http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-10-02/the-lost-polanski-transcripts/

Here are a few excerpts from the article:

The idea that Roman Polanski was done in by an unscrupulous judge is a myth…Ever since he fled Los Angeles for Europe, Roman Polanski and his defenders have been putting out a story: he had to run because Judge Laurence Rittenband, after having promised not to impose any jail time past a 42-day psychiatric evaluation for having sex with a 13-year-old girl, had changed his mind and intended send him to state prison. It’s a myth.
How do I know this? From Roman Polanski.

“What is the maximum sentence for unlawful sexual intercourse?” asked the prosecutor.

“It’s one to fifteen – twenty years in State Prison,” responded Polanski.

First, Gunson read out the litany of charges Polanski initially faced:

“Mr. Polanski, you are charged in Information A-334139 with the crimes of Furnishing Drugs to a Minor, Lewd or Lascivious Acts upon a Child under 14 year of Age, Unlawful Sexual Intercourse, Rape by Use of Drugs, Perversion, and Sodomy, all felonies committed on or about March 10th, 1977.”

The single crime Polanski pled guilty to, unlawful sexual intercourse, was the lightest of the charges filed against him. But even so, because the victim was so young, the judge had the power to require Polanski to register as a sex offender, something Gunson was quick to remind the director.

“Mr. Polanski, because this offense involved a girl under the age of 14, it is mandatory that MDSO proceedings be instituted. MDSO means Mentally Disordered Sex Offender. If you are found to be an MDSO, you would have to register that fact with the law enforcement officer of the community in which you resided.”

Gunson then went on to ask: “….on March 10, 1977, the day you had sexual intercourse with the complaining witness, how old did you believe her to be?”

Polanski conferred with his lawyer and then answered: “She was 13.”

Gunson: “Did you understand that she was 13 on March 10, 1977, when you had sexual intercourse with her?”
Again, Polanski conferred with his lawyer, then answered: “Yes.”

So Polanski knew he faced the possibility of becoming a registered sex offender and admitted in open court that he was subject to that penalty because he knowingly had sexual contact with a girl who was 13 years old.
He also knew the sentence Polanski he was facing: “What is the maximum sentence for unlawful sexual intercourse?” asked Gunson.

“It’s one to fifteen—twenty years in State Prison,” responded Polanski.

“Do you understand it is also possible that you could be placed on probation, with or without being required to serve up to one year in the County Jail?” the prosecutor next asked

“Yes,” responded Polanski.

Your Friend
Ken

Melissa

If you google up “Where is” the Left, Hollywood, feminists etc and set the dates up for the Clinton Years you will find that this was the sad, squealing lament of those who thought Juanita Broaderick, raped by Clinton years ago, should have her day in media now even though she never pursued a day in court then. What was the response from Democrats, Leftists, Hollywoodies etc? Yawns? Oh man! She would WISH for yawns! No, she was attacked, reviled and insulted. Not insulted nearly so much as Paula Jones it must be said. After all, Ms Jones was merely summoned by Governor Clinton, her boss, and instructed to felate his exposed penis. THAT bitch had it comin’!

As nauseating as Polanski is, he is at least no hypocrite; no situtional moralist he. He likes to fuck little girls and what’s wrong with that? To hear from the great enablers of the “Great President TM” in his depredations is truly horrifying. Can anyone explain why Polanski should be hanged while Clinton should be exonerated? It should be obvious but perhaps it should be said, you can’t use any Whoopi-isms or Wngeroids, else the whole enterprise comes acropper. Let’s hear it; how can anyone justify Clinton without freeing Polanski? Anyone? Buehler? Buehler?

http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b146725_kirstie_alley_on_roman_polanski_dont.html?utm_source=eonline&utm_medium=rssfeeds&utm_campaign=netzero_celebnews

France is dropping its public support for Polanski. See BBC website

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8283707.stm

What the…? It’s rape.

And he needs to have his day in court. If the result is the book is closed, as the victim has requested, so be it, but we all, as average people living under the law, need to see that the law applies to all people. He needs to go to court.

- The A&E industry didn’t close rank around RP
- No statements by French Cultural Ministers
- No petitions signed by an international Who’s Who
- No Debra Winger crying foul
- Or Whoopi (rape-rape)
- What would that look like
- What are these people afraid of
- By not supporting him
- Never being invited for Apres Ski ever again
- Or partying with him in Cannes
- Not appearing in any of his future productions
- Getting no love from Roman

What If

Why do you put “artist” in quotes, then?

“He could have put this thing behind him decades ago.”

Well, almost. The judge on this case somehow messed it up. Please watch the documentary: “Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired” (see: http://www.newsweek.com/id/138382)

Despite all that – yes he raped the girl, yes he fled the states to avoid prison.