L.A. Times Front Page Headline: Polanski Merely “Accused” of Sexual Assault
I woke up this morning to this headline on the front page of the L.A. Times:
Excuse me? He is more than merely “accused” of unlawful sex with a minor. He pled guilty to it. And, moving on the teaser on the right for Patrick Goldstein’s piece, it will not cost the L.A. District Attorney (for whom I work but do not speak) much to “prosecute” Polanski — because we don’t have to “prosecute” him. We need only represent the People at the sentencing for the charge to which Polanski pled guilty.
Nowhere on the front page does the paper explain to readers that Polanski pled guilty — much less mention that a 13-year-old girl testified to a grand jury that Polanski had provided her with part of a Quaalude and champagne before anally raping her and ejaculating inside her anus. (Excerpts of her testimony are provided in my takedown of Goldstein’s piece.) The article includes some of this information on the back pages that hardly anybody reads — the paper there reveals the drugging, the plea, and a sanitized version of the anal rape (he “forced himself on her”). But those who merely read the front page (and that’s many people, if not most) could be forgiven if they concluded that Polanski has yet to be put on trial.
This has been installment #56,447 in my ongoing series: “Why Nobody Trusts The L.A. Times.”
For some unknown reason, the media has a lot of sympathy for the movie producer but he was given a sweetheart deal 40 years ago when he was allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge of statutory rape.
That charge could be reduced to a misdemeanor, in fact. It is a low-grade felony that does not even require registration as a sex offender.
The media keeps referring to an “arrest warrant.” This is wrong. He has a bench warrant. All we are waiting for is a sentence. How much does that cost?
Alta Bob (e53677) — 9/28/2009 @ 7:20 amAnd here I thought that Chicago was Sodom and Gommoreah.
Dmac (b905fa) — 9/28/2009 @ 7:22 amI would like to get into the face of the publisher, the owner, and the editors of the LA Slimes to ask them why they are so stupid and put out such a shoddy product.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 9/28/2009 @ 7:24 amWhat is the motivation for this paper to softcoat what he did? I’m not suggesting they aren’t, merely at a complete loss to understand the “why” behind such a clear case of journalistic malfeasance.
Steve B (5eacf6) — 9/28/2009 @ 7:25 amWow. Search Google News for “polanski accused”
sierra (dfb2fa) — 9/28/2009 @ 7:29 amIt’s not just LAT. Bucky Hemmer over on Fox teased the story with “Polanski is tied to a child rape over 30 years ago”. The folks at Gates, Immelt and Olberphaaag, including Buchanan, all discussed the “fact” that the victim, now an adult, wasn’t interested in pressing charges.
Mostly the MSM is incompetent and biased. When that is not the case, they are just plain lazy.
Matador (ad4464) — 9/28/2009 @ 7:36 amThese are the kind of people who are friends of the ACLU, who are friends of the Man-Boy Love Association (or whatever).
I’m not surprised the victim wouldn’t want to “press charges” and go through the ordeal of reliving it and testifying again. Good thing she doesn’t have to, the trial is over, good thing she is not the one to decide. Bad thing that people put the importance of saving diddly-squat amount of money, in the overall scheme of things, instead of extraditing a proven pedophile.
Would you trust your children to be babysat by any of these paragons of virtue (spit on ground).
MD in Philly (d4f9fa) — 9/28/2009 @ 7:47 am#4 Steve B:
Good question.
Why are there fan magazines and the like at the grocery checkout stand? I dunno, but somebody buys them, which means to me that somebody identifies with or idolizes the subject of the genre.
IOW, there are freaking nutcases everywhere.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 9/28/2009 @ 7:52 amObama’s first pardon.
vinman (e1d1ce) — 9/28/2009 @ 8:23 amvinman, no, the President cannot pardon state criminal matters.
SPQR (26be8b) — 9/28/2009 @ 8:30 amReally, SPQR?
Huh. Didn’t know that. Thought it was for ANY crime, not just federal ones (though it makes sense now that I think about it).
The more you know.
Rainbow, Star.
Scott Jacobs (in class) (218307) — 9/28/2009 @ 8:36 amAs I recall, he switched his rape method so as to avoid pregnancy. Very thoughtful of him.
Amphipolis (b120ce) — 9/28/2009 @ 8:40 am“[T]he President cannot pardon a state criminal offense.” (More details at the link.)
Abner Gromble (bb5a4d) — 9/28/2009 @ 8:44 amWill the LAT finally sink beneath the waves on the S.S.Polanski?
AD - RtR/OS! (4994e0) — 9/28/2009 @ 8:50 amWe can only hope.
But, in any case, I blame Bush!
I hate to play cynic here, but I wonder how much Polanski’s settlement of the civil suit brought by the victim influenced her decision to not want to see this followed through. In other words, had Polanski not paid up and had run out on that obligation, would she still be so forgiving?
BT (78b929) — 9/28/2009 @ 8:53 amLet’s just hope he is sentenced, and the time is substantial.
Corwin (ea9428) — 9/28/2009 @ 9:00 amHind sight is perfect. Assuming the HBO “documentary” is true as to the conduct of the Judge, all Polanski had to do was go to his sentencing hearing, go to prison, and let his lawyer overturn the sentence because of the Judge’s seemingly outrageous conduct, [again if the film is accurate]. The trial Judge would be out, another in, and a new chance for a short sentence. Punishment done, case closed, turn the page and move on. But no. Polanski chose to flee. Too bad. Now get his butt back here and let’s get back to doing justice.
Mike H. (38ae5a) — 9/28/2009 @ 9:04 amIs Polanski part of ACORN? That would explain why the LAT protects him.
Teflon Dad (90ed9a) — 9/28/2009 @ 9:05 amWell, he is a nut…
Tex Lovera (456ded) — 9/28/2009 @ 9:50 amBa-ZING!
Scott Jacobs (in class) (218307) — 9/28/2009 @ 10:03 amThis has been installment #56,447 in my ongoing series: “Why Nobody Trusts The L.A. Times.”
Really? Or is this hyperbole? Neither answer would surprise me…
JohnW (93b5a1) — 9/28/2009 @ 10:34 amIf POTUS had authority over state criminal matters then there would have been no question that Bush’s order to Texas in the Medellin case would have been legal.
Instead federalism won a battle as it should have.
Soronel Haetir (2b4c2b) — 9/28/2009 @ 10:48 amIt would be higher, but Patterico wisely chose not to look at the paper while vacationing with his family in Switzerland last year. Besides, he works hard at his full time job and has a family to tend to. The LAT is getting off easy…
MD in Philly (d4f9fa) — 9/28/2009 @ 10:53 amIn whitewashing Polanski, the LA Times is a piker compared to the Washington Post:
Polanski, 76, a resident of France who is revered in Europe as a luminary of filmmaking, fled the United States 31 years ago on the eve of a sentencing hearing that was part of a plea bargain in which he acknowledged having sex with a 13-year-old girl in the Los Angeles home of the actor Jack Nicholson.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (4bd2b6) — 9/28/2009 @ 1:46 pmDude, we’re safe now.
Just were can ANYONE score a ‘Lude these days?
Whitehall (e5cbf5) — 9/28/2009 @ 2:27 pmHow does the LAT treat Catholic priests with decades old sex accusations?
Perfectsense (0922fa) — 9/28/2009 @ 3:23 pmIMO, that says a lot about Europe.
Techie (482700) — 9/28/2009 @ 4:04 pmTechie,
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (4bd2b6) — 9/28/2009 @ 4:12 pmAlso, note the description of Polanski merely “having sex” with the girl.
I’ve never said this before and probably never will again, but Eugene Robinson at the WaPo gets it right in tomorrow’s column.
b (df882e) — 9/28/2009 @ 4:40 pm[…] well: No matter what the LA Times would have you believe, he’s not an “accused” child-rapist. He pled guilty. The conviction’s on […]
Hot Air » Blog Archive » Celebrities, diplomats unite behind convicted child-raping degenerate (e2f069) — 9/28/2009 @ 5:50 pm[…] well: No matter what the LA Times would have you believe, he’s not an “accused” child-rapist. […] Read the rest […]
Celebrities, diplomats unite behind convicted child-raping degenerate | Singularity Universe News (c4e404) — 9/28/2009 @ 5:52 pmBradley,
Please give us your view on opinion writers and a conflict of interest (see: Anne Applebaum column on Patterico). Enquiring minds want to know.
Dana (863a65) — 9/28/2009 @ 5:54 pm[…] more I read about this incident, the more I am confused about what is going on here. According to Patterico, he already pleaded guilty thirty years ago, so that what mean that the statute of limitations […]
Roman Polanski’s Plight « Northern Thoughts And Reflections (5c299c) — 9/28/2009 @ 6:24 pmDana,
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 9/28/2009 @ 6:45 pmAt a minimum, the opinion writer’s conflict of interest should be disclosed whenever the conflict arises. If the opinion writer finds this too onerous, said writer should find other things to write about.
Comment by Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. — 9/28/2009 @ 6:45 pm
And that writer’s editor should find someone else to assign stories to, or to accept them from.
AD - RtR/OS! (4994e0) — 9/28/2009 @ 6:55 pmAD – RtR/OS!,
Amendment accepted. I was thinking along those lines as well.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 9/28/2009 @ 7:39 pmNonsense, Bradley, your standards lack all context … you know, all those fluffly words that make ethical rules not apply anymore …
SPQR (26be8b) — 9/28/2009 @ 7:41 pmHe may have never formally entered his plea in court. You can work out and enter a plea agreement before it gets accepted by the judge and becomes official. As far as the law is concerned, you’re merely accused until this happens. I’m surprised anyone has sympathy for him though. What, do celebrities get to drug & rape 13-year-olds for some reason?
Kane (cbd1a7) — 9/28/2009 @ 10:08 pm[…] the duct tape for this one. Allahpundit has the aneurysm-inducing story: Note well: No matter what the LA Times would have you believe, he’s not an “accused” child-rapist. He pled guilty. The conviction’s on the books. All […]
Hollywood Unites Behind Child Rapist | Support Your Local Gunfighter (2711a8) — 9/29/2009 @ 4:02 am[…] but their allies in the MSM. LA Times frontpage subtitle of Roman Polanski’s arrest reads thusly: “The filmmaker, accused of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in 1977, could be […]
Hollyweirdos rally around convicted child rapist Polanski « Crush Liberalism (cffb04) — 9/29/2009 @ 4:47 am[…] Paterrico who works for the Los Angeles County District Attorney notes that all his department has to do is represent the people of California at the sentencing. […]
Watcher of Weasels » Would the Left Defend Roman Polanski if He Were a Priest? (b53008) — 9/29/2009 @ 6:38 amMaybe operatives at the CIA could claim that they raped their al Qaeda prisoners .. oh .. didn’t they sort of rape the prisoners at abu Ghraib prison … and they took pictures, just like Roman Polanski did with the 13 year old.
Now we have the proof that abu Ghraib prison really wasn’t that bad .. they were just trying to do their “Roman Polanski” thing.
Neo (7830e6) — 9/29/2009 @ 8:37 am[…] Patterico takes the L.A. Times to task for their misleading headline, while Reason editor Nick Gillespie […]
Polanski’s Morally Bankrupt Supporters : Conservative Compendium (923bb6) — 9/29/2009 @ 5:13 pm[…] Hot Air, Patterico reports on the Los Angeles Times confusing “accused” with “convicted”: Excuse me? […]
Roman Polanski: Convicted and… Convicted : Zoominac (adb61b) — 9/30/2009 @ 6:55 am[…] Hot Air, Patterico reports on the Los Angeles Times confusing “accused” with “convicted”: Excuse me? […]
Roman Polanski: Convicted and… Convicted - matt_in_fl’s Diary - RedState (8eaf85) — 9/30/2009 @ 6:57 am[…] L.A. Times Front Page Headline: Polanski Merely “Accused” of Sexual Assault […]
Why Don’t The World-Wide Apologists Understand That Polanski Is A Perverted Criminal? « (ae46d6) — 9/30/2009 @ 9:17 amDear 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.
Kitty Kat (4f600a) — 10/3/2009 @ 11:38 pm[…] 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 […]
Patterico’s Pontifications » Associate Producer of Polanski Documentary Spams This Blog With Multiple Anonymous Comments Attacking Me? (e4ab32) — 10/4/2009 @ 1:35 am[…] portions of this comment are identical to the comment that she spammed at my site (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and […]
Patterico’s Pontifications » More Evidence That an Associate Producer of the Polanski Documentary Spammed Anonymous Comments Attacking Me (e4ab32) — 10/4/2009 @ 4:05 pm[…] front-page headline claimed that Polanski had merely been “accused” of the sexual assault — when, in fact, he […]
Patterico's Pontifications » Patterico’s Los Angeles Dog Trainer Year in Review 2009 (e4ab32) — 1/1/2010 @ 10:33 am