Vote 2020 graphic
Everything you need to know about and expect during
the most important election of our lifetimes

Roman Polanski Wants Rape Case Dismissed Through Documentary

Illustration for article titled Roman Polanski Wants Rape Case Dismissed Through Documentary

Oscar-winning director Roman Polanski is due in Los Angeles court on January 21 for a hearing in the now 31-year-old statutory rape case that caused him to flee the country in the late 70s. In an attempt to avoid the hearing, Polanksi's lawyers are asking a California judge to dismiss the case entirely in light of new evidence of judicial misconduct and victim's wishes, as presented in the HBO documentary Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired.

For those unfamiliar with the case, here's a brief recap from the AP:

The case was a sensation when it broke. Polanski, the widower of Manson family murder victim Sharon Tate, was arrested for having sex with the girl, whom he had hired as a model for a photo shoot. He was accused of giving her Quaaludes and champagne, taking her into a hot tub nude, and having sex with her…The lawyers said the now-43-year-old victim, who never wanted Polanski to go to prison, should have the final say. They said the law requires the courts to consider a victim's wishes.

Advertisement

Polanski was initially indicted on six felony counts, but all were dropped except for one count of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, which would have likely netted Polanski a prison sentence of 16 months to three years, the Guardian notes.

The filing points to several instances of judicial misconduct, New York Times says. "Judge Rittenband, who is now dead, intentionally violated a plea agreement with Mr. Polanski after having engaged in what it called 'repeated unethical and unlawful ex parte communications' with a deputy district attorney who was not involved in the prosecution, but was independently advising the judge." In addition, the AP notes that the prosecuting attorney in the case, retired Deputy District Attorney Roger Gunson, was so appalled with the proceedings that he "said that if he had been in Polanski's position, he also would have fled the country."

Advertisement

Polanski has not returned to the U.S. since the late 70s, and from the statements of the Los Angeles D.A.'s office, it seems that filing or no filing, the prosecution wants Polanski back in the U.S.A before they make any decisions about the case. The D.A.'s office has not looked at the case yet, but "We're looking forward to seeing Mr. Polanski in Los Angeles to litigate it," Sandi Gibbons, spokeswoman for District Attorney Steve Cooley, tells the AP. Click here for the full PDF of the court filings from Polanksi's legal team.

Film Cited in Request to Dismiss Polanski Case [NY Times]
Polanski Asks Court to Dismiss Child-Sex Charge (PDF) [NY Times]
Roman Polanski Requests Dismissal Of Sex Charge [AP]
Polanski Seeks Dismissal Of 70s Sex Case [Guardian]

Advertisement

Earlier: Which Is Worse: Roman Polanski Banging A 13-Year-Old Or Hollywood Blindly Embracing Him Despite It All?

Share This Story

Get our newsletter

DISCUSSION

tiredfairy
tiredfairy

Ugh, this again.

So, really, what Polanski did was wrong. It was rape. I think most people agree on that, given the fact that he A. knew she was 13 B. drugged her C. raped her and D. it's illegal to do both those things.

What boggles my mind is anyone who doesn't understand that this was a predatory act. The adult should ALWAYS be the responsible party. It wouldn't matter if the child or minor was parading around naked. You should know better. All responsibility falls on the adult and I'm sick of people excusing it just because a child might be "older looking" or "give consent". Since when is a 40 year old man INCAPABLE of saying no to a child? Never. Since when is a 40 year old man (or a 30 or even 20) not responsible for what they do?

Of course teenagers have sexual feelings. Of course they like sex. That is so beside the point when it comes to an adult/child situation it's staggering.

As for this case, I think Polanski got off light. However, an agreement was made, and the judge did illegal things. That is also wrong. Do I think that was an insane agreement for what he was pleading guilty for? Yes. But in our system you can make deals and judges are supposed to abide by them.

It's an all around crap situation.