Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Playing Politics With Roman Polanski

Los Angeles, CA—In a bankrupt state that is trying to figure a way to release 60,000 criminals from their prisons, it’s obvious that fugitive film director Roman Polanski is serving as pure entertainment. Is this just a way for L.A. County DA Steve Cooley to get some much needed press attention?

I know that despite a broken plea agreement, the fact that Polanski actually already served prison time or there was judicial and prosecutorial misconduct, many Americans want Polanski punished even more.

Public safety is hardly an issue since Polanski has not set foot on American soil in over three decades. At age 76, Polanski is incapable of ever committing any similar crimes again.

To facilitate the extradition taxpayers will be required to spend a bundle litigating the issue in a Swiss court. After that they must arrange secure taxpayer funded transportation and housing getting Polanski to Los Angeles. That is far from cheap.

Once Polanski arrives, tax payers get punished some more while the validity of the plea agreement that was broken by a corrupt judge is hashed out. Adding to this silliness is the fact that Samantha Greiner and her family want Polanski left alone. Chances are they will set Polanski free anyway and he may then be even able to travel to America freely. what’s the point of putting up this Circus? .

Putting Polanski in a costly international perp walk is a self-serving exercise for D.A. Steve Cooley.


HI-CALIBER Private Investigations said...

Paul we have to be careful in which battles we choose. Our roles as State licensed investigators are to be impartial advocates of the truth.

This man is a no good self admitted child molester (as was Michael Jackson.) However on the contrary, this man pleads out guilty - from a RAPE to MOLESTATION!!!

Don’t blame that plea on his ignorance of the law, nor his youthful bad experiences. This man was very wise and very rich; hence he had all the legal resources readily available to him than the average person does (that debate belonged in the plea bargain process.)

I don’t care about his pathetic white puppy dog face in his above booking photo.

He willingly plead guilty… he then willingly ran from our COUNTRY… and hid under the wings of more cowards.

If (if) that judge truly did re-nig on his plead agreement, then he should only be sentenced to the original plea of “time served.” But not to dismiss that horrific crime.

The down trodden man in the ghetto is JUST as important to cover as is this pathetic man.

And please I don’t want to see a bunch of ANONYMOUS posts opposing my post. Lets see their full names and contact info.

Anonymous said...

The first thing is he did not willingly do anything. He was tricked!!!!

To change the subject for a moment Roman Polanski is a holocaust survivor. I would not call that a youthful bad experience.

The child Roman Polanski was target practice for Nazis who would have killed him. They killed his mother. If she had lived perhaps she would have been able to teach him how to behave with young girls, or if he had a sister. But that was not to be.

Then much later in his llfe - and after more tragedy had struck - in Santa Monica in exchange for a certain amount of time to serve- Polanski gave his confession - The Court Reneged on that bargain, obtained the confession, and thereby hung Polanski out to dry.

The Santa Monica court reneging on that contract -but yet keeping the confession - is a sleazy manouever.

I have been tricked too in that Courthouse and I am not the perpetrator but the victim of sexual assault.

In my experience the County of Los Angeles do not care about women being sexually assaulted because their employees after the fact assault and batter and frame them in that Santa Monica Courthouse - to aid and abett other government agencies against a woman reporting sexual assault in Santa Monica Courthouse. They even use African American police and switch identity and race to create a racial animus to cover up sexual discrimination against white women by white professional males of Santa Monica Educational Institutions.

The Santa Monica Judges also assist in this travesty by allowing undocumented white sheriffs into the courtroom to perform assault and battery and other violence.

If the County of Los Angeles Judicial system had dealt fairly with Roman Polanski he would not have had any need to run. He would have known what he was facing firmly and would have been able to deal with it squarely - at the time. But a person does not feel like dealing with anything squarely when the authority is NOT DEALING FAIRLY with them. Even the perpetrator of sexual assault does not want to be abused by the Judicial system of Los Angeles.

The County of Los Angeles created this situation and Roman Polanski is the scapegoat 30 years later. IT IS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SPIN on the situation to make it all look like its ALL Polanski's fault.

The sexual assault was Polanski's fault if it is true and he stands by this admission but what is NOT HIS FAULT IS THE COURT'S CORRUPT DEALINGS TO OBTAIN THE CONFESSION, which became corrupt when the court reneged on the plea bargain agreement.

Polanski ran because that is what his dad taught him to do as a child in Nazi Germany. If he did not run in Nazi Poland he would have been dead. Did anyone blame him for running then - except perhaps the Nazis?

As an adullt if the County of Los Angeles betrayed his trust in reneging on the plea bargain arrangement why would he want to stay in LA and face - who knows what - if he had some other place to go?

The County of Los Angeles has acted the same way in my situation as a sexual assault victim for their own gain and warped gratification in someone elses distress - It is not about justice in the County of Los Angeles - it is only about deceit, intimidation and control with no regard for anyone else which includes the victim.

Anonymous said...

So much for the Gov...

This is really all about what club you are a member of.

This belated arrest of Roman Polanski is just an excuse for County of Los Angeles to show off its holier than thou attitude and I know it reeks of hypocracy.

If Roman Polanski was American and worked for the County of Los Angeles or for a Santa Monica Educational institution in the photography department the County of Los Angeles and their judges and police would have gladly assisted Polanski in covering up his sexual assault on a the woman using the California Government code as an excuse to hold a hearing to assault and batter and ruff up the sexual assault victim.

Anonymous said...

Double Standard Arnie.

Gove Arnie has not thought out his statement very well as Roman Polanski is not being treated like "everyone else" in California.

Nor was Roman Polanksi treated like everyone else in Nazi Poland. Roman Polanski has been discriminated against because he has some Jewish blood and would have been murdered by the Nazis as a child had he been caught as his mother was.

Nor was he treated like everyone else in California when his wife and child was murdered by the Manson gang. The landlord even asked Polanski to pay for the carpet stained in his wife and child's blood. Yes this is a cold world.

And why was the mother of the sexual assault victim not more careful with her young daughter Samantha– in leaving her young daughter at the home of a man whose wife and child had already been murdered by the Manson gang?

In addition Roman Polanski is being discriminated against now by California and IS NOT BEING TREATED LIKE EVERYONE ELSE because if Roman Polanski had been an American Instructor who worked for California in an Educational Institution in the photography department the California County of Los Angeles Appellate Judges and Justices would have gladly obliged in covering up Roman Polanski’s sexual assaults on students by using the California Government Code 910 technicality to end the law suit and as an excuse to assault and batter the victim with undocumented white Sheriffs in the Courtroom AND NOT PAY THE SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIM ANY SETTLEMENT.

This arrest after all these years- is all about discrimination, abuse of power and Money. The victim got her settlement in Polanski's case, but it seems that California want a slice of the Swiss pie.

There's a DOUBLE STANDARD IN CALIFORNIA as to who gets nailed for sexual assault - ARNIE & COOLEY. And if you are employed by the County of Los Angeles you get a free ticket to ride - with County o Los Angeles lawyers to protect your sexual assaulting tendancies at the tax payers expense.

Anonymous said...

The pendulum swings...

Below is a discussion between Roman Polanski, Sharon Tate and Hugh Hefner on sex and nudity in 1969.

Anonymous said...

California needs to pay back Roman Polanski for the murder of Roman Polanski's American family Sharon Tate and his unborn child, which story is 41 years old.

Arnold is wrong - Polanski is not being treated like everyone else in California...See Below for one of the most gruesome murders in American History… which marked the beginning of Polanski's victimization in California.

LINKS WORK AS OF 10/7/2009

Anonymous said...


Are any of you interested in Polanski's side of the story? Or do you all prefer to get on your moral high horses and bay for the man's blood while ignoring the possibility that he may be guilty of nothing more than having consensual sex once with a 13-year-old girl who by her own admission was already sexually experienced but by Californian law was underage? ,

In Polanskis autobiography there was nothing about drugging the girl beforehand, though he does mention that they had both had some champagne. He goes on to say he was "shocked and bewildered" the following day when he was arrested on a charge of rape. Having admired his work for more than 30 years and having also read a good deal about him, I feel I know something about his character, his tastes and inclinations, though I have never had the privilege of meeting him. I do not believe he would do what he was accused of. Nor do people who know him. And it is undeniably significant that in the whole of his 76 years no other woman, young or old, has ever accused him of molestation. What really clinches it for me, however, is that a medical examination of the girl, the findings of which can be read online, discovered no blood on her clothes or body, no anal lacerations and no sphincter tear - nothing, in short, of the kind one would expect if her story of being drugged, raped and sodomised while putting up "some" resistance and saying "no" repeatedly had a grain of truth in it.

I do not believe I have ever before been so disgusted with journalists as over the way they have maligned Polanski these past few days. Almost to a man they have proved themselves true to type: the spiteful hack who cannot get his facts right and cares nothing for truth or justice or fair play. For example, though he was originally indicted on six counts - furnishing a controlled substance to a minor; committing a lewd or lascivious act; having unlawful sexual intercourse; perversion; sodomy; rape by use of drugs - the DA subsequently withdrew five of these charges, leaving only that of unlawful sexual intercourse. It was to this alone that Polanski pleaded guilty, though one would never know it from most of the recent stories about him.

Furthermore, since the girl was three weeks short of 14 at the time of the incident, Polanski is no more a "child molester" (as some people insist on dubbing him) than Edgar Allan Poe, Mayne Reid, Paul Gauguin, Charlie Chaplin or Oliver Reed, each of whom as a grown man either cohabited with or married a girl in her early or mid teens. Old goat might be a more fitting epithet. There is a world of difference. Besides, some 13-year-old girls are enough to make an old goat - or a Polanski - of any man. And if Californian law supposes, as it does, that a girl under 18 is incapable of giving her consent, it is in the immortal words of Mr Bumble "a ass - a idiot".

Most sickening of all is how some people give every impression of wanting to be his executioner. On internet forums one semiliterate moron after another writes with undisguised glee of the prospect of his spending the rest of his life in prison and there being beaten up and sodomised every day and perhaps, with a bit of luck, murdered. Some even demand that he be castrated. It is all disturbingly reminiscent of the witch-hunts of centuries ago, the tricoteuses who sat round the guillotine, the persecution of Oscar Wilde, the Nazi thugs who rounded up the Jews and sent them on a one-way journey to the gas chambers. It is a sad intimation that man is still the vicious, apelike creature he has always been, that civilisation is only a veneer and that the lynch mob may one day come down the street to get you for being different from the herd.

Anonymous said...

The California prosecutor's focus seems to be on the crime of statutory rape, but to focus on that crime exclusively and to not broaden that focus to an establishing shot - is to eclipse and cover up the California's crime against Roman Polanski which is part of the same transaction - where Santa Monica Courthouse Judge Rittenband was about to renege on the California plea bargain agreement made with Roman Polanski in order to obtain Polanski's confession.

So Roman Polanski was tricked by Santa Monica Courthouse authorities into his confession through those Officials offering a lesser amount of time in order to get his confession - and tricked again by the Santa Monica Officials who did not reveal when they made the plea bargain agreement - that part of the punishment would be that Polanski be deported.

So the problem was that neither the punishment nor the plea bargain agreement terms were fixed and solid as the punishment increased after Polanski made the plea bargain agreement. Polanski who had been tricked into confession as part of the plea bargain "agreement" now faced a sentence which was uncertain, and this new uncertain sentence BREACHED the Plea Bargain Agreement. Shocking and Highly Unsettling...for Anyone in his position.

Roman Polanski's lawyer Herve Temime would be correct to assume that “Hollywood” support for Polanski has hurt Roman Polanski's case if Officials are only going to pay attention to "Hollywood" comments for their reason to convict Polanski. But since the "Hollywood" comments were not made by Polanski himself - they have nothing to do with his case.

But I believe Polanski's European lawyer is incorrect as far as support that is coming from people who do not condone either statutory rape or abuse of Judicial power.
Many people who are supporting Polanski are not forgetting about the abuse of Judicial power to which he fell victim.

Roman Polanski also has support now because of the ridiculous amount of time - 31 years -before the California Authorities acted to extradite Roman Polanski who has not been in hiding.

Also Roman Polanski has support because the extradition seems to be in retaliation to Marina Zenovitch's movie "Polanski - Wanted and Desired" which speaks to the Judicial Misconduct,

Also Roman Polanski has support because the wish for extradition 31 years later seems to be in retaliation for Polanski's lawyers writing in the California appeal briefs that the County Prosecutor had never tried to extradite Polanski in 30 years.

Roman Polanski has support for a host of different reasons but primarily because of abuse of power by Judge Rittenband which caused Polanski to run, and because he has served 42 days, and because the victim does not want this now, because 31 years is too long of a time for the LA County authorities to not act, and because Polanski apparently paid Samantha a settlement , and because he has certainly had enough heartache in his life not of his own doing, and should be left to enjoy the rest of his life - and should not be left to rot in a Cold Swiss Cell.

Anonymous said...

Regarding Los Angeles'administration of justice and prosecutorial misconduct...

If Roman Polanski's former prosecutor David Wells is now saying that he was lying about his influencing Roman Polanski's judge (in 1977), judge Laurence J. Rittenband in the movie Polanski - Wanted and Desired, then David Wells also is apparently lying to the New York Times on 7/17/2008 aprox. in an article entitled "Polanski Asks Prosecutor To Review Film's Claims" by Michael Ciepley.

According to the New York Times dated 7/17/2008 , Roman Polanski's former prosecutor David Wells had a telephone conversation from his home with the New York Times on 7/15/2008, where David Wells denied to the New York Times that his contact with Judge Laurence J Rittenband had been improper, saying it occurred in open court during routine discussions of cases.

“I didn’t tell him to do it or that he should do it,” Mr. Wells said of the judge’s decision to put Mr. Polanski in prison for 42 days for psychiatric review. “I just told him what his options were.”

For the link where David Wells said this to the New York Times. See

I think Prosecutor David Wells just lost his credibility.

David Wells may have influenced Judge Laurence J. Rittenband despite what he says now. It seems not only has he lied to the director of the documentary Polanski Wanted and Desired, but also David Wells has lied to the New York Times in July 2008 if he lied, but it is also possible that David Wells did not lie. And whatever Prosecutor David Wells says now is no longer credible.

In addition David Wells said he embellished his role in the Polanski documentary because he was told the documentary would air in France and not the United States,

But David Wells's assertion cannot be true because he also embellished his role to the New York Times, and the New York Times is not based in France.

Anonymous said...

Apparently Swiss officials have urged American prosecutors to address allegations of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct leveled by Polanski’s attorneys The Swiss Officials should view the documentary Polanski: Wanted and Desired which shows that Polanski was being treated differently because he was not an American Citizen.

After Roman Polanski had already served “42” days in prison - the movie explains succinctly why he flew away from Injustice in Los Angeles, a theme Polanski was made to revisit in real life - after making "China Town".

In the movie Judge Laurence J. Rittenband is shown talking about deportation Polanski, & deportation was not part of the Judge’s jurisdiction.

In addition there was coercion because if Polanski did not agree to the Judge's illegal new condition of deportation then the Judge would reneged on the prior agreement with Polanski, & would order an unspecified but longer prison term.

But Roman Polanski already had “served” 42 unappealable days in prison which must be unconstitutional since the California prison sentence was not appealable.

The Documentary Polanski Wanted and Desired also shows that Judge Rittenband conducted phony hearings which were specifically staged for the press. Polanski's attorney Douglas Dalton and Polanski's prosecutor Roger Gunson confirm this to be true.

Also Judge Laurence J. Rittenband wanted a longer prison term for Polanski NOT because of the original crime that he was accused of - but because Roman Polanski was photographed at the Oktober Fest in Germany sitting next to girls. But this is not a crime and should not entitle Santa Monica Judge Rittenband to enhance Roman Polanski's sentence .

After all it was Judge Rittenband that permitted Roman Polanski to leave the country in the first place to make a movie, so Polanski was never treated like everyone else, and then the Judge resented Polanski sitting next to girls in Germany's Oktober Fest.

How far should the Santa Monica Judicial system reach to penalize Polanski for sitting next to German girls at the Oktober Fest when sitting next to girls is not even a crime?

And if it is a crime in Santa Monica Judge Rittenband’s view - then Polanski should have been warned before the Judge allowed Polanski to film to Europe, or the Judge should have not permitted Polanski to make a movie before his sentencing, and in this way a trap was set.

Judge Rittenband, (an elected California Official) in the end - was only concerned with how he would appear to the press and the California public. Judge Rittenband had a balancing act to perform and so he Judged Roman Polanski to have committed a crime in Germany by sitting next to girls.

It is obvious that the Santa Monica Courthouse Judicial system is unable to deal with sexual crimes fairly, & is unjust & broken.

The Santa Monica Courthouse is filled with corruption and discrimination in sex cases, regardless of whether you are famous or not, regardless of whether you are accused of consensual sex with an underage girl or whether you are have been victimized by sexual assault, sexual discrimination that culminates in assault and battery in a courtroom in Santa Monica Courthouse.

In a sense Roman Polanski is being discriminated against because if he was Californian and worked for the State then the State would have been more inclined to cover up any claim of sexual assault, through perjury and false witnesses, insinuating racial discrimination to cove up sexual discrimination, and more staged hearings with the government paying for his lawyers.

In addition Polanski is being discriminated against because of his fame, because of his movies and,because of what the California Manson Family did to Roman Polanski’s American family and

finally because he flew away in the face of injustice when the Judge illegally coerced Polanski to agree to deportation, to which Polanski complied with in his own way, by flying away from discrimination, broken legal agreements, and lnsanity.

Anonymous said...


Santa Monica Courthouse Judge Laurence J. Rittenband’s abuse of power towards Roman Polanski 32 years ago, is the root cause of the current problems.

But the Los Angeles DA starting up this case again against Polanski, after a 32 years lapse, is evidence of a retaliation - since Polanski’s California lawyers filed appeal papers in the California Appellate Court requesting that Appeal Court drop the case against Polanski to include that the Los Angeles had not attempted to arrest or extradite Polanski in 30 years, and these Court papers were filed prior to Polanski’s arrest.

In requesting Polanski’s extradition after 32 years – the Los Angeles DA is emulating Roman Polanski’s China Town in waiting until the man is 76 years old before choking him.

The Los Angeles DA has forgotten the reason the plea bargain arrangement was struck 32 years ago by the victim’s lawyer, the prosecutor and Polanski’s lawyer, was to avoid a trial and avoid further humiliation of the victim through media coverage.

Roman Polanski ,who is not American, is being used as a scapegoat for all of America's sins as if he is was the only person in America who allegedly acted on his attraction to a pretty girl who was just too young.

In addition Judge Rittenband, god bless his cotton socks, is guility of metaphorically raping and discriminating against Roman Polanski by wielding his illegal leverage over Polanski, which the Judge could do by virtue of the fact that Polanski was not an American Citizen - if Polanski did not give up his legal rights to fight deportation as per the Judge’s request - Polanski would have faced an uncertain & longer prison term from this Judge.

This was how Judge Rittenband could rape Roman Polanski, and put Polalnski between a rock and a hard place– by using illegal leverage to vaporize Polanski's legal rights and choice to dispute deportation.

It is not right – even if Polanski was facing a sentence for statutory rape – for the Judge to rape Polanski in turn, an Eye for an Eye or in this case a Rape for a Rape, by taking away Polanski's right to dispute deportation by threatening him with a longer prison term.

Bottom Line - Two Rapes don’t make a Right-

And Santa Monica Courthouse Judicial Sin and Spin

Anonymous said...

Apparently California State lawmaker Gloria Romero and 14 other legislators have written a letter in support of the extradition of Roman Polanski to Los Angeles, saying the effort makes an important statement about the seriousness of domestic violence.

I am sure California State Lawmaker Gloria Romero’s heart is in the right place. Perhaps she should focus more on California Official, Police and Judicial cover up of sexual assault in California as official cover up of sexual assault in California’s High Schools, & Universities is far more insidious, and potentially deadly. Also in California people seem to care so little about sexual assault they won't even pick up a phone to call the police when it is staring them in the face in Richmond California.

Also California State Legislator Gloria Romero is misrepresenting the totality of the circumstances.

It is not true that Roman Polanski flew away from Santa Monica California to escape punishment because he had already returned to America from Europe once to comply with Judge Laurence J. Rittenband and served 42 days, and Chino prison officials said he should serve no further prison time.

We do know that Roman Polanski served his sentence at Chino of 42 days, and so
if we believe that Roman Polanski would have completed his sentence if Roman Polanski had not run into Injustice and illegal coercion by County of Los Angeles Santa Monica Judge Laurence J. Rittenband

then it follows that Roman Polanski’s flight from Los Angeles is not only being misunderstood but is ALSO BEING MISREPRESENTED BY CALIFORNIA LEGISLATORS who want to scape goat Roman Polanski, and in so doing to COVER UP JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT AT SANTA MONICA COURTHOUSE!!!!

Remember Nina Simone who sang “But I'm just a soul whose intentions are good: Oh Lord! Please don't let me be misunderstood ...” This could be Polanski's words because he did start his sentence.

I believe that Polanski’s flight from Los Angeles was not so much about avoiding punishment but was more TO NOT BE FORCED INTO ACCEPTING INJUSTICE, where he was being illegally coerced into agreeing to deportation and mistreated in the County of Los Angeles Santa Monica Courthouse by Judge Rittenband who was taking Polanski’s civil rights away.

In one sense Roman Polanski can be considered a hero in the face of Injustice because he did not give in.

In not caving in to INJUSTICE at County of Los Angeles Santa Monica Courthouse, his plight has brought World attention to INJUSTICE AT SANTA MONICA COURTHOUSE, with the wonderful dedicated & expert assistance of Marina Zenovich and everyone else who made the documentary movie, Polanski: Wanted and Desired, and the honesty of lawyers Douglas Dalton, Roger Gunson, and even David Wells as well.

Anonymous said...

The Fifteen California lawmakers who are supporting Los Angeles would be better off in making some law that would prohibit American sexual assault offenders and corrupt police and Officials who are working in California’s Schools from BEING ABOVE THE LAW

Currently if you work for a California school and sexually assault your student from behind in a class - the police & County of Los Angeles Santa Monica Justice system will help the school & sexual predator cover up the sexual assault, and if the victim complains will further assault and batter the victim of sexual assault, in a staged "hearing" at Santa Monica Courthouse that is designed to exclude due process of law, and silence the lamb.

But if you don't work for California –and you are a French/Polish citizen you don't get a free pass like the California photography teacher...instead at Santa Monica Courthouse you face a different slant by having your civil rights taken away through illegal Judicial coercion, discrimination, and are forced to flee not from punishment, but from punishment that is illegal.


For more info see:

Anonymous said...







Anonymous said...

Hi Crime File
Happy Thanksgiving 25th Nov 2009
We may have helped

Roman Polanski is expected to spend the holidays under electronic monitoring at his posh Alpine chalet after a Swiss court agreed to a $4.5-million bail request by the famed director.

Legal experts said the bail is likely to lengthen what is expected to be a fierce battle over whether Polanski should be extradited to Los Angeles to face sentencing for unlawful intercourse with a 13-year-old girl more than three decades ago.

The decision also raises other questions, given that Polanski fled from the U.S. just before his sentencing in 1978. Swiss justice officials have repeatedly denied his bail requests, saying he’s a flight risk.

Under the terms of the bail, Polanski would be restricted to a chalet he owns in Gstaad, a ski resort in the foothills of Mt. Blanc. The town has long been known as a celebrity hangout, with David Niven, Richard Burton and Roger Moore among its frequent visitors in the past.

Dmitry Gorin, a former prosecutor who has represented people overseas facing charges in Los Angeles, said he was surprised the court would grant bail given Polanski's record of fleeing justice.

Others agreed.

“It is very rare to get bail in an extradition case and especially in cases where the person’s fled,” said Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor and Loyola law professor. “This is a little like giving bail to O.J. [Simpson] after the Bronco chase.”

Levenson said she believes the bail could prolong the extradition process, because Polanski would have less of an incentive to resolve the issue if he is out of jail.

“This will dramatically slow down the extradition process,” she said. "A Swiss chalet is a lot nicer than a jail here.”

Details about why the court decided to grant bail remain unclear. The Ministry of Justice had argued that Polanski should remain behind bars until extradition is resolved. Switzerland’s justice minister told the Swiss national TV that it was not going to appeal the court ruling.

Anonymous said...

More On Playing Politics With Roman Polanski...

Polish director Roman Polanski’s family is thanking French President Nicolas Sarkozy for being “very effective” in helping to win his release from a Swiss prison.

“I wouldn’t go so far as to say that it is thanks to the President that Roman has been freed, but he has been super,” Polanski’s sister-in-law, Mathilde Seigner, told Le Parisien newspaper. “The President has been very effective.”

The London Times speculated that Sarkozy’s wife, ex-model Carla Bruni, may have pressured her husband to intervene because she used to hob nob with Paris’ artistic community, which includes Polanski and wife Emmanuelle Seigner.

After initially balking at his release, Swiss authorities agreed to let Polanski move from a cell to his luxurious Alpine chalet once he puts up $4.5 million bail.

A bracelet will allow police to monitor Polanski , but the device does not include a global positioning system to track him should he escape.

“We can only check if the person is at home," Jonas Peter Weber, a professor at the University of Bern, told the Times. "If the alarm goes off and no police is in the vicinity, the person will be able to flee.”

Anonymous said...

If the D.A. Steve Cooley is going to prosecute Michael Jackson’s doctor, Conrad Murray for furnishing Propofol to Michael Jackson, then the D.A Steve Cooley should also investigate Samantha’s mother Susan Galley, who furnished her underage daughter to Roman Polanski unsupervised, on two separate occasions in 1977.

Susan Galley furnishing her underage daughter to Polanski, is not dissimllar to furnishing a controlled substance to someone who is vulnerable to the charms of that substance, which in this case was sex.

Roman Polanski's was set up by Samantha's mother. We don't know why, Perhaps Stupidity, Negligence, Intentionally?

Roman Polanski was more vulnerable than most to being set up in California, since he was a successful film director which made him a target, and also he was a European who liked younger women which put him at risk, and in Europe in the 70's there was a far less severe standard when it came to sexual activities with younger women.

D.A. Steve Cooley should not use Roman Polanski's well deserved fame in making fine movies, as a device to promote his own political agenda, and he would do better to dismiss the Polanski case instead.

Anonymous said...

There is a cry for Polanski to be treated like everyone else, but he is not being treated like everyone else, AND THAT IS BECAUSE EVERYONE ELSE CONNECTED TO THIS CASE GOT OFF SCOT-FREE

The mother got off scot-free for child neglect, and possibly other crimes against her daughter and Polanski. She was tolerant of the other male that was having sex with her underage daughter for some reason?

And this other male who was having sex with her daughter before Polanski arrived on the scene got off scot-free, and was not even prosecuted by the Los Angeles prosecutors. (Hmm isn’t there some discrimination here?)

Anjelica Huston also got off scot-free for possession of cocaine in return for her witness information on Polanski and on the child who she thought could have been 20 years old.

The Judge got off scot-free for the illegal sentencing- and illegal extortion of Roman Polanski that he was about to inflict- since Roman Polanski departed from USA to avoid the extortion and the deportation (not the remainder of the 90 days).

The Prosecutor David Wells got off scot-free for influencing the Santa Monica Judge Laurence J. Rittenband against Roman Polanski giving him the photo of Polanski sitting next to smiling German girls at the OktoberFest, and sitting next to German girls is not illegal, so Roman Polanski did not deserve an enhanced sentence from the Santa Monica Judge because he sat next to girls in Germany.

I bet Judge Rittenband wanted to be sitting next to smiling girls at the Oktoberfest in Germany, and got jealous.

Anonymous said...

What's Free Speech got to do with it?...

The Swiss and Los Angeles Prosecutors could have arrested Roman Polanski at any time at his home in Switzerland.

But there was no real interest until the movie, Polanski - Wanted And Desired, by Marina Zenovich.

The movie with authentic original footage from the Santa Monica Courthouse, California in 1977/8 made the Los Angeles authorities look bad, because of the Judicial and Prosecutorial misconduct in Polanski's case, with backroom dealings in Judges chambers, staged hearings etc, the Judge reneging on a plea deal, and the Judge wanting to illegally take away Polanski's rights to fight deportation.

Perhaps Los Angeles should have arrested Marina Zenovich for making that movie, instead of Polanski, but somebody had to be blamed and Polanski was arrested on the way to a Swiss film festival which had the effect of maximizing the shock and awe of the arrest after 32 years.

The Los Angeles authorities also waited until 2 days after Roman Polanski's American wife and child's murderer had died in a California prison. Only 2 days...

The fall out from arresting Roman Polanski on the way to the 2009 Swiss Film Festival in Zurich has a chilling effect on many filmmakers.

The arrest is a Swiss betrayal not only to Polanski, but is an affront to all filmmakers in all countries whether they attended the film festival or not.

No longer will filmmakers feel safe in Switzerland, or necessarily at any Film Festival especially if the film is controversial, because now after Zurich's Film Festival 2009- filmmakers know that anything can happen ...

Free Speech has been chilled in this way...The arrest of Polanski on the way to a film festival in Switzerland that was supposed to honor him, has a chilling effect on FREE SPEECH in the movie industry.

Los Angeles should not have used the Swiss Film Festival in Zurich in a dual manner to bait Roman Polanski - and nor should the Swiss Officials have allowed their film festival to be used in this way.

In addition there is ambiguity regardless of the stated reason, as as to why Los Angeles wanted Polanski arrested after 32 years, when he has been very visible and not been in hiding.

Was Polanski really arrested solely for consensual sex with an underage girl 32 years ago?

Or was Polanski really arrested by Los Angeles as revenge for Zenovich's movie Wanted and Desired that has now exposed the Judicial and Prosecutorial Misconduct in the Santa Monica Courthouse against Polanski's 32 years ago,

That's a FREE SPEECH issue in Zenovich's movie, where Roman Polanski is getting a backlash and arrest - in retaliation for Zenovich's movie Polanski: Wanted and Desired that exposes the Judicial and Prosecutorial misconduct in the Santa Monica Courthouse that occured 32 years ago against Roman Polanski.

Also perhaps Los Angeles prosecutors are still miffed with Roman Polanski for not giving the movie Chinatown a happy Hollywood ending?

Anonymous said...

Chicken & Egg Problems for Polanski & Feb 12 2010 was a very good day for Roman Polanski.

Roman Polanski's new film premiered in Berlin and Swiss authorities pledged not to extradite him to the U.S. as long as his appeal on a sex case was still being considered in Los Angeles.

Polanski could not walk the red carpet at the Berlin film festival Friday night for the debut of his movie "The Ghost Writer,"...because he is under house arrest. But he still was the star of the party.

In a new twist the Swiss Justice Ministry declared it would make "no sense" to shift Polanski from Gstaad Switzerland until U.S. courts ruled definitively that he must be sentenced in person to further jail time.

"When the question is still open, why should he be extradited?" Rudolf Wyss, the ministry's deputy director, told The Associated Press. "As long as the question is still open, our decision depends on that."

"Even if we decide on extradition, he can still appeal. This would take many months," Wyss added.

Polanski's extradition is a complicated and diplomatically sensitive decision, as it deals with a three-decade-old case full of alleged wrongdoing by a Los Angeles judge, a confused sentencing procedure and the director's own flight from [in] justice.

There is also Polanski's status as a cultural icon in France and Poland, where he holds dual citizenship, and his history as a Holocaust survivor whose first wife was brutally murdered by crazed followers of cult leader Charles Manson in California.

Loyola University law Professor Laurie Levenson, who has followed the case closely, said the next move appears to be up to Polanski, who has the option to waive extradition.

"The Swiss authorities want to know what Polanski's sentence will be and the Los Angeles courts won't tell them until he comes back. It's a bit of a standoff."

She said that Polanski can keep fighting extradition, but will remain under house arrest indefinitely.

"Mr. Polanski may be able to sit in his Swiss chalet forever," she said. "But if he wants to get out he may have to come back and be sentenced by the California court even though he might get a sentence that would not have required him to come back in the first place.

This is a chicken and egg problem.

In Conclusion See paragraph 2 of Los Angeles Times dated Feb 1st 1978 in jpg file in the link below in the article concerning Polanski where it states that the Judge, Judge Laurence J. Rittenband will sentence Roman Polanski in absentia if he does not return to the Santa Monica court in 10 days.

There is no reason for the current Los Angeles Judge to not sentence Roman Polanski in absentia 32 years later, since Polanski did not return after 10 days, or even after 32 years, & thus that is the law of Polanski's case.


Anonymous said...

In regards to playing politics with Roman Polanski the question is -is Polanski really no different to the late German film maker Leni Riefenstahl?

You may ask - What's the connection?

Leni Riefenstahl was neither a holocaust survivor, nor was she a Santa Monica Courthouse survivor which Roman Polanski is, and he’s certainly not the only one!

There may be some similarity to the retaliation and punishment Leni Riefenstahl received after World War II for being such a great film maker, because Polanski is also being punished and is taking the rap now for film maker Marina Zenovich's documentary movie "Polanski: Wanted and Desired" which expertly uncovered and exposed Judicial and Prosecutorial Misconduct against Polanski at the Santa Monica Courthouse.

We must remember that Roman Polanski did not create the Santa Monica Courthouse misconduct against him, (and sitting next to German girls at the Oktoberfest is not a crime) just as the German film maker Leni Riefenstahl did not create Hitler.

Polanski may also be being punished by Los Angeles for making the movie "The Ghost Writer" at the Babelsberg Studios instead of at the Hollywood Studios.

And current even the Hollywood sign has been covered up, which definitely is A SIGN OF THE TIMES.

When films show an unpopular view, or when corruption is uncovered and exposed, there's usually a price to pay.

Thus Leni Riefenstahl being banned from film-making after World War II for making the movie "Triumph of the Will" for Hitler, even though she was not Hitler, and apparently not even a Nazi, may be the equivalent of Roman Polanski being arrested now for a movie that he did not even make,

i.e. "Polanski: Wanted and Desired."

In that sense Leni is no different to Polanski since "Triumph of the Will" and "Polanski: Wanted and Desired" are movies that are controversial, and that the authorities want to put a lid on.

So much for the concept of Free Speech being applied universally to include movies.

Anonymous said...

Regarding Retaliation for reporting...

The corrupt LA DA's office needs to finally own up to their foolishness and ineptitude in regards to Roman Polanski's case, and many others including this one below, that shows retaliation strikingly Rampant, & Rampart.

Polanski's case was settled.

The publicity-hungry judge was pressured and cajoled by a member of the DAs office to reject the settlement and impose a much harsher sentence.

That former DA now claims he was lying about his conversations with the judge (uh, okay...).

The case is tainted. It's over.

All this is just more chest-thumping political theatrics.

Why do we always have idiots for DAs in Los Angeles?

Why do Polanski, his children & his wife have to suffer all this now - for the LA DA's unfair handling of Polanski's case, way back when. See the LA Times link below.

The LA DA hould drop the entire case against Polanski, which would happen instantly if they were principled enough to address the problem of the Prosecutorial & Judicial ex-parte communications in Polanski's case in 1977, as well as the fact that he served his time, and Chino released him early, recommending probation for the second time.

Anonymous said...

Polanski's lawyers have been fighting to have the unlawful sex case dropped, alleging judicial misconduct in the original legal proceedings when the judge considered sentencing.

Until this newest legal salvo, it was believed that those allegations were first revealed in a 2008 film documentary about Polanski. But Polanski's attorneys said recent testimony from a key player in 1977 reveals prosecutors knew of the misconduct from the start and concealed it from the defense.

"Now to hear, through entirely new evidence, that high level deputy district attorneys in the summer of 1977 learned of misconduct by the judge in this case and never told the defense about it, that's inexcusable," Polanski's lawyer Douglas Dalton said in a statement.

for more see

Anonymous said...

More on the current Los Angeles County cover up of the 1977 Judicial Corruption in Polanski's case, including the cover up of the transcripts of the Los Angeles Prosecutor Roger Gunson In Polanski's case.

Today 29th April 2010, Roman Polanski's lawyers asked a County of Los Angeles judge to unseal secret testimony by the original prosecutor Roger Gunson in the director's 33-year-old sex case to help Swiss authorities decide his extradition case.

In a strongly worded motion stressing the urgency of their request, attorneys Chad Hummel and Bart Dalton said they need to submit the testimony of retired Deputy District Attorney Roger Gunson to Swiss authorities who have to make a decision on whether to extradite Polanski, or not.

The motion said the transcripts will prove the extradition request is based on false and incomplete statements by the Los Angeles district attorney's office.

"These transcripts are urgently needed," the motion said, seeking a May 10 hearing before Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza.

Gunson testified this year in what is known as a conditional examination. Such proceedings preserve the testimony of a witness who might not be available for future hearings.

Judge Espinoza kept the transcripts sealed based on his interpretation of the law governing such examinations.

The defense said the Los Angeles Judge's interpretation of the law to keep the transcripts sealed is wrong.

In addition the Los Angeles Judge's decision to keep sealed Los Angeles prosecutor Roger Gunson's testimony is a clever but rather obvious way of keeping Santa Monica Judicial corruption under wraps which occured 33 years ago, with the Santa Monica Judge Rittenband's, bait and switch justice, by his changing the sentence, his illegal coercion in sentencing, and the Judge's breach of the plea bargain agreement

Prosecutors and defense attorneys were present at the closed sessions in February and March, and the defense paraphrased portions of Gunson's testimony from its own notes in a petition to the state appellate court.

Defense lawyers want to provide Los Angeles Prosecutor Roger Gunson's exact words to the Swiss authorities.

Defense lawyers noted the district attorney's office previously asked that all hearings and conferences in the case be public "so as to appropriately respect the public's right to know."

Polanski's defense lawyers argued that the same right to transparency should apply now.

Defense lawyers acknowledged that Espinoza is not responsible for the extradition decision.

Still, "it should be the Los Angeles court's role to assure that the complete and true facts of the events are presented to the Swiss," the motion said.

It will be interesting to see what happens on May 10th 2010 in the Los Angeles Court.

What's the odds that it will be denied? I would be shocked if it were granted.

Anonymous said...

The Swiss Official's and their spokesperson, should study "Don’t assume, otherwise you’ll make an ass out of you and me."

If Swiss Officials are going to be fair NOT ARBITRARY in Roman Polanski's extradition process then Swiss Justice would have to study whether the current Los Angeles Prosecutor's statements regarding what Polanski's sentence was back in 1977 - is true or not.

If the sentence is less than 6 months Roman Polanski cannot be extradited by Switzerland according to their treaty with U.S.A.

Currently it sounds as if Swiss Officials want to discount the original Los Angeles Prosecutor in Polanski's case, Roger Gunson's testimony regarding what the original sentence was, without even looking at it.

For Swiss Justice to assume that California County of Los Angeles Prosecutors always makes authentic statements when they request extradition of Roman Polanski after 32 years is to make an ass out of you and me.

Polanski's lawyers filed a motion in Los Angeles County Superior Court on 4/29/2010, seeking access to the sealed transcript of testimony by Los Angeles prosecutor, Roger Gunson, concerning the Santa Monica Judge's sentencing plan for Roman Polanski in 1977.

Polanski's California lawyers motion contends that Los Angeles prosecutor Roger Gunson’s testimony proves that an extradition request by Los Angeles Prosecutors filed with Switzerland last year included a false depiction of the sentencing plan by Judge Laurence J. Rittenband made 33 years ago.

There are two other lawyers who support retired Los Angeles Prosecutor Roger Gunson's testimony one of whom is the victim's lawyer Laurence Silver.

The 2009 Los Angeles Prosecutors request to Switzerland said that Judge Rittenband sent Mr. Polanski to prison in 1977 for a psychiatric study so he would “be in a better position to reach a fair and just decision” before sentencing,

but this is not true, since there was one other immediate psychiatric study of Polanski when he was first arrested and before the Judge let Polanski leave the country to make a movie, and before he came back and underwent a second pyschiatric study at Chino prison.

while the Los Angeles Prosecutor Roger Gunson in Roman Polanski's 1977 case, has testified that Roman Polanski’s prison stay at Chino was to constitute his entire sentence, and lawyers Douglas Dalton for Polanski, and Laurence Silver for Samantha Geimer agree.

Also it is documented in newspapers in Feb 1978 that the original Santa Monica Judge Laurence J. Rittenband would have sentence Polanski in absentia so why is that not happening now to end this nonsense?

Isn't all this torment just to add more clout to the DA's desire to become the next Attorney General, at the expense of another famous person who apart from serving his time at Chino, is harmless, and also to deflect attention from the Santa Monica Courthouse Judicial and Prosecutorial corruption against Roman Polanski in his case, which caused him to be in a Catch-22 situation and flee?

Anonymous said...

Hi Crime file

This is the latest motion from DA on Polanski's case May 7 2010. It is 51 pages

Anonymous said...

Los Angeles former prosecutor Roger Gunson, the original prosecutor in Roman Polanski's case, his sealed witness testimony, reportedly contradicts the current Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley as far as the original sentence applicable in Roman Polanski's 1977 case.

The current District Attorney was not involved in the initial Los Angeles prosecution against Roman Polanski in 1977.

If the current Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley made false representations to Swiss Authorities in regards to the extradition request for Roman Polanski as far as the time left to serve, apart from the harm done to Roman Polanski,

the California voters have a right to know this, since Steve Cooley is running in a California election as a candidate for California Attorney General,

Thus it would be in the interests of Justice in Roman Polanski’s case for the County of Los Angeles Court Peter Espinoza on May 10th 2010 to unseal the original Los Angeles Prosecutor Roger Gunson's testimony in Roman Polanski's Case,

and if this miracle were to occur, for the Swiss Authorities also to take the original Prosecutor Roger Gunson’s testimony into consideration in Los Angeles’s extradition request for Roman Polanski,

and not automatically assume the validity of the Los Angeles District Attorney’s extradition request, since there may have ben an ulterior motive for the extradition request of Roman Polanski, since the Los Angeles DA is seeking higher office. .

Anonymous said...

The first appearance of Polanski in Switzerland after his release on July 12th 2010, is at a Jazz Festival in Switzerland where his wife Emmanuelle Seigner is singing music from Rosemary’s Baby!

Coincidence? No!

It took Swiss Justice to say NO to the devil of injustice that lives on in the Santa Monica, courtroom, assisted by Federal Court Judges, Magistrates, including those who ratified the Torture Memos,

which means that sexual assault victims who have been re-victimized by police assault and battery, and Santa Monica Judges covering up, are then victimized again by Federal Judges with Dog & Pony show decisions, using bait and switch justice, over a 12 years period to prolong the torture.

33 years later thanks to the Swiss Justice Ministry, Polanski was rescued from Californian clutches, where American justice has sorely failed.

In refusing to extradite Polanski, and by not pandering to California’s DOUBLE STANDARD, Swiss Justice also assisted sexual assault victims in California

Since a Santa Monica Judge permitted bait and switch justice and police thuggery in his Courtroom that injured a sexual assault victim,

And in Roman Polanski’s case the Judge used bait and switch justice and broke the plea bargain agreement.

Can you see the pattern of the devil yet?

Yes its that unreliable American Justice sitting in the next room, who wants to suck the life out of you,

through use of bait and switch justice, who will bait you with a favorable or solid decision, only to suck your blood, and throw you off a cliff years later.