|
It now appears unlikely that the misconduct allegations raised by Polanski's legal team will ever be addressed. The attorneys have said the original judge handling Polanski's case acted improperly by consulting with a prosecutor who was not assigned to the matter on sentencing issues. The judge also reneged on a sentencing deal, the attorneys have repeatedly contended. Other courts have cited the strong likelihood that Polanski's case, filed in 1977, was mishandled. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza, who has recently presided over the case, said during a hearing last year that he believed there was evidence of "substantial misconduct." Months later, a three justice panel of a California appeals court also cited the likelihood that there had been misconduct by the judge who originally handled Polanski's case and a prosecutor assigned to his courtroom. In their written ruling, the justices made their case that Polanski's treatment by the Los Angeles judicial system had to be taken into serious consideration. "Fundamental fairness and justice in our criminal justice system are far more important than the conviction and sentence of any one individual," the court wrote last year. Despite misgivings about Polanski's treatment, none of the courts have ordered a hearing to determine whether the director's case was mishandled. Such a ruling could lead to an outright dismissal of the charges against the director. "Polanski got away with a lot, but it's not all black and white," said Loyola Law School professor Stan Goldman. "I don't see the D.A. rushing to investigate the very palpable evidence of misconduct in the original case. And the victim said they were hurting her every time they brought this up. So there are many shades of gray." Jean Rosenbluth, a former federal prosecutor who has handled extradition cases, said Cooley's attorneys risked harming themselves in future extradition cases if they agreed to a hearing on the misconduct issues without Polanski's presence. "The D.A. was in a tough spot," said Rosenbluth, now a professor at the University of Southern California's Gould School of Law. "They don't want to set a precedent. "The allegations are very serious," she said. "On the other hand, they were 30 years ago. It's a really, really difficult case
-- just a jumble of competing principles and different circumstances."
[Associated
Press;
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor