Associate Producer of Polanski Documentary Spams This Blog With Multiple Anonymous Comments Attacking Me (UPDATED With More Evidence) (UPDATED With Admission and Apology)
[UPDATE 10-4-09 at 9:53 p.m.: Ms. Sullivan has identified herself as the author of the post and apologized personally to me. She stresses that she was writing in a private capacity — without the knowledge of her former production team. She has also apologized to the producers for any embarrassment or misunderstanding caused. I ask my commenters to refrain from posting her picture, insulting her, or other similar behavior. — Patterico]
That’s certainly what the evidence suggests to me. Looks like I touched a nerve, huh?
Tonight the following comment started to appear on every single post I have written about Roman Polanski. The commenter goes by the name of “kitty kat.” I will bold the more insulting and/or inaccurate passages, to make sure you don’t lose them in all the illiterate ranting and raving:
Dear Mr. Frey
Deputy District DA in Los Angeles? Where do you find the free time…to blog about Polanski… or IS this little recreation…. all part of the job? Big Election year coming up, right?
Shouldn’t you be making sure justice is served through a just system? Justice for the victim and Polanski cannot be won under a corrupt justice system then and now.
I believe, two kinds of people when it comes to crime and punishment. There are those who understand that we are a nation of laws, and that our system does not serve vengeance but justice. And those who are like something out of the Old Testament, eye for an eye righteous, lying, arrogant fumers. I like to divide these groups into educated and ignorant
David Wells did not lie in the documentary. The interview was done years ago according to the director. He signed a release. The film premiered in 2008 worldwide. No word from Wells on his big lie until now? Me thinks Cooley is worried he will not get elected again. Clearly the LAJD has no respect for its own system but as we know corruption breeds corruption. The fact that the majority of the PRESS is IGNORING a corrupt judge in 1977 and now a corrupt DA speaks volumes. The question is how much are you paying David Wells or at least tell us what he’s getting of it or were threats involved?
RE: Probation Transcripts: So many case facts have been spinned by your pal Marcia Clark, I cannot even begin to list them all. However the documentary: Roman Polanski: Wanted & Desired interviews MAJOR participants from the case and witnesses to Rittenband’s judicial misconduct who outline this heinous conduct in the film. How interesting that the PRESS also FAILS to mention that Rittenband asked a news reporter (as well as David Wells ) “What he should do with Polanski?” Ethics Violation…big time.
Also, please note that David Wells provided way too many SPECIFIC details. Lying? I don’t think so…. Let’s see if his current statement will hold up under a polygraph test, shall we?
Also, how interesting that the prosecutor Roger Gunson, says in the film ( paraphrase ) ” had he been in Polanski’s shoes, he would have fled as well.” Yes, the highly respected MORMON PROSECUTOR!!!!. The Judicial misconduct was indeed….that bad…. Oh and did I mention the 2 PRETEND hearings that Rittenband concocted? The list of misconduct and ethics violations goes on and on and on.
How interesting that the PRESS neglects to mention… that Rittenband was removed from the case.
The LAJD says its been trying to get Polanski for 30 years. When questioned, they immediately scramble to produce a one page press release which they post on their website with some dates and blurbs over the years…. Anybody can write a press release. Let’s see the original papers.
Seems evident that a corrupt justice department and a biased sensationalist News Media walk hand in hand these days… After all, an election year is coming up! Is it not?
No wonder Polanski fled. Anyone in their right mind would and should.
The question is… how can you can you condemn his corruption when you cannot condemn your own. What type of justice is corruption, dishonesty and finally hypocrisy ? It is he who thinks they are above the law, not Mr. Polanski.
I generally don’t allow comments that attack me professionally based on what I blog, and I deleted several iterations of the exact comment, and banned the user. But the comments kept appearing in moderation. (Since I’m posting on this now, I have decided to approve a handful of them. You can read the comment here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. That’s eight instances of the same comment — and I deleted at least as many instances of the same comment, if not more.)
The fervor with which this person spammed each and every comment thread with this comment led me to wonder whether “kitty kat” might not have some personal stake in all this. So I decided to investigate . . . and the evidence I uncovered points to the conclusion that she is Michelle Sullivan, an associate producer of the Polanski documentary.
Here is a screenshot from my control panel, showing kitty kat’s IP address and e-mail:
[I am removing the screenshot with Ms. Sullivan’s IP address, given that she has admitted posting the comments. I will not remove the other screenshots that show her e-mail, since her e-mail address is already available online — but I ask readers not to send Ms. Sullivan any abusive e-mails. — P]
If you plug that e-mail address into Google you get this page, which associated the e-mail address with one Michelle Sullivan of Perpetual Motion Films:
Please e-mail me at email@example.com
Many thanks for any thoughts in advance,
Perpetual Motion Films
Los Angeles, CA
And a Google search for “Perpetual Motion Films” “Michelle Sullivan” Polanski yields one result and one result only: Ms. Sullivan’s LinkedIn profile, where we can see that she was an associate producer of the Polanski documentary “Wanted and Desired”:
Why, hello, “kitty kat”!
We need not rely on a single web page to tie in the above e-mail address to Ms. Sullivan. Her LinkedIn page refers to a Website called “Violet Planet.”
That site turns out to be a Blogspot-hosted blog with predictably liberal opinions such as this anti-Bush screed. Plugging the e-mail address by itself into Google reveals other connections to Ms. Sullivan, such as this message at a Greta Garbo fan site:
Sure enough, Ms. Sullivan’s imdb.com lists among her credits her stint as Greta Garbo, and her work on the Polanski documentary.
[UPDATE: I forgot this page, which also associates kitty kat’s e-mail with the VioletPlanet site. This has some good anti-Bush and anti-PUMA screeching.]
It’s perfectly clear that the e-mail address used by “kitty kat” is the e-mail associated with an associate producer of the Polanski documentary. If the commenter isn’t Ms. Sullivan, then it’s a very clever person who knows Ms. Sullivan and is trying to frame her as having left the comment.
Let’s go with the common-sense conclusion: “kitty kat” is Michelle Sullivan, associate producer of the Polanski documentary.
Based on that assumption, I have these responses for Ms. Sullivan:
- No, I have not done any of the Polanski-related blog posts while on the job. While I am a Deputy District Attorney, I blog on my own time and do not speak for my office on this blog.
I do not appreciate your unfounded insinuation that I have blogged on these issues on County time.
- No, I am not writing these posts because I want to get Steve Cooley re-elected. I am writing these posts because I want to contribute to the public’s knowledge of the facts surrounding the Polanski controversy. The documentary that you worked on both added to and distorted the body of knowledge available about the controversy. For example, the documentary was (in my opinion) not clear about the nature of what Polanski actually did, as revealed by the victim’s grand jury testimony. Nor was it clear about the fact that Polanski was not promised anything in his plea deal other than a) dismissal of all charges but the statutory rape charge, and b) that he would be sentenced by the judge after the judge heard counsel’s argument and read the probation report.
I do not appreciate your unfounded insinuations that I am writing these posts for a base political purpose.
- I paid David Wells nothing, despite your suggestions that I did. I did not threaten David Wells, despite your suggestions that I did (“The question is how much are you paying David Wells . . . or were threats involved?”). I do not know David Wells and have never spoken to him in my life.
I do not appreciate your unfounded insinuation that I bribed David Wells.
- I do not know Marcia Clark. I have never met or corresponded with her. Contrary to your claim, she is not my “pal.”
- No, ma’am, I am not corrupt, despite your suggestion to the contrary (“how can you can you condemn his corruption when you cannot condemn your own”).
I do not appreciate your unfounded insinuation that I am corrupt.
As an associate producer of the documentary about Roman Polanski, you do not cover yourself in glory by coming on my blog and spamming a dozen identical anonymous comments that baselessly insinuate that I have a) bribed a witness on this case; b) blogged this issue on County time; c) written these posts to improve Mr. Cooley’s re-election chances; or d) engaged in “corrupt” behavior.
A decent person would apologize to me for all these baseless accusations.
Whether you will, I have no idea.
P.S. If you’re going to come on my blog and criticize me by name, I’d have a lot more respect for you if you used your own real name. Lobbing anonymous insults is kind of chickenshit, in my book.
UPDATE: More evidence that “kitty kat” is Sullivan here. Namely, “kitty kat” spammed the comment at The Daily Beast as well — and then scrubbed it after I reported that evidence indicated “kitty kat” was Michelle Sullivan.
UPDATE x2: See the top of the post for an update with Ms. Sullivan’s admission and apology.