Late last night I wrote the following with regard to using Marina Zenovich's documentary Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired as evidence of wrong-doing in the 1978 Polanski case:
I'm sorry, but as well-done as I believe Zenovich's documentary to be, using the narrative of a movie as part of an ongoing 31-year-old legal debate just doesn't sit well with me. Sure, use the same factual evidence, but don't point to the movie itself, it reeks of ease of availability and a lack of complete understanding of the situation at hand. It's Cole Trickle learning how to drive stock cars from ESPN… It opens our eyes to things we most likely didn't know but the important details must be learned on the battle field. Nobody passes on the outside in turn four!
Today, a good example of why I made the above statement is revealed in a piece by former Los Angeles District Attorney Marcia Clark at The Daily Beast with the following major revelation from former prosecutor, David Wells:
"I lied," Wells told me yesterday, referring to his comments in the movie that he told [Judge Rittenband] how he could renege on a plea bargain agreement and send Polanski back to jail after he had been released from a 42-day psychiatric evaluation — the heart of Polanski's claims of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct. "I know I shouldn't have done it, but I did. The director of the documentary told me it would never air in the States. I thought it made a better story if I said I'd told the judge what to do."
On top of this, Wells was the one that supplied Rittenband with pictures of Polanski reveling at Oktoberfest. The same photos that prompted the judge in 1977 to reconsider the plea bargain.
Clark says law enforcement sources confirm that the strident actions of Polanski's own lawyers — prompted by Wells' now-recanted statements in the movie — led to his arrest this weekend.
I don't know about you, but this doesn't look good. Maybe next time don't build your case on a movie and do a little research first.
I am not surprised at all. I am hoping this will be the first nail in Hollywood's "Free Roman Polanski" campaign. Over the last 24 hours, I have lost so much respect for so many Hollywood greats, that it's depressing.
Oh, by the way, if you need help figuring out where you stand on this issue, just ask Whoopi Goldberg. According to her, “The language that we use here is very important, because, (rape) is not the allegation…I know it wasn’t rape-rape…" and "We’re a different kind of society. We see things differently. The world sees 13 year olds and 14 year olds in the rest of Europe… not everybody agrees with the way we see things…" I'm sorry Whoopi, I didn't realize statutory rape wasn't "rape-rape." If this is the mindset of those in Hollywood who defend Polanski, then it is a truly sad day for the industry.
Why would anyone believe a word David Wells says now? He's recanting because he doesn't want to get in trouble for his actions back then. Nice try. Similarly, Marcia Clark's judgment was rightfully called into question during the Simpson case and after. It's a rare prosecutor I have seen do as incompetent a job as she did. Don't you know any seasoned and intelligent criminal lawyers you can cite?
Not all sex offenses are the same. I trust that the prosecutors at the time made the best decision with the facts and parties involved and the court should honor that decision.
Over and done with. End this case now.
That doesn't change the fact that Judge Rittenbad was an attention grubbing whore, and not a fair judge, but please don't think i'm one of those people who is blinded by roman Polanski's genius. He did something and the judge did something awful, period.
Someone should tell the lady with the 1987 Predator 'do that when a 13 year old tries to leave, and you throw her back down and do her in the @$$: it's "rape-rape." What an idiot.
Zack Solomon, post #3:
Judge Rittenband WAS ASKED BY MOVIE STUDIO EXECUTIVES to be very public with the whole trial.
They wanted it to be clear that there was NO SPECIAL TREATMENT given to Polanski, just because he was a famous director.
The problem is that Polanski had his own delusional agenda. Polanski wanted to go to court and have sex with children LEGALIZED IN AMERICA, the way that it was in france. Polanski kept bringing up french law, during the trial.
Movie studio executives SECRETLY PUSHED TO GET RITTENBAND for the judge, as he was well known for being cooperative/understanding of movie costs and scheduling, to avoid a shooting shut down!!
I know this and actually spoke with Judge Rittenband, about Polanski PUBLICLY BRAGGING THAT HE WAS GOING TO INTENTIONALLY CAUSE TROUBLE TO MAKE THE JUDGE LOOK BAD. When these things actually happened, the judge was going to have ME ARRESTED! Then one of his court employees stopped him and told him that his friends, family, and neighbors had heard Polanski say the same things. The judge demanded to talk to them, and when he learned that I was trying to protect him/the court from Polanski's scams, he realized that Polanski had a mental problem and WANTED A FULL 90 DAYS OF OBSERVATION OF THE MAN TO DETERMINE WHAT WAS WRONG WITH HIM!
Polanski Publicly BRAGGED, during his first or second day in the prison, that he had bribed doctors to let him out in about half the time, to make the judge look like he was too harsh in all his decisions and make him (Polanski) look like he was "perfect".
Polanski left the USA because I had him investigated for arranging the murders that Charles Manson committed. Polanski confessed that he had, and that he would kill more people. Hollywood celebrities did NOT WANTTO BE HIS NEXT MURDER VICTIMS and TOLD POLANSKI TO LEAVE HOLLYWOOD. That is why Polanski ran to France. He was afraid of being charged as a mass murderer!