Lawyers: Polanski Shouldn’t Get Sealed Transcripts
Prosecuting lawyers argued in court recently that film director Roman Polanski should not have access to sealed transcripts that could help his case because of his fugitive status in the United States.
The transcripts of testimony by Roger Gunson, a former prosecuting attorney in the ongoing legal case with Polanski, reportedly detail alleged misconduct. Polanski’s defense lawyers believe the transcripts will help their effort to stop Polanski from being extradited from his current home in Switzerland, where he is under house arrest, according to the Associated Press.
Los Angeles area authorities have tried repeatedly to get Polanski back into the country to face sentencing for the charge of having illegal sexual relations with a 13-year-old girl in 1977.
Deputy District Attorney David Walgren wrote in a filing that the request made by Polanski’s lawyers should be denied because the director has refused to return to Los Angeles for sentencing, despite repeated requests. Walgren further said that any charges of misconduct should be dealt with at a sentencing in Los Angeles.
Gunson gave his testimony in February during a closed session, according to the AP. Court descriptions read that in 1977 Gunson testified that he attempted to challenge presiding Superior Court Judge Lawrence Rittenband, who has since passed away. But Gunson’s supervisors stopped him from doing so after a conference with Rittenband, according to the AP.
Documents within the files claim that Gunson wanted Rittenband to be disqualified from presiding as judge over Polanski’s case because of misconduct. The files with the transcripts are a part of filings made by Polanski’s lawyers.
The testimony was apparently taken from Gunson, who is now retired, in the event he wouldn’t be able to testify at a later hearing.
Another bullet Polanski’s legal team has tried to fire at Walgren involves claims that the requests made to authorities in Switzerland to extradite Polanski back to the United States have false and incomplete elements within them.
Walgren sharply criticized the statements made against his team’s efforts, describing the charges as “completely baseless and reckless allegations.”
Polanski’s case has been ongoing in some form since charges of illegal sexual activity arose back in 1977.
He had left the United States for Europe in 1978 the night before he was to be sentenced for the charges. Rittenband had reportedly said that night the he might renege on a sentencing agreement that had been reached in Polanski’s case.
Seven months ago, Polanski was arrested after arriving in Zurich to receive a lifetime achievement award for his film work.
He released his first public comments about the charges during that weekend, and said efforts to bring him back to Los Angeles were to serve him “on a platter to the media.”
May 7th, 2010 at 4:47 pm
Justice Delayed is Justice Denied.
To none will we sell, to none deny or delay, right or justice.
Magna Carta (1215) Clause 40.
Its relevance to California Courts, Prosecutors, Justice and Federal Courts and Justice today…?
Roman Polanski has refused to return to Los Angeles for sentencing because he already served one sentence at Chino California in 1977 which he was informed by the Santa Monica Judge and Los Angeles Prosecutor Roger Gunson, would be his full sentence initially.
In addition the original judge on Roman Polanski’s case, County of Los Angeles Santa Monica Judge Laurence J. Rittenband, would have sentenced Roman Polanski in absentia 33 years ago if he was not taken off Roman Polanski’s case for misconduct.
See: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/files/1978_0201_polanski.jpg
The new County Los Angeles Judge Peter Espinoza on 22nd January 2010 stated in his Los Angeles courtroom that he would like Roman Polanski to come to Los Angeles to receive the original intended sentence –which is the time Mr. Polanski had already spent in a state prison (Chino) under psychiatric evaluation in 1977 & 1978.
What Los Angeles Judge Peter Espinoza stated ion 22nd January 2010 is documented in the New York Times:
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/heated-words-at-the-polansk….
Roman Polanski’s American lawyers may have a transcript of that County of Los Angeles January 22nd 2010 proceeding…
If County of Los Angeles Judge Peter Espinoza has stated that Roman Polanski’s sentence, if he were to come to U.S.A, is for the time he has already served 42 days in 1977 & 1978, that there would be no more jail time, then it should follow given this information that Swiss Justice authorities could make a decision to deny the extradition of Roman Polanski to California USA, since he does not have a sentence of six months or more,
For more info on Swiss Extradition Treaty See:
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2010/1/23/31436/2767
Thus the Los Angeles Prosecutor’s extradition request for Roman Polanski does not meet Switzerland’s extradition criteria, where extradition can only take place if there is six months or more prison time to be served.
May 9th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
[...] Lawyers: Polanski Shouldn't Get Sealed Transcripts – Total Lawyer … [...]
May 9th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
[...] Lawyers: Polanski Shouldn't Get Sealed Transcripts – Total Lawyer … [...]