Friday, October 31, 2014
street news, views and stories of justice and injustice
Follow me on Twitter

Search WitnessLA:

Recent Posts

Categories

Archives

Meta


Polanski Revisted: The Devils & the Details – UPDATED

October 1st, 2009 by Celeste Fremon

Polanski-Paris

UPDATE:

Steve Cooley tells why he decided to go after Polanski.

And the Polanksi filmmaker, Marina Zenovich, talks about inteviewing David “I was lying to make the story better” Wells.



Okay, I’ve changed my mind on Roman Polanski’s extradition.
I want him hauled back, toute de suit, for his 1977 alleged drugging and rape of a 13-year-old girl.

And I want certain people from the DA’s office (or retired from the DA’s office) hauled into to court and forced to sort out their own increasingly appalling behavior.

To recap: Back in 1978, in part in response to the wishes of Polanski’s victim and her family, Polanski’s attorney Douglas Dalton and the assistant DA prosecuting the case, Roger Gunson, agreed on a plea bargain in order that Samantha Geimer would not have to undergo the trauma of a trial. Polanski pleaded guilty to having sex with a minor. In return, all other more serious charges were dropped. The judge ruled that Polanski would go for a psychological evaluation at the California Institution of Men at Chino, after which time, the judge would sentence the director according to the prison’s recommendation.

Polanski went to Chino as required. When he was released, the relevant Chino personnel recommended no more prison time.

It looked like Polanski would be released altogether for time served, as had been reportedly agreed. But in the meantime, Judge Rittenband had been chatting about Polanski with another prosecutor in the DA’s office, David Wells, who although he was not assigned to the case, knew it well, and felt strongly that Polanski should not be allowed to skate quite so easily.

Whether or not because of Wells’ extracurricular influence, Rittenband did do an about face and decided Polanski had to go back upstate. He also reportedly had additional side conversations with personal friends and even at least one reporter about his desire and/or plans to send Polanski behind bars for many decades.

According to Well’s he said as much in the courtroom—albeit out of any other attorneys’ hearing. “[He] said, ‘Screw the deal, he’s going to state prison.’ And he said it straight to a reporter from The Outlook.”


But getting back to those cosy chit-chats between Rittenband and Wells,
—again, a DA who was NOT on the case. Those talks—if they took place–were what is known as ex parte conversations, which are both unethical and illegal.

So how do we know such illegal chin wagging occurred? After all, Judge Rittenband is dead, so cannot be questioned.

Well, mostly we know because Wells went on camera and said so
when he was interviewed for an HBO documentary about Polanski’s case with the unfortunate title, “Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired.” And not only did Wells tell of conversations with Rittenband, he did so in great and colorfully convincing detail.

But then yesterday Wells decided that, upon reflection, he didn’t really, really mean what he said to those filmmakers. In fact, Wells has confessed cheerily to several newspapers and media outlets (including the LA Times), he lied about his misconduct way back when. Why? Because he thought the ex parte thingy would make a better story. “”I made that up to make the stuff look better,” Wells said.

Plus, he said, he thought the documentary would only air in France
.

(Damn those unscrupulous filmmaker scum! They used the dreaded “It’ll only air in France” ploy.)

Okay, So let us get this straight: Wells, the veteran prosecutor, lied to a couple of documentary filmmakers about committing prosecutorial misconduct, thus possibly endangering an otherwise respectable career (plus a still open case)— because he thought the dramatic arc would be better? (For French audiences?)

And now, according to him, this time he is really, no-kidding, cross-his-heart-hope-to-die-stick-needle-in-his-eye telling the real and unvarnished truth about his unfortunate misconduct lie because…What? He figures screw the dramatic arc?

Uh, Yeah. Sure. That works.

Marcia Clark—yes THAT Marcia Clark—first floated this bizarre sounding tale in a column in Wednesday’s Daily Beast.

However, at some point in her lengthy essay, Clark–who said she knows the now-retired prosecutor well—let slip this interesting little moment of musing, ” For the record, if he [Wells] really did make those suggestions to the judge, I wouldn’t put it past him to fall on his sword, say he lied, and save the case.”

Great. That’s comforting to contemplate in the name of justice.

And in addition to the Wells’ did-I-or-didn’t-I stories, there is also the alleged misconduct of the late Judge Rittenband.

Bottom line, if Polanski isn’t extradited, we won’t get to sort out this circus, which badly needs sorting.

But there are other reasons.


Reason number two: Like most anyone with any sense, I’ve had it with the apologists who oppose the prosecution of the admitted pedophile Polanski on account of his past suffering (the murder of his wife Sharon Tate and child-to-be, plus his personal Holocaust traumas)—and mostly, because of his artistry.

This elitist perspective is beyond offensive. Yes, Polanski has been through terrible truama. (And, yes, Chinatown is a truly great American film.) But we don’t cut gang members one iota of slack, even though many come from horrorshow backgrounds that would give Polanski a run for his money in the suffering category.

And if talent was a get out of jail free card, as a friend of mine noted, let’s start with the Unibomber. Ted Kaczynski was a genius. (Unfortunately he was also crazy. But Polanski is also a pedophile.)

Nonetheless, more than 100 film industry figures have signed a petition asking that Polanski be released. The names include such people as . Martin Scorsese, David Lynch, Wes Anderson, Michael Medavoy, Michael Mann, Tilda Swinton, Harvey Weinstein and Woody Allen. (Oh, the irony.) There was also a slew of directors from outside Hollywood like Wim Wenders and Pedro Almodovar.

A part of the text of the petition is reportedly as follows:

“We demand the immediate release of Roman Polanski. Film-makers in France, in Europe, in the United States and around the world are dismayed by this decision… It seems inadmissible to them that an international cultural event, paying homage to one of the greatest contemporary film-makers, is used by police to apprehend him.”

Yeeccchhh. Extradite the SOB—if only to slam the apologists upside the head. (No, I don’t think that’s a good legal reason. It’s an emotional reason.)



Yet in the end, for me, the most persuasive reason for Polanski’s extradition is contained in the written statement
from the organization called SNAP—The Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests—which staged a demonstration downtown on Wednesday. The statement they distributed Tuesday night read in part.

“Since his arrest and the announcement that he will be extradited to the US, some entertainment figures have expressed sympathy for him. These public statements of support… make teenagers who are being victimized now feel intimidated and hopeless, thus staying silent and enabling their predators to keep hurting them and others. Rallying around admitted child rapists also rubs salt into the wounds of other rape victims, both adults and kids,….

Despite the probable misconduct in the 1978 case, despite the DA’s office likely grandstanding and questionable priorities, despite the wishes of Polanski’s victim, SNAP expresses the perspective of hundreds and hundreds of victims of child sexual abuse.

Theirs is a collective voice that cannot be ignored.

Posted in crime and punishment, District Attorney | 98 Comments »

98 Responses

  1. RobThomas Says:

    Where was Polanski when I was 13?

  2. Mrs. Salazar Says:

    Did I read the story correctly, Polanski was a child abusing priest in the Roman Catholic church?

  3. Sure Fire Says:

    Yeah I heard Wells yesterday and the guy is a flake, I’m not sure what he did. I can’t realy argue with your take on this but I think he needs to do time based on what he actually did to Geimer.

    The evaluation done at Chino concluded he was not a pedophile and reccommended probation based on the one charge, not everything he did. If you think they didn’t get instructions from higher ups to come to that conclusion I think you’d be dreaming.

    Further, this guy who “wasn’t a pedophile” than takes off to France where he quickly shacks up with 15 year old Nastassja Kinski. He probbaly knew better but that was the type of girl Polanski was atracted to. I’d bet there are more young girls he approached and probably convinced, or forced to have sex with him that we’ll never know about.

    It’s how his type of mind works.

  4. Woody Says:

    Boy, howdy. Two people got it right: Me for predicting it and Celeste for doing it.

    Woody Says – 09/28/2009 at 8:15 pm: Celeste can do better, and I bet that she has second thoughts after reading the comments.

    Celeste above: Okay, I’ve changed my mind on Roman Polanski’s extradition.

    - – -

    But, what’s amazing, Celeste, is that you put forth an effort to make Polanski a victim – one of the justice system. Keep in mind that none of this would be happening now if he hadn’t been a child molester.

    If you feel as if a case can be made here to overturn a conviction based upon such ex parte conversations, then consider that the Brown vs. The Board of Education decision had such ethical violations. Should it be overturned?

    - – -

    Celeste, let’s be accurate, though, concerning your first paragraph. Polanski did drug and rape the girl. The charges, in a plea bargain, were dropped to unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. He admitted guilt to that and was convicted. Since the girl was underage, Polanski’s crime at a minimum constitutes statutory rape. Don’t try to pull a “Bill Clinton” by saying “alleged” or “that he didn’t have sex with that woman.”

    Read a summary of the testimony if you want a few more documented details about what the girl suffered.

    Sex crime conviction

    In 1977, Polanski, then aged 44, became embroiled in a scandal involving 13-year-old Samantha Gailey (now Samantha Geimer). It ultimately led to Polanski’s guilty plea to the charge of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.

    According to Geimer, Polanski asked Geimer’s mother if he could photograph the girl for the French edition of Vogue, which Polanski had been invited to guest-edit. Her mother allowed a private photo shoot. According to Geimer in a 2003 interview, “Everything was going fine; then he asked me to change, well, in front of him.” She added, “It didn’t feel right, and I didn’t want to go back to the second shoot.”

    Geimer later agreed to a second session, which took place on March 10, 1977 at the home of actor Jack Nicholson in the Mulholland area of Los Angeles. “We did photos with me drinking champagne,” Geimer says. “Toward the end it got a little scary, and I realized he had other intentions and I knew I was not where I should be. I just didn’t quite know how to get myself out of there.” She recalled in a 2003 interview that she began to feel uncomfortable after he asked her to lie down on a bed, and how she attempted to resist. “I said, ‘No, no. I don’t want to go in there. No, I don’t want to do this. No!’, and then I didn’t know what else to do,” she stated, adding: “We were alone and I didn’t know what else would happen if I made a scene. So I was just scared, and after giving some resistance, I figured well, I guess I’ll get to come home after this”.

    Geimer testified that Polanski gave her a combination of champagne and quaaludes, a sedative drug, and “despite her protests, he performed oral sex, intercourse and sodomy on her”, each time after being told ‘no’ and being asked to stop. Polanski, in his autobiography, described the encounter as consensual. [Yeah, right. With a girl of thirteen.]

    Charges and guilty plea
    Polanski was initially charged with rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance (methaqualone) to a minor.

    But, of course, you can take the word of a rape victim and the overwhelming evidence or you can twist the conviction around to defend Polanski (or, is it more to attack our justice system?)

    “Poor O.J., he was found innocent and they kept his knife.”

    A crime is no longer “alleged” once a person is found guilty of it in court. Polanski is guilty until and if an appeal overturns the verdict. Leaving the country before sentencing is not a valid appeal and is something you would expect from someone who is guilty. He was lucky that the final charges weren’t worse to reflect what he really did.

    - – -

    What the “Survivors Network” said to you through its statement is very good. However, you, of all people, should have already understood that side, and probably did, and should not mentioned it as the most persuasive reason to modify your position.

    Usually, you have a problem (in my view) when you use your heart rather than your head. However, this time your heart would have served you better. But, still use your head.

    - – -

    (Trying to get me to not read your post?
    Words in post: 1,165)

  5. Woody Says:

    Explaining the Polanski Controversy to a Thirteen-Year-Old

    Finally, some of the people who want to see Polanski freed allege that the judge in the case broke some rules, too. Or that the crime Polanski committed didn’t really rise to the level of “true” rape. The accusations about the judge have never been proven, but Polanksi and his lawyers would be allowed to investigate and make their case in court—if he ever comes back to the US. Again, what would happen if every criminal who felt unfairly treated just left the country? The world would be a dangerous place, wouldn’t it?

    Getting into the details of what “counts” as rape isn’t really my area of expertise, and shouldn’t be something that you need to worry about at your age. Just think of it this way: If an adult who was your parents’ age forced you to take powerful pills and then touched you and did sexual things to your body even after you asked him to stop many times, would that be morally wrong? The obvious answer is yes. It was wrong in 1977, it is wrong in 2009, and that’s why it remains illegal.

  6. Celeste Fremon Says:

    Woody, stop lecturing me for this b.s.

    1. All he’s guilty of according to the court deal is having sex with a minor. But, as I don’t for a minute believe that’s the truth, I am using alleged to indicate that he is guilty of drugging and raping Samantha Geimer.

    2. I’m not making Polanski a victim. The post makes it clear that I want him help accountable, for heaven’s sake.

    I am, however, holding the judge and assistant d.a. accountable as well. Their (alleged) wrongdoing doesn’t let him off the hook, it puts them on their own hook.

    ALSO, I didn’t change my mind about Polanski. I have always seen him as a non-repentant pedophile and a swine. But I now think that the harm of NOT bringing him back to face justice, however delayed and poorly handled, is greater than the harm to the victim and to our already overstretched system of bringing him back.

    SureFire, of course the Chino folks’ diagnosis wasn’t accurate. I think Polanski simply charmed them at Chino—or whatever. Who knows. Maybe he said he’d make them all stars.

    But that isn’t the point. The judge made the deal he made—and then, it appears, behaved in a most unjudicial manner in around a half-dozen ways. Unfortunately he’s dead, so we don’t get to shout at him for it.

    Mrs. Salazar, that made me laugh nearly to the point of coffee spitting.

  7. Woody Says:

    If it weren’t for your age, I’d guess it was that time of the month.

  8. CCD Says:

    Time of the month?

    Well at least women have that excuse…so what’s your excuse Woody? Assuming you are a man…what’s your excuse??? Temporary insanity? or is this a permanent condition?

    Oh wait…there’s probably a pill out there for what you have. There is hope for you!

  9. WBC Says:

    Woody, a lot of your nonsense can be explained, if not really excused, by the fact that you’re a product of your culture and environment somewhere in the rural redneck woods of Georgia or Alabama or such. And in truth, I there are some good aspects to redneck culture: no one has better barbecue, and some country music makes me laugh. BUT by bringing up a woman’s age (on top of the other thing not discussed in allegedly polite and puritanical redneck society), you have lost your last pretense to being any semblance of southern gentleman and hence, your last pretext of superiority over the rough-tongued yankees you seem to relish trading barbs with.

    As for the substance of this thread, I agree with you, Celeste, and said below that I also came around to actually looking forward to getting back “the little pervert,” as poplock succinctly put it, to expose the whole mess. Once his supporters started to actually justify and excuse his behavior, they made this outcome inevitable. (Peg Yorkin, who heads the influential feminist activist group, made the most sensible comment of the Hollywood bunch, that there were more worthy causes benefiting women that would be a better use of financial and human resources — but too little too late, the Hollywood idiots like those you mention DO need to get slapped with a reality check before they ruin it for everyone in Hollywood.)

  10. reg Says:

    Wow – Woody sort of tops himself with #7 (the only reason I even read that one was because it was short.) Of course, he’s making a joke so it’s okay. Sort of like the time I made the joke about his wife being a whore and he totally “got it” that the cloak of “humor” makes any asinine, offensive, bigoted, demeaning, racist, homophobic or sexist comment okay.

    Polanski’s “friends” happen to be digging his grave with this petition – it comes off as such an affront to common sense. Any good anyone in his circles might have done for Polanski, given the passage of time, as a character witness or to put his flight in some context – neither of which move me, but you can’t blame a friend for being a friend – has been eradicated with the flagrant cluelessness of the film community’s circling their wagons around Polanski. I found it interesting that Bernard Henri Levy signed on. He should know better and since his entire reputation is in the arena of social commentary, politics and philosophy, he’s doing a lot more damage to his image than, say, Natalie Portman, who has her acting abilities to fall back on if she comes out of this not being seen as a sage on issues such as the handling of criminal justice cases.

  11. reg Says:

    WBC – actually Woody is the quintessential “red-state” middle-class suburbanite. You’re giving him a little too much credit as a “rube.”

    Also re: “some country music makes me laugh.”
    It’s supposed to make you cry.

  12. Alan Mittelstaedt Says:

    Phew!

  13. reg Says:

    Celeste – I have to say that I don’t find any inconsistency in your changing your mind. What’s consistent and core with you is concern with keeping the judicial system at least reasonably honest and responsive.

  14. roy Says:

    what is making me sick(besides him) is the people backing him up.i hope they get a ear full for it.

  15. Randy Paul Says:

    Woody, a lot of your nonsense can be explained, if not really excused, by the fact that you’re a product of your culture and environment somewhere in the rural redneck woods of Georgia or Alabama or such

    WBC,

    I come from a long line of liberal southerners from Alabama and Georgia. Trust me, Woody speaks only for his twisted self. I know a lot of people from both left and right who would have flattened him for making that comment, assuming he had the stones to make it to her face.

    There are times when one should think before hitting the submit comment button. That was one of them.

  16. Joe Says:

    Wow, the rabbit hole just gets deeper and deeper on this one, doesn’t it?

  17. CCD Says:

    Celeste, I love that you changed your mind. Debating with yourself and coming to a conclusion whether it be the same or different shows that you are objective. That’s so much better than those that pick one stance and refuse to budge, even when given a different point of view and/or facts.

    That being said, I fully agree with reg that Polanski’s Hollywood “friends” are digging Polanski’s grave for him. The best is Woody Allen. Jo-Ann Armao said it best on the Washington Post site: “LOL. That was my first reaction at seeing Woody Allen’s name on the top of a petition demanding justice for director Roman Polanski. Here, after all, was one pervert using his supposed good name in defense of another: a little like Billy the Kid speaking up for Jesse James.”

    I think Surefire’s comment was perfect: I hope he hangs himself and spares us the cost of a trial, all pedophiles should!!

    Or as my friend would say… I hope someone pulls a Jeffery Dahmer on him. He was beaten to death by another inmate. Saves us sooo many tax dollars.

  18. reg Says:

    I can assure you CCD – other issues aside, of which there are quite a few, and serious – it would not save the state of California one penny if Roman Polanski were beaten to death in a jail cell. In fact, it would likely end up costing the state many millions. I think this kind of spew from folks who present themselves as defenders of “justice” is bizarre, to put it mildly.

    I’ll refrain from my usual “tone” here, because it would get even uglier than I would like to see.

  19. CCD Says:

    reg, you are right…lets hope he hangs himself prior to being sent back to the U.S.

    either way…my stance is save the tax dollars for a more worthy cause.

  20. reg Says:

    “either way…my stance is save the tax dollars for a more worthy cause.”

    Ironically, that was Celeste’s original rationale for leaving the Polanski file on the bottom of the pile.

  21. Sure Fire Says:

    Reg- “I think this kind of spew from folks who present themselves as defenders of “justice” is bizarre, to put it mildly”.

    There are lots more people who I wouldn’t mind doing the exact same thing and save us all lots of money housing them. That would be ‘justice’ for the countless victims crying out for it that some of the deaf and dumb here ignore.

  22. Sure Fire Says:

    Just like his pal Obama, the arrogance of Reg is astounding.

  23. reg Says:

    Same old shit…who would have guessed ?

    The jerk has a list of people who he hopes are beaten to death in prison but calls me out as “arrogant.”

    Oh well.

  24. CCD Says:

    Sure Fire & reg, you both make a lot of sense sometimes, but I think your points will be better received if it wasn’t so covered in flames.

    I’m on the side of the victims of sexual abuse. Minimizing the second rape society commits to girls/women after the first physical rape. Pedophiles and rapist should always be tried and punished regardless of how long ago the crime was. However, in this case, its pretty obvious society is continuing to violate the victim…which is WRONG in every way. So I’m not siding with the perves.

    Two wrongs don’t make a right, so yes, my initial comment of “pulling a Jeffrey Dahmer on him” was wrong…but it came from my friend who was raped at 15. We’re just indulging in a fantasy. Whereas this case is still a harsh reality.

  25. CCD Says:

    p.s. I know I’m also guilty of flame throwing sometimes.

  26. WBC Says:

    reg and Randy Paul, I wasn’t intending to insult all Georgians or Alabamans by equating them with Woody – I have friends and even extended family in suburban Atlanta, and find their neighbors and community a lot more conservative and evangelical that what I’m used to (or they were used to, before moving there), but I’m also aware that greater Atlanta has become very cosmopolitan and even international, with a lot of Japanese businesspeople, for example. (Never mind the nouveau riche world of “Housewives of,” which also exists. I’d focus on the beautiful, gracious old Victorians being rehabbed in a gentrifying area of Atlanta.) I was just picking up on Woody saying his property is cluttered with at least 5 old cars and pickups, a woodshed and what sounds like an arsenal of guns and rifles. So it sounded pretty rural. — I’m quite sure most southerners as well would like to give him a good clunk on the head, which may be why he’s here.

  27. reg Says:

    “Never mind the nouveau riche world of “Housewives of…”

    I wish I could, but my wife habitually tunes into that damned thing.

  28. WBC Says:

    CCD, I agree with the gist of your comments, but think it’s hypocritical that neither the DA nor the County Sheriff who is charged with the DNA rape kits for his dept. (the DA has some of his own, I’m not clear exactly what the overlap is) made it a priority to test these kits until the LAPD (which is the more cash-strapped City not County) got blasted about the problem and made it a top priority. Apparently there’s a 10-year statute of limitations, so when kits weren’t tested in the allotted time, the case went “cold.” (Which makes me wonder, if there is a statute of limitations on a crime like Polanski’s: or does the statute not apply, because he confessed?) And those were cases where each kit would have cost just $1000 to test, each kit was/ is a victim pleaded for justice denied, often with the perps still out on our streets now; according to LAPD, they are likely to re-offend and also commit other crimes. There are some cases of violent rape which get no attention, not to mention money for support services for victims.

    The media was nowhere on this issue for years, even though a few officials were plugging away on the issue trying to get the media to play it up, until an audit by Laura Chick got a lot of attention, then suddenly everyone was pointing fingers and more kits started being tested, money was “found.” (Though maybe “lost” again, now that the city’s intent on even reducing the police force, to the dismay of Chief Bratton who says it would undo much of what he’s accomplished over the last 7 years.) The DA, funded by the more financially stable county (which includes lots of small, wealthy cities) has a huge staff of investigators, detectives, and between him and the Sheriff the obligation to test those kits but it wasn’t a PR-generating priority.

    That’s my beef, and what some women’s/rape victim’s advocates are trying to point out, but this message too is lost, another casualty of the dummy “supporters” who have only ensured that all the attention stays focused on this one “profligate dwarf,” as he has even referred to himself.

  29. Sure Fire Says:

    I said he should commit suicide Reg, said nothing about anyone being beaten to death in prison. More hyperbolic comments from the king of them.

  30. reg Says:

    My statement that you went nuts over was in specific reference to a comment “wishing” that Polanski be targeted and killed in prison. No one could read my comment without it being clear that’s what I was referring to. You made no reference to suicide in your comments – just “the exact same thing.” I guess that’s ambiguous, assuming I’m a mind reader and my own reference to “beaten to death in a jail cell” isn’t perfectly clear. It sounds like you’re just cleaning up after a bout of the sputters, but you’re welcome to walk back from your hyperbolic attack on me.

  31. reg Says:

    I am totally baffled by this thing WBC discusses regarding the rape kits. How could prosecutors not follow through and gather evidence in outstanding rape cases – which is what this sounds like, unless I’m totally not understanding the issue. That is sheer malfeasance and, frankly, budget issues have no place in such a discussion. The system owes it to the victims – and for that matter to any suspects involved, wherever the evidence takes them. That just seems indisputable.

  32. reg Says:

    Incidentally, Surefire, if it makes you feel better I’ll amend my statement to this:

    The jerk has a list of people who he hopes commit suicide, but calls me out as “arrogant.”

    Oh well.

    Are we friends now ?

  33. CCD Says:

    WBC’s: Though maybe “lost” again, now that the city’s intent on even reducing the police force, to the dismay of Chief Bratton who says it would undo much of what he’s accomplished over the last 7 years.

    WBC, thanks for focusing on the issue. Thanks for bringing the bigger picture on the impact of all this madness. Gets us out of tunnel vision (hopefully). Wasteful usage of limited resources such time, money & people which impacts whole cities/counties/state, etc.

    Lastly, regardless of geographical location, an idiot is an idiot and no one wants to be grouped in with idiots. So I always wished the idiots realize that they are usually just speaking for themselves, unless they were elected to speak for “the idiots.” That’s what bother’s me about some people on this site who claim to represent the “left” or “right” on whatever issue. Give it up, they are only voicing their personal perspective on reality…we all are.

  34. CCD Says:

    reg: The system owes it to the victims – and for that matter to any suspects involved, wherever the evidence takes them. That just seems indisputable.

    Fully agree with you, but what about all the other victims who don’t get their case properly handled b/c the city/county has run out of $$$ b/c it had wasted it on a chasing this damn case around? Lets focus here…this case specifically Geimer is over it. MOVE ON!

  35. WBC Says:

    Thanks, CCD, you put it well.

    reg, these “kits” contain DNA samples from hair, semen, etc. which ARE collected from victims, with the promise to them (implied or stated) that subjecting themselves to such an invasive procedure will be followed up on to catch the perps. But THEN the kits have been allowed to sit until the statute of limitations runs out, and/or the samples just deteriorate with time (I’ve mentioned the 10-year limit, but I’ve read something about a 2-year time frame for optimum lab testing, I’d have to research the details), because it would cost $1000 bucks to send them out to a lab. Also, there are a limited number of labs that can do this work. This is a problem that has plagued both LAPD (under the city’s jurisdiction) and County, Sheriff and DA.

    Finally, LAPD found the money to build its own lab, and the money to hire 16 in-house scientists which it was determined, would be needed to test the kits in timely fashion. But now with budget cuts which even mean that the current class of police recruits may not be hired, and the brand-new, multi-million-dollar jail may sit empty because the city won’t hire the jailers, I’m not sure WHERE this leaves the new research lab and the forensic scientists that were to have tested the rape kits.

    Rape victim’s groups, Human Rights Watch and other groups are frustrated about it, just when it seemed that things were set to be on track. THIS is all LAPD – the wealthier Sheriff’s Dept. and DA’s own rape kit backlogs are another issue, and I don’t know if those are on-track to be tested now, if there’s a commitment to catch all the perps, or what. (The Sheriff had refused to test any kits earlier this year– i.e, to pursue the perps — in another of his budget games to protest his dept. being cut like every other, but was ordered to continue and last I read, was going ahead to test them all within a reasonable time frame.) I’m NOT clear on what’s happening with it all now, because not a word from the media about any of this in the midst of all the Polanski hoopla.

    Many police and sheriff’s depts. have been more consistent over the years, but a number of others have also fallen behind, in effect, not going after perps on the street.

  36. Mavis Beacon Says:

    I hate the notion that the courts are places where we avenge a wronged victim. The courts should be about doing what is best for society. If that means the person should be in jail for a million years – either to incentivize everybody else or to keep a dangerous person off the streets – that’s just fine. If it means the criminal needs to enter a program or merely face house arrest, well, I’m okay with that too. Sentencing isn’t up to the victims of crime for a good reason.

    Additionally, I think it’s very tempting to pretend that harsh punishments are some sort of compensation for the suffering of crime victims. Not only do I find this morally suspect and an overly emotional way meting out punishment, I think it’s pretty pathetic compensation. I’ve never really seen any numbers on this, but I would definitely be interested in a victim’s compensation fund.

  37. Mavis Beacon Says:

    That said, we certainly owe it to the victim’s of crime (as well as the rest of us) to investigate the crime. The rape kits stuff is unconscionable.

  38. johnny lemonhead Says:

    “Woody, stop lecturing me for this b.s.”

    Celeste, get out your kitchen roller and bop him a couple of times inside the head.

  39. Woody Says:

    johnny lemonhead, do you agree that Celeste’s place is in the kitchen?

    Hey, I went to the barber this evening. We don’t call them stylists and they only cut men’s hair. As some of you know from past comments, the place is covered in American flags and pictures of generals and the military. You might say that it leans conservative.

    As I left, I notice a real ad on the bulletin board by the door that read: “GUNS FOR SALE My daughter is marrying a liberal and I need the cash to support him. It’s a long story. ….”

  40. CCD Says:

    haha!! LOL!!! that’s actually the only funny thing I’ve heard Woody say in a while. I can already tell you don’t reside in California. We don’t welcome your kind.

    Since you are already deliriously off topic…I can’t beat you so I will join you. If Celeste’s place is in the kitchen, I know a perfect place for Woody. In the Castro district of San Francisco, where REAL MEN will show you what their REAL GUNS are all about…. over and over and over UP the ASS!!!! How do you like them guns???

  41. Celeste Fremon Says:

    Dial it back, everybody. Let’s cut the personal attacks.

    Thanks.

  42. Sure Fire Says:

    Nope, that backwards walk feel good old man?

  43. reg Says:

    You tell me how it felt, since it was a stroll over your dumb ass. Or were you too stupid to realize that ?

  44. Chuck Says:

    I’m glad that Celeste has changed her mind about Polanski being allowed to be set free. He should be hauled back to Los Angeles in handcuffs and locked-up until he is either sentenced for statutory rape; a sentence that can be anywhere from time-served to three years in state prison, or he be allowed to withdraw his plea and stand trial for forcible rape, sodomy, and oral copulation, crimes for which he would certainly spend the remainder of his days sharing a cell with Phil Spector (I know, cruel and unusual punishment).
    Polanski’s problem is that his case is essentially indefensible. That these acts took place is beyond reasonable doubt; Polanski’s own statements in interviews he has freely given since fleeing to France are enough to convict him so long as the victim testifies. She may well be reluctant or unwilling to testify, and we can all understand why she would prefer that a very dark period in her life and that of he mother, be left alone.
    The problem is that her dark days are very much public knowledge now that the Smoking Gun has published her chilling Grand Jury testimony, and again, Polanski’s freely made statements confirm the substance of what she said, so there’s little doubt that she told the truth to the Grand Jury.
    So what is left for the defense? The hope that the DA does not use his subpoena power to force the victim to come to court. He can do that. Yes, she’s in Hawaii but she’s not beyond the process of the court. She can, if necessary, be arrested and hauled to Los Angeles just like Polanski, and even if she attempts to refuse to testify, she can be imprisoned for contempt of court. If she claims to have forgotten the rape, she can be confronted with her Grand Jury testimony. The jury will hear what she said under oath in 1977, and will fully understand why she has had a change of heart towards Polanski; the amount of the payment he made to her to settle her lawsuit against him will be enough to convince the jury that she was, indeed, drugged, raped and sodomized by Polanski. He will be found guilty as there isn’t an OJ jury waiting to sell their stories or ignore the law. Unlike OJ, nobody gives a fig about Polanski except for the Hollywood elite who are far too busy to serve on a jury, and who will also abandon Polanski (like Celeste) as soon as they realize that he is not a sympathetic figure, he is and was a predator.
    So, thanks to some exceptionally inept lawyering by his highly paid vultures, sorry, lawyers, Polanski’s looking at a no win situation.
    Trying to withdraw his plea would be an exceptionably stupid strategy. He should accept the validity of his original plea as it will prevent the DA from reinstating the original charges, and serve his sentence of up to three years in prison, and consider himself lucky. Then he can sue his lawyers for malpractice while he serves his time at our expense, and I have no problem at all in seeing my tax dollars at work paying for his incarceration.

  45. Woody Says:

    Everyone, if you skipped over it, go back one and read Chuck’s comment.

  46. WBC Says:

    Woody, so you think Chuck’s gem of wisdom is worthy WHY exactly? First, he chooses to ignore the REASON Celeste has reconsidered and wants Polanski back: it’s not because she all of a sudden “realized that he is not a sympathetic figure.” But this conflating of facts with what he CHOOSES to believe is par for the course.

    The scenario he lays out for the victim is especially interesting, and should do a lot to encourage other rape victims to come forward, even if they’ve been fearing the embarrassment and stress of a trial which makes them relive the ordeal. Even 30 years later. Chuck notes that she’s living in Hawaii now, but if she declines to return to LA to testify of her own volition, “She can, if necessary, be arrested and hauled to Los Angeles just like Polanski, and even if she attempts to refuse to testify, she can be imprisoned for contempt of oourt…” Very nice, indeed.

    Meanwhile, I’ve done some research on what was promised by both city and County regarding the rape kit backlog, and what is or isn’t happening. I’ll post details later.

    But in brief, the City and LAPD made a specific commitment last Oct. (announced by the Mayor, Chief Bratton – who of course is leaving, and Jack Weiss, then head of the Council’s public safety committee and point man on the issue — recently replaced by Paul Koretz, who Bratton blasted yesterday for blithely stating the force could be reduced to 9500 with no adverse impact, so I suspect this rape kit issue will also fall to the wayside), to eliminate the backlog with funding to continue sending out kits to specialized labs and a commitment to hire and train specialists on a specific time-frame until the lab was fully staffed and could handle future kits in timely fashion in-house. NOW with this team gone or going, and a new city council make-up that Bratton expresses grave concerns about in regards to LAPD, all their momentum may fall apart without public pressure.

    The County, on the other hand, under Sheriff Lee Baca (and this is DA Cooley’s counterpart, though his dept. has some rape kits and staff of his own) has been far more negligent and only after being blasted and publicly embarrassed, like by Human Rights Watch’s Sarah Tofte in a July HuffPo piece, and only after Zev Yaroslavksy made it a personal priority, did Baca “find” the money just this month to continue testing, and they outline a plan. I’ll add the citations later, and hopefully Celeste can follow up on them.

    Tofte/Human Rights Watch has some pertinent and disturbing information on how justice is being denied thousands of rape victims in Los Angeles (she was pretty appalled by Baca’s attitude, and notes that LAPD and the City made a huge step forward but the funding needs to be more “robust”), while rapists out on our streets NOW are not apprehended.

  47. WBC Says:

    P.S. Celeste: did you mean to turn OFF comments for newer thread on violence in Chicago schools? BTW just heard Obama’s lobbying didn’t help in getting the Olympics for Chicago, U.S. out first round, got fewest votes of any locale. Maybe the Olympic committee thought Chicago sounds just too dangerous?

  48. Celeste Fremon Says:

    Thanks, WBC. No, for some reason the ALLOW COMMENTS box unchecked itself. I’m quite positive there are ghosts at work. (But who are they? And what do they have in mind?)

    Kidding. Sort of.

    Anyway, Woody just sent me a note too, so they’re on now.

    How discouraging that we’re out on the first round—with FEWEST votes!!!

  49. Randy Paul Says:

    I’m thrilled for Rio!

  50. roy Says:

    Chuck notes that she’s living in Hawaii now, but if she declines to return to LA to testify of her own volition, “She can, if necessary, be arrested and hauled to Los Angeles just like Polanski, and even if she attempts to refuse to testify, she can be imprisoned for contempt of oourt…” Very nice, indeed.

    its not nice, but what else should courts do let rapist and killer go if people don’t want to relive that horrible time?

  51. Tommy Tanga Says:

    The Olympic’s were moved to Rio De Janireo for the new thong bikini competion. Brasil is expected to capture the Gold, Silver and Bronze medal in this event.

  52. WBC Says:

    Celeste, I see certain progressive bloggers/journalists are lamenting that you’ve “sold out to the rightwing Republican lynch mob,” over-simplifying your reasons like Chuck here. While I’ve been following this topic, and know you have very nuanced reasons, I too worry that this issue is being seen so much in black and white, that it’s now playing back into the hands of this DA and helping him bury the grievous prosecutorial misconduct of the Peaglers and Liskers, many more, and whatever is going on here.

    And of course, helping him and the Sheriff distract attention from the thousands of rape kids/ unsolved rapes they’ve let stack up because they have simply cried poverty – in reality, they just haven’t been career-making enough.

    Detestable and criminal as Polanski’s behavior was, the fact is he’s an old man now, married (to a “hottie” he doesn’t deserve), no danger to anyone, while there are very dangerous criminals out on our local streets just not being pursued. Frankly, I think it’s in question whether he can get a fair trial in LA at all, with this DA’s office and the “lynch mob” furor that’s coalesced around the case. If he does come back, they’ll probably have to move it.

  53. PopLockErOnE Says:

    WBC – look up European Union’s “global surveillance program” on travel – this program was started to combat terrorist but is now also being used to solve criminal related crimes.
    Then get back to me ….so I can give you the real story

  54. Celeste Fremon Says:

    WBC, in truth, even now I have very, very mixed feelings about the effort to extradite Polanski, mostly for all the points you’ve been making.

    At this point, however, I think we’re stuck. There’s no way outa this but forward. I would not have gone after him—not because he doesn’t deserve it, but for the reasons you have indicated, and because the judge and the DA Wells, by all credible accounts, engaged in misconduct. I think they blew the opportunity for a clean legal outcome over 30-years ago. (To my mind, Polanski should have done some time, maybe a lot of time. But that was not the deal everyone worked out—and then welshed on.)

    Be that as it may, now that it’s become international news, I really believe that not to allow the whole thing to play out legally sends a message to victims of sexual abuse that I fear would do damage. He’s a pedophile, and he got away with what he did.

    Also, I think Wells et al, need to be held to account.

    Yet it’s a mess, and a colossal distraction. And, as you said, the ability of some people—both here and on other blogs (Mayor Sam’s comes to mind)—to discuss the matter while also acknowledging its complexity, is a tad lacking.

  55. Celeste Fremon Says:

    Gava Joe (or whatever you call yourself), I deleted your abusive, assaultive comment.

    THIS IS A ONE TIME WARNING.

    Any further comments that come even close to what you just did will cause me to block you from commenting on this site for the foreseeable future. I will also delete any future comments of yours that happen to slip through, regardless of their content.

    (NOTE: This is not in any way aimed at the very thoughtful commenter, Gava Joe from Kansas.)

  56. reg Says:

    “Maybe the Olympic committee thought Chicago sounds just too dangerous?”

    WBC – Rio’s murder rate is more than twice that of Chicago. And the actual number of murders is about ten times Chicago’s. My assumption is that that pattern follows for violent crimes.

    ( I heard a complicated explanation this afternoon on MSNBC that made it sound like this was kind of a done deal behind the scenes before the thing started, with complicated lobbying strategies that undercut the US on the first vote – apparently African delegates who would have been disposed to support the Chicago bid were persuaded to vote for Tokyo on the first ballot for technical reasons having to do with the quality of their presentation, thinking they could vote for the US in the next rounds. Sounded arcane and loaded with weird intrigue and manipulation by the committee insiders, but the reporter had apparently spoken to a number of people involved in negotiations.)

    I don’t think that the crime thing is a big factor – a number of the cities that have hosted Olympics over the years are relatively high crime, but my assumption is that during the games the tourist influx gets maximum attention by police, security in the Olympics zone, on public transportation, etc. is beefed up and sheer numbers of visitors actually make the main streets safer. (So far as crime in Brazil is concerned, apparently Sao Paulo has cut their crime rate dramatically in recent years, which is quite an accomplishment for such a huge city.) I’m certain you are expert at traveling smart, because just the fact of unfamiliar turf can be dangerous for a tourist – even a city like London. Most likely the clueless and careless will have some problems, but most folks will be fine.

  57. reg Says:

    Iincidentally, I didn’t have super-strong feelings about the Olympics bid and am glad to see Latin America in the mix, but in retrospect I’m sort of glad things turned out this way because it’s an opportunity for the crazy rightwing to show the country, once more, what a bunch of insane jerks they are. There’s nothing like crowing over a rebuff to the President of the United States over something as benign and popular as the Olympics to prove you are a bunch of hyper-partisan assholes and hysterics, putting your narrow politics over what normal people see as in the interest of the whole country. This had nothing to do with concerns that locals often have over hosting these mega-events, nor anything to do with wanting to see Latin America get a chance to present itself on this stage for the first time – it was all about rooting against America because they hate Obama. Sick ! And if he hadn’t gone to lobby for the Olympics, like every other head of state who was in the running, they would have trashed him for that. But their asses are showing, which is always a good thing.

  58. reg Says:

    Joe Scarborough: “Chicago is a beautiful city that would have made a perfect backdrop for the Olympics. The President was right to fly to Copenhagen to try to land the games, not for the sake of his city, but for the good of his country. The fact President Obama failed makes me respect him more for taking the chance, and the fact many right-wing figures opposed the President’s mission shows just how narrow-minded partisanship makes us all…what we saw from some conservative corners regarding the President’s failed Olympics bid was just plain stupid.”

  59. Randy Paul Says:

    As I have pointed out, Rio put on the Pan American Games in 2007 with no problems of the major kind. In addition, Brazil is going to put on the 2014 World Cup and will have much of the infrastructure for the Olympics ready by then.

    I’ve been to Rio some seven times. I have used the subway and the buses there with no problems. Last time I was there I saw numerous people on the subway with Ipods and without problems.

    On New Years Eve 1999-2000, we walked from our cousin’s place in Botafogo through the Rebouças tunnel to Copacabana and back for the New Year’s celebration. There was not one arrest made tha night. I have walked from Botafogo to Flamengo, from Jardim Botanico to lagoa Rodrigo Freitas. I have ridden the tram from Santa Teresa to Lapa.

    I have found by using good judgment and good sense I have had no problems. Indeed, many of the homicides taking place in Rio are the result of police killing civilians.

  60. WBC Says:

    reg, you may be right about the backroom machinations – people speculate it had to do with global politics and geography, wanting to give the games to S. America instead of el norte or Europe or Asia this time. But I wondered if the violence in Chicago being played up in the media and being given attn. from the Obama admin. just now may have given the committee cover for their (possibly pre-ordained). Of course Rio is statistically far more violent.

    Yes, the rightwing radio ranters crowing over Obama’s failure to snag the games is disgusting and disgraceful – they go on about the cost, sneering he’s lost street cred when it comes to solving big global problems when he can’t manage this, etc. etc. I don’t know if he should have gone or not — maybe not, Michelle might have been enough — but I certainly don’t think it hurt his image or ours as a nation. I don’t know if it helped our image, but good for Joe Scarborough, breaking ranks with the rightwing lynch mob.

    I agree that their showing themselves to be who they are, irrationally partisan spitemongers, is good in that people who don’t pay attention to them get a good snapshot: once I started to listen to some of these people on our local L A level and realize the influence they’ve had on some elections (like for this City Attorney and DA, very recently) it opened up a whole new reality to me. A parallel universe that people ignore to their peril. Lots of candidates have two personas, and only reveal themselves to their “own crowd,” so we elect Jekyl and get Hyde (or is it the other way around?).

    Guess it’s time for Celeste to block the “bad” Gava Joe, too.

    Poplock, I’ll check into your lead later; i think I know what you’re referring to in broader terms, re: tracking an international assortment of underworld figures from Russian arms and nuclear materials dealers, to hired assassins, Afghan drug lords, African blood diamond dealers, sellers of organs and stolen children, counterfeiters, a bizarrely seamy world that somehow manages to converge in Chavez’s Venezuela at one point or another, with Interpol and other agencies on their trail, both in person and via the Internet…if you have something else in mind let us know.

  61. Dennis Says:

    “We demand the immediate release of Roman Polanski. Film-makers in France, in Europe, in the United States and around the world are dismayed by this decision… It seems inadmissible to them that an international cultural event, paying homage to one of the greatest contemporary film-makers, is used by police to apprehend him.”

    I just saw the film called Mario’s Story that is unrelated and saw the comment on here that said that the criminal justice system is broken and it took them 10 YEARS to get a convicted supposed gang member that was and is not guilty out of thier broken prison system that, alone is pathetic, if the system is broken then why do you perpetuate the system (fix the system) Polanski is in another country and thier laws do not apply here in the United States therefore why are the foreign police working in conjunction with US authority cops to have someone extradited for something that the staute of limitations is expired upon, in the previous mentioned film they even said that the system in ineffective so release Roman Polanski because the authorities are inept. They used an international film festival to arrest someone that is not quilty.

  62. Dennis Says:

    A crime is no longer “alleged” once a person is found guilty of it in court. Polanski is guilty until and if an appeal overturns the verdict. Leaving the country before sentencing is not a valid appeal and is something you would expect from someone who is guilty. He was lucky that the final charges weren’t worse to reflect what he really did.

    WRONG! – But did Nastassja Kinski want to have sex with him? – (Further, this guy who “wasn’t a pedophile” then takes off to France after being “not guilty” where he quickly shacks up with 15 year old Nastassja Kinski. He probbaly knew better but that was the type of girl Polanski was atracted to.

  63. Dennis Says:

    THE COURTS AND JUDGES ARE SCREWED UP!

    “JUDGE NOT FOR YOU WILL BE JUDGED”! – JESUS

    “GOD IS AN INVISABLE SPIRIT THAT CANNOT BE SEEN BY HUMAN EYES”. – JESUS

    “MARIO ROCHA (Roman Polanski) HAS BEEN SENTENCED UNLAWFULLY And unjustly by a system that is broken”!

    Mario Rocha’s conviction was overturned and vacated, but it took 10 and 1/2 years by a broken system.

  64. Dennis Says:

    “If the alleged victim has said that she wants the case dropped (she is married now) and the judge is dead and cannot defend himself then they have no case because Polanski is overseas. The laws there and the cops have no jurisdiction”. Therefore NO EXTRADITION!! = The cops and courts break the laws ALL THE TIME BECAUSE THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN.

    ‘NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE’.

    “IF YOU HAVE NO JUSTICE THEN YOU HAVE NO PEACE”

  65. Dennis Says:

    “A JUDGE IS NOTHING MORE THAN A LAWYER THAT HAS BEEN APPOINTED TO THE BENCH BY SOMEONE ELSE” – AND THE LAWYERS ARE OFTEN WRONG”! A LAWYER IS A GUESSER.

  66. Dennis Says:

    W.W.B.C.D. = WHAT WOULD BRUCE CAMPBELL DO?

    SEE: ‘MY NAME IS BRUCE’

  67. Dennis Says:

    I HAVE A QUESTION FOR ALL OF YOU:

    DO YOU DEFEND TO THE DEATH THE CURRENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM?

    MY FIRST VOTE IS: A RESOUNDING ‘NO’!

  68. PopLockErOnE Says:

    WBC – Interpol was not involved – strictly Austrian Gov.
    :)

  69. Sure Fire Says:

    Put down the pipe Dennis.

  70. Sure Fire Says:

    WBC, crazy and out of control liberals are no different than their conservative counter parts. I could post the deranged posts made by idiot liberals that went on for the 8 years Bush was in office and show that. You remeber those years right? My problems with Obama are so many that his trip to tout Chicago isn’t close to anything that’s on my map. Sure he said one thing and did another and the leftist media pretty much said so what, but when you expect that out of him what’s supposed to shock you. It’s meaningless media fodder.

    His policies, appointments and decsions in reagrds to this nation, in less than a year, are what distresses me about this far left end of the universe extremist. Those issues can be debated by me in a healthy way but the only response from the left will be to claim the reasons for my feeling are the color of his skin, becayse they have no answers for what Obama is actually doing. I’ve been there and done that but I’ll go toe to toe with any of you on issues rather than what the far right said about this trip or anything else about him that simply doesn’t matter.

    Talking about the direction he’s pointing this country in is easy enough for me to show. Explaining what I see wrong with that direction is as well. I think explaining some of his decisions would be tough without being completely honest which will show him for what he is, an extremist of the worst kind.

  71. Woody Says:

    WBC: Yes, the rightwing radio ranters crowing over Obama’s failure to snag the games is disgusting and disgrace.

    Maybe you could be specific, WBC, as to what rightwing radio you’ve been listening to and who you heard doing this.

    No one is celebrating the loss of the games. What someone like me gloats over is that Obama isn’t considererd “The Chosen One” as you seem to believe.

    I’m not the least bit surprised that liberals are attacking the OOC Committee, making all sorts of excuses for Obama, and, yes, even blaming Bush! Four years from now Obama and the Left will be still be blaming Bush for matters which are really due to Obama’s ineptness.

    Of course, you don’t think that attacks and gloating over Bush is disgusting.

  72. PopLockErOnE Says:

    Ms. Fremon – I got a chance to read the Daily Beast link – I’m just going to say this one more time. Whoever is that so called law enforcement source – saying that Polanski’s lawyers triggered his arrest – that is such a bullshit lie.
    The arrest was triggered by another well known wealthy individual – that knew how Pokelanski. was making a mockery of the justice system with his connected influences and money. This happened months and months prior to the so called media’s statements regarding the lawyer’s inquiries.

  73. Celeste Fremon Says:

    Interesting, P.

    I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that the two unnamed “law enforcement sources” who leaked to the LA Times that it was Polanski’s lawyers who triggered the arrest, are actually a couple of people from the DA’s office. And once the Times published this tale, the story has been repeated and repeated—including by Marcia Clark.

    The point of the leak, I believe, was to make the DA’s office look better by saying that no one was pursuing Polanski at all. The DA’s office was just minding its own business, taking care of LA priorities until Polanski’s lawyers started making a ruckus and then What’s a Poor DA to Do? Go after him, of course—all of which struck me as somewhat disingenuous.

    I’m far more willing to go for the well-known rich guy story.

  74. reg Says:

    Surefire’s bitter rant is so off the map of rational discourse (“Obama is an extremist of the worst kind” ) that I think it shows Jimmy Carter was probably wrong about the racism fueling this vitriol and hatred. He forgot to mention the mental illness.

    Surefire – you need a fucking straight jacket. Really. That you think you’re some kind of sage makes it even more obvious just how far removed from reality you are.

  75. Chuck Says:

    Celeste, I do agree with you that it is vital that Polanski is brought back to Los Angeles so that the whole mess can be sorted out, fairly, legally and finally. PopleCock’s “deep throat” source and the” wicked DA people” are all simply smoke screens, desperate tactics of Polanski’s foolish lawyers who originally pandered to Polanski’s wealth and arrogance, rather than dispensing sound legal advice.
    In the world of public opinion the notion that there was misconduct by the Judge and a deputy DA unconnected to the case, is the stuff of movies like “The Fugitive;” innocent men (and women) railroaded by overly zealous cops, prosecutors and judges.
    Unfortunately for Polanski, and his inept lawyers, Polanski is not, by the furthest stretch of the imagination, an innocent man. His guilt is beyond issue, it’s his sentence that remains to be settled.
    DA Cooley would be really going out on a limb to reinstate the alleged ‘Original Deal.’ For one thing that deal has not been fairly, fully or accurately reported. The Diagnostic Report that has been widely quoted (but not fully revealed) may well make a recommendation against a State Prison sentence, but what did the report say about Polanski being instead sentenced to “a suitable amount of time in County Jail?” Even if Cooley were to stand by that recommendation, a suitable time in County Jail is not credit for 42 days in Chino. Also, it appears to reward Polanski for fleeing the country, a separate offense.
    Polanski has been widely quoted as saying he feared that judge would give him “a hundred years” in prison, but that’s another example of hype; the maximum the judge could have sentenced Polanki to prison was 3 years (for which he serves 50%) but, because of the Diagnostic, it would have been 1 year in County Jail (for which he serves 66%).
    Perhaps the best result for everyone, Polanski included, is that he be allowed to withdraw his plea and stand trial for all offenses originally charged. The fact that Samantha Geimer is a reluctant witness is again, hype. Once she’s been counseled by DA investigators who routinely deal professionally and sympathetically with situations where victims fear re-living past trauma, she may well realize that as the cat is now fully out of the bag (thanks to Polanski’s lawyers) testifying against him is the best way to put her past where it belongs, in the past.
    The tactics employed by Polanski to escape justice are simply a second victimization of Samantha as he attempts to cast the her and her mother as the villains who caused him a momentary weakness.
    So Polanski will face justice after all, he can cast all the dirt he likes against Samantha, and he can question the motives of the DA and the Judge, but he cannot and should not escape responsibility for what he has done.
    PopppleCock thinks Polanski would have been arrested in Switzerland regardless of his lawyer’s stupid assertions that the DA made no previous attempts to extradite him, he may be right, but it does not diminish the fact that Polanski’s strategy to cast the victim, the DA and the Judge as the ‘bad guys’ was an ill thought out plan, and one that will thwart Polanki’s attempts to emulate “The Fugitive.”

  76. johnny lemonhead Says:

    The full moon affects human behavior. That is pretty much clear here.

  77. Sure Fire Says:

    Way to put up some rational response Reg, I said he’s an extremist, just like you and his appointments and decisions show that every day. Did you argue that point, nope just shot off your big mouth which is all you have as usual.

    Hey Celeste, can you open up a thread just about Obama? Wasn’t he the candidate of social justice people like you and your friend Reg? My post was anything buta rant but anyone who dares to go against this old fool gets his filthy response time after time.

    Now you open it up and people can put up or shut up. Reg didn’t, as usual, argue any point just shot of that big mouth of his. Let’s eee some justice on the issue.

  78. PopLockErOnE Says:

    The orders to return Pokelanski back to the US – was strictly an order from Cooley himself.
    None of the district attorneys were aware of what was going on behind the scene to capture him…..Pokelanski has so many spies – connections and influencia in Los Angeles and the US, he would have had a “heads up” on the warrant by some stupid DA snitch.
    So I am 100% sure that those DA sources within the DA office are clueless on this entire story – specifically Marcia Clark.
    I have talked to a couple of County DAs with so called “inside details” and they go off about some bullshit story – that I dont know who in the DA’s office invented this fucking fairy tale in the first place. I am pretty sure its going to be the same people talking and leaking the bullshit lawyer story to the media. They have such big mouths with their lawyer retarted attitude and mentally of “I know it all” (but in reality I’m indeed a stupid human being).
    On other not, Ms. Clark is one person that the DA’s office refuses to provide any details on any high profile case – its not like she is well liked within the DA’s office – then or now.
    So, Celeste, your pecfectly right – “The DA’s office was just minding its own business” – that’s their job – unless the case is specifically assigned to them.

  79. reg Says:

    Did I argue the point ? No, because it’s not arguable. You called the President “the worst kind of extremist.” Sorry chump, but that’s nuts. It’s really that simple. Unfortunately this kind of crap is typical of your idiotic rants. Get help. You’re living on your own wingnut planet, slinging shit. You’re not a rational human being. There was zero substance in your comment, just your vitriolic, insane horseshit. Don’t ask me to come down to your pathetic level of to discuss the origins or nature of your insanity. Ague the point ? Get fucked. I don’t argue with nutcases shouting nonsense. I “shot off my big mouth?” Look in the mirror asshole, because that’s all your insane “Obama’s the worst kind of extremist” charge was. You shooting off your big mouth with wingnut horseshit that is impossible to back up with any evidence or rational discourse. You’re a fucking disgrace.

  80. Sure Fire Says:

    Impossible to back up? You’re an arrogant witless extremist who isn’t smart enough to back his view up and will use pathetic vulgar responses that mean nothing because all you do is run, you’re a gelding.

    It’s not nuts and you simply know you don’t have the balls to argue the statement I made. Hell if you were so confident I was a wing nut you’d enjoy showing everyone how ridiculous my statement was, but instead you run like the phony you are.

    Bottom line is you’re a gutless old troll, all talk no backbone which I’ve known from day one. You think you’re a man with the type of responses you put up Reg, you’re not even close just a senile filthy disgusting coward, or as you like to say..a punk. I could post likewise, the filth you post to make you feel like the man you’re not but why drag myself back there to your trailer again.

    Live with it old man, live with running like all the other frauds, you have no game.

  81. reg Says:

    You’re weak. And stupid. And an angry-ass loser. You dig your hole deeper with each post. Don’t expect to be taken seriously when you’re not flashing your badge.

  82. Chuck Says:

    The entire Polanski matter will be played out openly in the public area. The salient facts are really straightforward and beyond dispute. Those who want to use Polanski as a rallying point to attack the criminal justice system have picked a poor champion. The allegations of misconduct are irrelevant distractions. I’m sure that Cooley has already prepared a trial team to handle the matter if Polanski is stupid enough to try to withdraw his plea, and then Polanski and his lawyers will have misconduct labeled against them; any attempt to deter Samantha Geimer from testifying will be prosecuted as obstruction of justice and witness tampering. These are serious crimes and matters that Polanski’s current entertainment lawyers would be well advised to steer clear of.
    Polanki’s plight is looking darker by the minute, and his advocates are looking increasingly desperate.
    The more personal the attacks become (eg PoppleCockerOne), the more clear it appears that their true agenda has nothing to do with the appropriate punishment for Polanski, and more to do with trying to advance elitism for the movie industry who regard themselves as untouchable.
    I sense something of a personal vendetta against DA Cooley here. It is not without coincidence that Polanski’s lawyers were also big supporters of a certain city attorney candidate who was beaten by Cooley’s candidate. In choosing to avenge their losses in backing the wrong candidate, they seem to be repeating their mistakes with the wrong champion of injustice – an admitted pedophile.

  83. PopLockErOnE Says:

    Chuck? “personal attacks”? I’m not attacking anyone Chucky Cheese- Cooley has done the most righteous decision and the most ethical choice for the safety of public and to serve justice to its end.
    I agree with your statements of movie elitism – it does exist.
    My statements is not an attack against Cooley – My statements are strictly attacks on the media’s and more specifically the newspaper reporters that continue to twist and sell the story into a block buster drama motion picture or a fugitive thriller book.
    As you have seen lately, the press has printed numerous acticles saying nothing but assumptions, repeated so called facts, or hogwash opinion columns.
    In the Pokelanski case – everyone involved was doing their honest earned job – point blank. All of these made up reporting stories about his lawyers, improper court conduct, and back door bogus conspiracies, is a bunch of horseshit.

  84. Chuck Says:

    Thanks for clearing up where you stood on this, PopL. Yes, the system nailed Polanski in Switzerland, and maybe the new ‘relationship’ between the US and Switzerland over banking secrecy explains why, after decades of ignoring our extradition request, they finally honored a warrant that’s been in the system continually. I also have no time for Marcia Clarke and her gratuitous remarks. Be ready for the media to go into overdrive with this story, and be ready for Polanski to go down hard. He had his chance and blew it. Now he will pay the price and Big Hollywood will turn their back on him in a New York minute.

  85. PopLockErOnE Says:

    Look, lets get to down to the nitty gritty facts here – POKElanski doesn’t want to go to prison period.
    If he does, he knows he is going to get sodomized and its not going to be a pretty sight – its going to be a bloody mess with all his hemorrhoids taking a beating and getting popped.
    He wont be able to buy himself out of this one. :(

  86. reg Says:

    “if you’re so confident I was a wing nut you’d enjoy showing everyone how ridiculous my statement was”

    My suggestion, Surefire, if you want to test my opinion that you’re a wacko, is that you ask Gen. Jim Jones, Bob Gates, Hillary Clinton, Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, Gen. Eric Shinseki, the former governors of Kansas and Arizona, the former chair of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, among others (all major Obama appointees that apparently have you in this deep distress) what they’re doing signing on with an “extremist of the worst kind” from the “far left end of the universe.” Or, assuming they’re too busy to answer emails from outer space, just imagine the responses.

    If you think for a second they wouldn’t all simply look at you like you’re crazy….well, that means you really are crazy. (Unless of course, everyone to the left of Hot Air Hannity is in on this “far left of the universe extremist” plot to destroy America.)

  87. Sure Fire Says:

    See the word all anywhere? I realize the statement is open ended but where I see problems with just what I said, I didn’t say all. Quit stretching things to what I didn’t say. I stand by the statement but i have better things to do than argue with a horse’s ass like you with no game.

    “His policies, appointments and decsions in reagrds to this nation, in less than a year, are what distresses me about this far left end of the universe extremist”.

  88. reg Says:

    “see the word all anywhere” – no but I saw the word “worst”, idiot.

    “I stand by the statement but i have better things to do than argue with a horse’s ass like you with no game.”

    I’m not arguing with you because your assertion is totally crazy – I am showing what a total fucking loon you happen to be in making this assertion about Obama. The only reason I even bother is because I find you to be consistently arrogant and asinine in these comments threads and you seem to get very upset when you’re dissed – which amuses me.

    “No game” – yeah, it’s really embarrassing taking on your total nonsense.

    You’re weak, chump. Weak. And a whiner.

  89. WBC Says:

    Chuck and Poplock in perfect agreement, and Chuck too, quite a cozy menage a trois. Add Woody as a likely party too plus Kevin and we have a — oh, never mind. Fans of certain AM radio talkshows, would be a “sure fire” bet.

  90. WBC Says:

    Oops, I did it again: make that, Chuck and P and Sure Fire, as the Basic 3, plus 2 (or more). Or, “Chuck and Poplock Plus 3…” Quite sure reg and Randy Paul won’t be joining.

  91. Randy Paul Says:

    Quite sure reg and Randy Paul won’t be joining.

    I can only speak for myself, but you’re right.

  92. Woody Says:

    We should stop the Obama comparisons with Hitler. At least Hitler got the Olympics to go to Berlin.

  93. Gava Joe Says:

    And Black Jesse Owen displeased the Fuehrer to the extreme. It’s ironic that the race-baiters should use the new Black Prez in some comparative view with Hitler. It boggles. Ooooh, that’s a dichotomy..

  94. Sure Fire Says:

    You heard me Reg, worst, you’re not deaf as well as old lame and vulgar are you Snitch? Never needed a badge to back up anything I said, going back to the hate cops playbook huh Reggie? What’s next donut remarks light weight?
    You’re the saame type of guy who would talk about how they would kick some cops ass as soon as the cuffs were off than be all “yes sir” and “no sir” when the time to put up was there. You’re a fraud dude, nothing more and easy pickings.

    I’m not whining old man, made a statement or two, stand by them and you pull out your cop cliche handbook along with your leftist liberal bs dogma. All cop hating pussies like you carry those worn out old time cop put downs, way to be original Reg. Now run off and find some better one liners, something from this decade if you can. Have WBC find one for you while she’s looking, my God she’s got as many witty old news remarks as you.

    Take your pill Reg, don’t explode, they’re only words Snitch. Obama is even worse today than yesterday, you should be pleased.

  95. Sure Fire Says:

    Maybe I should start responding like you old man. Maybe I should always think…WWRS…What would Reggie say? I don’t know man, maybe I’ll just use some of your wisdom, maybe that’s what I need. You know like the cop hate stuff that runs through you 24-7.

    You develop that wisdom after your “snitch episode”? Did it make you do some soul searching? Man I wish I was the narc that played you, talk about a fun time. People forgive you Reg or still can’t get that trust back?

    We can play nasty all day Reg, just let me know pops.

  96. WBC Says:

    Hate to interrupt this stream of witticisms especially from Sure Fire, but I’ll be curious to see the outcome of the case mentioned in the Times today, re: an 89-year old man from long Beach with Alzheimer’s who’s in jail for life for First Degree, but he can’t remember what he did or why or who he is, so is keeping him in prison sensible or humane? His attorneys are petitioning the court for early release, while the same LA DAs going to argue against it. I can guess where the compassionate right on this blog stands on this.

  97. Sure Fire Says:

    WBC, I don’t have compassion for murderers for the most part and don’t know anything about this guys case. If I read the article I’ll be sure to let you know what I think about it. I actually wrote a letter to the parole board once for an inmate who murdered an old man during the course of a burglary. You should never assume I fit into the mold of everyone else you think I’m like, you’d be wrong.

    Funny how weaklings on the left only speak up when someone on the righht throws a little back their way. Your silence when Reg goes off on his filthy little rants make your comments about what I write pretty much meaningless.

  98. Sure Fire Says:

    All you liberals are so smug. Are you as annoying in person as you are here? I read up on the case, the guys a cold blooded murderer, even the judge who released him understands that. I don’t care if he’s released, if he has dementia smelling that soup isn’t going to mean a thing will it?

    Let him sit in his chair at home and die there, I could care less. How’s that for humane?

Leave a Comment





Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.