Comments on: Brett Ratner to produce new Polanski documentary

By: Edmund

Edmund — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 06:15:03 +0000

What a great way to see who the heartless, worthless scum are in hollywood. No respect for children. If Polanski is released this case will be used by pedaphiles to rape our children with no recoarse. The downfall of all civilization is the Moral Fabric. There is nothing left after that. Wake up, you Whores in Hollywood. Let Polanski date your 13 year old daughter!!!
Hipercrits, Freaks. Its not about Polanski, he is being used to Pervert this nation.

By: McFly

McFly — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:35:43 +0000

Good old Brett Ratner. The guy that almost killed the Xmen franchise.

By: Margo

Margo — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:22:51 +0000

Since when did film festivals become sanctuaries from the law?

By: Margo

Margo — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:18:39 +0000

“Polanski, as documented in the comments above, is the target of undisguised antisemitism, as well as their ignorance of the original case.”

Stephan, it is so sad that you have to resort to such a heinous charge as antisemitism. The people here are commenting about the admitted BEHAVIOR of Roman Polanski. You obviously have never been a victim of antisemitism or you never would have used that detestable accusation without any justification. Shame on you.

By: jau

jau — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:01:45 +0000

are all hollywood celebrities on drugs? if not, then why are they supporting a release of a confessed child rapist? im disgusted, beyond disbelief and nauseated. this is incomprehensible and these people who support his crime should be condemned.

By: Margo

Margo — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:01:26 +0000

Stephan, you also missed the news where the Assistant District Attorney who made the allegations against the judge in the documentary has now admitted he lied in the film.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/retired-prosecutor-hbo-roman-polanski-case.html

A retired Los Angeles County prosecutor who claimed in a 2008 documentary that he advised a judge to sentence Roman Polanski to prison for having sex with a minor now says that he lied on film about his role in the case.

By: Margo

Margo — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:23:10 +0000

Then I guess you missed the part where he admitted, under oath, that he knew she was 13. Look at page 10 of the transcript of his plea.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0928091polanskiplea1.html

MR. GUNSON: On March 10th, 1977, the day you had sexual intercourse with the complaining witness, how old did you believe her to be?

THE DEFENDANT (POLANSKI): She was 13.

MR. GUNSON: Did you understand that she was 13 on March 10th, 1977, when you had sexual intercourse with her?

THE DEFENDANT (POLANSKI): Yes.

By: Margo

Margo — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:14:02 +0000

Turns out the film featured a big bunch of lies:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/retired-prosecutor-hbo-roman-polanski-case.html

By: Margo

Margo — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:11:51 +0000

I hope Rat-ner includes the latest update on the 1st documentary:

RETIRED PROSECUTOR SAYS HE LIED ABOUT POLANSKI CASE

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/retired-prosecutor-hbo-roman-polanski-case.html

The on-camera statements by David Wells in “Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired” were seized upon by Polanski’s defense attorneys, who say in court documents that Superior Court Judge Laurence J. Rittenband and Wells engaged in misconduct by improperly discussing the 1977 case behind closed doors.

Wells, who at the time of the alleged misconduct was not the assigned prosecutor on the case, claimed in the film that he spoke to Rittenband before sentencing and told the judge that Polanski deserved prison time.

He claimed that he suggested a way that the judge could sentence the director to prison by sending him to Chino State Prison for a 90-day “diagnostic testing,” despite a probation officer’s recommendation that Polanski serve no time behind bars.

“That was not true,” Wells told The Times today during a brief interview. “I like to speak of it as an inept statement, but the reality is that it was a lie.”

Wells, 71, said that he made up the story, believing that the documentary would never been shown in the United States. The film was broadcast on HBO.

In January, Wells told The Times that he regretted making the statements but never said they were untrue. Rittenband died in 1993. Wells said today that he notified the district attorney’s office several months ago that he had lied during the film and apologized for his actions.

He said he decided to make the announcement public after the weekend arrest of Polanski, who fled Los Angeles on the eve of sentencing after pleading guilty to sexual intercourse with a minor.

“Why am I owning up to it now? If Polanski does come back, that’s going to be an issue as to whether he can withdraw the plea,” Wells said.

By: Psion

Psion — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:49:25 +0000

This is a perfect example of psychological egoism at work here. The supporters, especially the Parisian elite, really don’t care about Polanksi. They care about what he gives them. It’s purely self-interest on their part.

They consider him an artist and artists inspire and entertain, and that is valuable for his supporters. If he were a homeless man who contributed zero to the arts, would they even care. So you see, it’s not about the man, it about what he can do for them. Period.

I’d like to add Judge Rittenband should have never accepted a plea bargain simply because Polanski is a great director. He should be prosecuted to full extent of the law, which I understand for him may only be 16 months of jail time. That’s baloney but at least it’s the maximum.

Honestly, they should lock his “short eyes” with the rest of the prison population but then we’d lose a famous director for sure. Give me a break!