverly Hills and went up to the seventh floor, where they run a drugs treatment programme.”
But Charlotte’s addiction was so great that she persuaded her friend to give her another gram of the drug which they both took in the hospital bathroom.
She says: “We thought we should finish it off before we committed ourselves.
“We sat in the waiting room and tried to fill in the forms, barely able to read or hold our pens. I was cold and clammy and unable to think straight.
“Then when we saw the doctors coming towards us my friend said to me, ‘Do we really need to be here?’ We got cold feet and left.”
A few weeks later she again tried to give up drugs … and thought that she had found a boyfriend – a film producer – who would help her.
She was already attending Alcoholic Anonymous because she thought she had a drinking problem when her lover-to-be saw her at her agent’s office and followed her to an AA meeting.
“He knew I was taking cocaine so he pretended that he was anti- drugs,” she recalls.
“We even went to AA meetings together. He told me that he spent one week of every month working in New York.
“After a few months of living together in an apartment near the beach in Santa Monica he started acting strangely like he was having an affair.
“We had a huge row and I threw him out of the house.”
Charlotte discovered that his “affair” was really with cocaine.
And while he was supposed to be working in New York he was really on a massive drinks and drugs binge. “The next night he appeared on the doorstep saying he was sorry,” she recalls.
“He had a bottle of champagne and a big packet of cocaine. I just couldn’t resist.
“We sat up all night doing line after line until it was all gone.
“I became a nervous wreck and lost so much weight I was just skin and bone.
“He was a very confused puppy. I knew I had to call time on the relationship.”
Sad and depressed, Charlotte left him to resume her wild partying with a vengeance.
She often stayed up all night as one day rolled into the next.
Four months ago she realised she had hit rock-bottom when she stayed at an all-night party in the Hollywood Hills snorting cocaine and popping Ecstasy pills.
“I passed out on a sofa and when I woke up I realised that someone had stolen my Rolex watch and some of my jewellery,” she recalls.
“The man whose party it was was actually a friend of mine, but he had a strange girlfriend and she had strange friends running around.
“I told the guy that unless it was returned I would call the police and bust everyone.
“I went into the kitchen to pour myself a cup of coffee and sure enough the watch appeared on the coffee table.”
By now even the smaller roles had begun drying up and Charlotte was beginning to run out of money.
“One movie I did just paid for a new lamp. It was a nice lamp, but that was it,” she admits.
“I wasn’t spending all my money on drugs because it always seems to be around in Hollywood.
“Someone always seemed to have some to give me.
Now Charlotte says she is determined to fight her way back to the top – for the sake of her mum.
“I never knew my father, who was a half-Iranian half-Chilean doctor,” she says.
“We didn’t have any money when I was growing up and my mother raised me by herself.
“Now it’s my turn. Even when I was doing really well I still couldn’t afford to buy her a house or a car.
“All I did was to try to make sure she was always warm in the winter.
“Now I really want to be a successful Hollywood movie star and really spoil her.
“But I was never veory good at calling it quits.”

Addendum – Seems like the Los Angeles prosecutors in 1977 and once again in 2010 are using cocaine drug addicts to try to nail Roman Polanski for all sorts of phoney stale crimes, by doing deals and covering up witnesses cocaine drug addiction, using them to defame Roman Polanski’s character to the world, while hiding their drug addiction and other addictions.

This is less about the witnesses and more about the Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley and his prosecutors use of the cocaine drug addicts representations about Roman Polanski to the world's press. These witnesses have strong motivation for saying the things that they do which may make it more likely to be untrue.

Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley loses credibility using these witnesses who have cocaine drug addiction, and these witnesses are either biased witnesses because of fear of prosecution for cocaine, or because of Charlotte Lewis’s betrayal and wish for more fame and fortune at Roman Polanski’s expense.

If Charlotte Lewis was sexually assaulted and did not like it, she should not have stayed for the movie, she should have walked away with her dignity. If true she made her bed literally for the movie and so she should lie in it.

In addition if Charlotte has made up a story after all these years then someone may have paid Charlotte Lewis for her press reception in Los Angeles at an opportune time just before the California Primary Elections where Steve Cooley was running as the Republican candidate to become the Attorney General of California.

Posted by: anon | Jun 15, 2010 5:40:24 AM

TO clarify and in answer to who is to blame for the Roman Polanski situation now –
the most honest and psychologically coherent opinion as to who is to blame actually comes from the person who has had the experience, who has the BIG PICTURE in his head, himself.

Who has been harmed and re-victimized is Roman Polanski.

This is what Roman Polanski had to say about the matter on May 2nd 2010 for those of you who have not read it, or have already forgotten.

"This affair was roused from its slumbers of over three decades by a documentary film-maker who gathered evidence from persons involved at the time. I took no part in that project, either directly or indirectly. The resulting documentary not only highlighted the fact that I left the United States because I had been treated unjustly; it also drew the ire of the Los Angeles authorities, who felt that they had been attacked and decided to request my extradition from Switzerland, a country I have been visiting regularly for over 30 years without let or hindrance.

...I can remain silent no longer because the same causes are now producing the same effects. The new District Attorney, who is handling this case and has requested my extradition, is himself campaigning for election and needs media publicity!"

Posted by: Anon | Jun 20, 2010 2:02:27 AM

What happened with Ms Geimer was clearly the fault of her mother, for what kind of person leaves her sexually active, drug-using kid alone with a film director, for a photo shoot in the SEVENTIES


As a parent, i know that in a similar situation, there is no way I would have let this happen without supervision.

Yes and in all this commotion the Press and Prosecutors and Santa Monica & Los Angeles Judges for 33 years have forgotten that Roman Polanski was not an ordinary MAN, since he was a highly attractive person to Samantha Geimer and her family, through the fame and fortune Polanski could potentially have brought her in Roman Polanski being a successful and famous film director.

Everyone in California is upset about seduction of an underage girl, but on the other hand there may have been seduction of Roman Polanski by an underage, oversexed, unsupervised kid, to gain his favor, and fame and fortune, or alternatively just simple mutual attraction, an accident waiting to happen,

A Streetcar Named Desire.

Posted by: Anon | Jul 10, 2010 5:17:46 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB