Last-minute drama in Polanski's bid to have sex charges dropped

With an international contingent of media gathering for Wednesday's hearing in Roman Polanski’s 1977 child-sex case, attorneys for the acclaimed filmmaker this afternoon made a second attempt to have the proceeding, a revisiting of one of Hollywood’s most dramatic legal sagas, removed from the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles Superior Court.

In an emergency writ filed with the 2nd District Court of Appeals, Polanski’s lawyers requested “an immediate stay of all proceedings in this case ... to prevent irreparable harm that will result from the continued participation” of Judge Peter Espinoza and the rest of the local bench.

Polanski’s lawyers -– although not the Academy Award winner himself –- are due in the courthouse Wednesday to ask that a 3-decade-old statutory rape charge be dismissed because of what they claim was egregious judicial and prosecutorial misconduct surrounding his 1978 sentencing.

The appellate court did not immediately rule on whether to take Polanski’s case. In their filing, attorneys for Polanski, the director of such films as “Chinatown” and “Rosemary’s Baby,” reiterated their claims that December statements by a court spokesman as well as the conduct of a judge involved in negotiations with the fugitive director a dozen years ago are evidence of bias against the defendant and cause to disqualify all of the court’s judges.

Espinoza, the supervising judge of the criminal division, refused to step aside, insisting in a written ruling that he was not prejudiced against Polanski and had an open mind about the issues raised by his lawyers. The district attorney’s office maintains Polanski must return to the United States, where he would face arrest, to make the request and has urged the judge to cancel the proceeding.

The 75-year-old director, who now lives in France, is grounding his request for a dismissal of charges largely in revelations contained in an HBO documentary broadcast this year, “Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired.” In the documentary, David Wells, a deputy district attorney not directly involved in the case, acknowledged telling Judge Laurence Rittenband that Polanski was making him look foolish and that the judge should sentence him to prison.

Polanski spent a month and a half in prison for court-order psychological testing but fled the country after learning from his lawyers that Rittenband, now deceased, planned to sentence him to additional time behind bars. Both the victim, a 13-year-old girl who said Polanski raped and sodomized her during a photo shoot, and a probation official had recommended Polanski not be incarcerated. The victim, Samantha Geimer, now 45 and living in Hawaii with her husband and three children, has been an outspoken advocate for Polanski’s cause and condemned prosecutors last week for fighting the dismissal of the charges.

Reached at his home in Paso Robles, Wells, who is now retired, said he regretted participating in the documentary. “A lot of that stuff I said was just off the top of my head,” he said. Still, he said he was convinced Polanski’s request would be turned aside. “He has no standing. He’s not here. He’s a fugitive,” he said.

-- Harriet Ryan

Photo: Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Arietta Sollini]

Is it true that Los Angeles does NOT have enough crime on it's hands thus it must revist, ad nauseum, crimes not only committed 40 years ago, but in which the victim has called for complete exoneration. The stacatto of gunfire fills the air, our children lay dying in the streets, victims of drug traffickers turf disputes, while others are shot, stabbed and left for dead by gangbangers, the court wastes valuable law enforcement and taxpayer dollars on something of no tangible or redeemable value. WAKE UP Los Angeles - put your vanity mirror down and deal with reality for a change. Our streets run red with the blood of your collective stupidity. No one gives a damn about Roman Polanski, he lives in France and no one gives a damn about France, either.

[Micah]

Roman Polanski got Statutory Rape as a plea deal. The crime that he actually committed, by all accounts, was the rape and sodomization of a minor. Yes, after many years the victim is now on his side, probably due to being paid a large sum of money. This is a class issue. If Polanski was poor he wouldn't be in France right now, he'd be on parole after having served his sentence. I don't like the message our justice system sends when the rich can get away with crimes that the poor cannot.

[fern]

An ego trip for the judges and maybe some xenophobia on their part. I'm not familiar with the intricacies of the case, however some questions remain for me, like, what was a thirteen year old doing alone on a photo shoot? Where were her parents? What was her parents attitude toward sex? What kind of parents were they to allow their daughter alone without supervision on a photo shoot and what kind of photos were to be taken? Sure money was involved, with Michael Jackson money was involved too in Santa Maria yet he was innocent.
California is wondering about its budget deficit, I don't.