Polanski Will Fight Extradition, Lawyers Say

• I saw something similar to this on another site and couldn't get the gist of it, but your post explains it better. Thanks!

• Seems like the Los Angeles prosecutors in 1977 and again in 2010 want to use cocaine drug addicts to try to nail Roman Polanski for all sorts of phoney stale crimes, by doing deals with them, and covering up the prosecution witnesses cocaine drug habit, and using them to defame Roman Polanski�s character to the world, while hiding the Los Angeles prosecution witnesses drug problems and other sexual addictions. Let us not blame the drug addicted witnesses but instead to blame is the Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley and his prosecutors use of the cocaine drug addicts representations about Roman Polanski to the world�s press. These witnesses have motivation to lie, to please the Los Angeles prosecutors which may make it more likely that what these witnesses are saying about Polanski is not true. Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley and his prosecutors office loses credibility using these witnesses who have cocaine drug addiction, who are either biased because of fear of prosecution for cocaine in 1977, or because of Charlotte Lewis�s betrayal of Roman Polanski and Charlotte�s wish for more fame and fortune at Roman Polanski�s expense. If Charlotte Lewis was sexually assaulted and did not like it, she should not have stayed for the Pirates movie, she should have walked away with her dignity. If true that there was a sexual assault then she made her bed literally for the movie, and remained silent for 24 years, and so she should lie in it. In addition if Charlotte has made up a story after 20 years then someone may have paid Charlotte Lewis for her press reception in Los Angeles at an oppotune time just before the California Primary Elections where Steve Cooley was running as the Republican candidate to become the Attorney General of California. See My cocaine hell, by the beauty [Charlotte Lewis] who partied away her glittering film UK Sunday Mirror, Apr 6, 1997 by Henrietta Knight Looking gaunt and vulnerable, Charlotte Lewis hangs her head and whispers: �I used to have the world in the palm of my hand. �But I discovered cocaine and just couldn�t stop. �Everywhere I went there were drugs � at parties, at restaurants, on the sets of movies and at my friends� homes. I couldn�t get away from it. It took over my whole life and then wrecked it.� http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_19970406/ai_n14462559/

• Los Angeles former prosecutor Roger Gunson the original prosecutor in Roman Polanski's case testimony reportedly contradicts the current DA Steve Cooley in regards to the original sentence applicable in Roman Polanski's 1977 case. If Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley made false representations in regards to extraditing Roman Polanski, apart from the harm done to Roman Polanski, in addition 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, and thus the County of Los Angeles court Peter Espinoza should unseal Los Angeles Prosecutor Roger Gunson's testimony in Polanski's Case.

• Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley seems to feel that the taxpayer�s dollars are his personal monies, and that he can use celebrities to seek higher office to be Attorney General of California See Also link below for more information: http://www.fulldisclosure.net/Programs/515.php

• The Los Angeles Times in Feb 1st 1978 says the original Santa Monica Judge Laurence J. Rittenband would have sentenced Polanski in absentia, so why could the new Judge not sentence Polanski in absentia in 2010? See: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/files/1978_0201_polanski.jpg At least the Los Angeles Judge Peter Espinoza could have given him a sentence which then would have given the Swiss Justice clarity in regards to extradition, instead of the sentence being vague, murky and in dispute. However perhaps Polanski�s sentence is not at all vague, since at the JANUARY 22nd 2010 hearing Judge Peter Espinoza explained �Nothing precludes the possibility [that the original Santa Monica Judge in 1977 in Polanski's case] Judge Rittenband's [original] promise will someday be enforced,� But more importantly County of Los Angeles Judge Espinoza also stated on January 22nd: �I don�t disagree that the intended sentence was the time Mr. Polanski already spent in a state prison (Chino) under psychiatric evaluation." This is documented in the New York Times: http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/heated-words-at-the-polansk... So if Polanski's sentence is to time has already served i.e. 42 days, then it would follow that Swiss Justice should deny extraditing Polanski, since it does not meet Switzerland�s extradition criteria, since the criteria dictates that Roman Polanski would have to face 6 months of jail time or more to be extradited, but according to the new County of Los Angeles Judge Peter Espinoza it looks as if Roman Polanski is not facing any more prison time at all. The first Catch 22 is this, the County of Los Angeles Judge Espinoza says Roman Polanski is only facing time served, but yet refuses to sentence him in absentia, which would end this never ending story. Ever since Judge Espinoza made his January 22nd 2010 comment concerning Polanski's sentence to be the time he has already served, this has not stopped the Los Angeles District Attorneys Office continuing with their extradition request, which now seems to be more of a scheme to add more clout to the Los Angeles District Attorneys lust for power, so that the Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley can be the next Attorney General of California, at the expense of another famous person Roman Polanski, who in addition to already serving his time at Chino, is proven to be harmless after 33 years. Let us not forget the d�� vicious cycle. Polanski�s arrest in 2009 and pending extradition deflects attention away from the Santa Monica Judicial & Prosecutorial corruption against him in 1977, which caused Polanski to be entraped in a Catch-22 situation in 1978 where there was serious Santa Monica Judicial Misconduct against him, he was damned if he stayed and damned if he fled, & this Judicial corrupton in turn caused him to flee America in 1978. Roman Polanski would not have returned to California in 1977 after the Judge permitted him make a movie outside of the country if his intent was to flee justice. Polanski only left Los Angeles when the Santa Monica Judge treated him unfairly. Roman Polanski�s case is not the only case of foul play where County of Los Angeles Santa Monica Judges and County of Los Angeles District Attorneys who are seeking promotion to become California Officials will victimize the defenseless and it doesn't matter whether it is a criminal defendant or a sexual assault and police cover up victim, in order to gain that promotion, using illicit & hidden power. Also it does not matter whether you are a rich or poor victim, because these County of Los Angeles and California Officials, like vultures will search for your vulnerability, and with each different victim comes a different California Official promotion opportunity. We who have been harmed by this foul play are being sold out and denigrated, our lives ruined so these California Officials can sweep corruption under the rug, receive respectability and praise, and promotion at our expense, in addition to advancing their status, along with covering up their own illegitimate power & corruption.

• 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?

• A double standard exists in how sexual assault cases are decided at the County of Los Angeles Santa Monica Courthouse, California, which depends on who the perpetrator is. Roman Polanski was not treated straightforwardly by the Judge at the County of Los Angeles Santa Monica Courthouse, California in 1977, which is why this case has lingered on for 33 years. Roman Polanski wanted to make good in 1977 since he would not have returned to America, and served time at Chino California, if this were untrue. A double standard is in operation at the Santa Monica Courthouse, which double standard hinges on whether the perpetrator works for California Government and its subdivisions. And if that criteria is met then the Santa Monica Court and other County of Los Angeles employees will act in concert in the local Government�s favor to cover up their employees� crimes. But if the perpetrator or victim are not working for the California state and its subdivisions, and were born in another country, then the Santa Monica Court and other employees will act against them, using any means and foul means. See the link cached below in 2000 for more details. http://cache.zoominfo.com/CachedPage/?archive_id=2999255&page_id=40502187&page_url=%2f%2fwww.copcrimes.com%2fsantamonica.htm&page_last_updated=10%2f1%2f2000+3%3a11%3a50+PM&firstName=Laurence&lastName=Rubin In addition as French/Polish citizen Roman Polanski admitted to a crime through a plea bargain, the Santa Monica Judge should have honored it. When the Santa Monica Judge Rittenband wanted to force Polanski into deportation, using illegal coercion in the sentencing, the Santa Monica Judge broke the plea bargain agreement, was abusing his power, and through the Judge's use of bait and switch justice, betrayed the righteous legal process, destroyed Roman Polanski�s trust in it, and caused Roman Polanski to flee. California Officials are not policing their own California institutional sexual offenders who work for the State and its subdivisions, but instead will act to cover up, and harm and re-victimize the victim instead. In view of the double standard it would be in the interests of justice to free Roman Polanski, a Polish & French artist as soon as possible. I believe it is a good time to pardon Roman Polanski, and for California Justice to attend to its own ills.

• Can't believe any man would take advantage of children.

TotalComments: 8