What happens when you can't pay $20 mil to shut 'em up ...
Doc
12:54 PM | July 8, 2009
Roman Polanski's attorneys have asked a state appeals court to overturn the
May ruling of an L.A. judge refusing to throw out Polanski's 32-year-old
child sex case while the director remains a fugitive.
In May, L.A. Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza rejected a request by
Polanski's attorneys for a dismissal of the director's criminal case based
on allegations of unethical and improper acts by a judge and prosecutor at
the time of Polanski's original case in 1977.
Espinoza said in an earlier hearing that even though he thought
"substantial" misconduct had taken place, he had no choice but to deny the
request unless Polanski appears in person before the court. In a writ filed
Tuesday with the 2nd District Court of Appeals, attorneys for Polanski, now
75, wrote that Espinoza was legally wrong in rejecting the director's bid
for dismissal of his case based on the "fugitive disentitlement doctrine."
Because the actions of the same court and prosecutor's office forced
Polanski to flee to escape illegal imprisonment, the court is relying on a
"Catch-22" to stop an inquiry into its own misconduct, attorneys contended.
The L.A. courts and district attorney's office "have been clear that they
have no interest in addressing and remedying the misconduct that took place,
perhaps seeking to avoid the anticipated political fallout," attorneys Chad
Hummel, Douglas Dalton and Bart Dalton wrote. Polanski has indicated through
his lawyers that he has no intention of returning to the U.S. The writ
argues that a hearing into the misconduct in the case could take place in
Polanski's absence because the director has no personal knowledge of the
alleged illegal acts by the judge and prosecutor.
Attorneys also asked the appeals court to disqualify the Los Angeles
district attorney's office from taking part in future proceedings. Polanski
pleaded guilty in 1977 to unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old
girl, in a deal with prosecutors in which they agreed not to pursue rape,
sodomy and other charges. The case was revived late last year when Polanski's
attorneys filed motions to get the case dismissed based on interviews in an
HBO documentary. In the film, the original prosecutor and defense attorney
said the trial judge, Laurence Rittenband, reneged on a sentencing agreement
with Polanski after the director spent 42 days behind bars for a "diagnostic
study."
Another prosecutor, who wasn't working on the case, said he gave advice to
Rittenband, who is now deceased, about the director's sentencing.
-- Victoria Kim
This may be the longest-running statutory-rape criminal fugitive case in US
history. If only Polanski had been able to make a deal with her family to
pay 'em $20 million to dismiss the case.
Doc ;))~