The Los Angeles County District Attorney will not object to Roman Polanski’s attempt to get prosecutors to testify in the 1977 case.

The Los Angeles County District Attorney is no longer opposed to sealing the testimony of a former prosecutor that Roman Polanski says will expose a judge’s misconduct, ensuring the closure of the decades-old case against him.

Los Angeles prosecutors on Tuesday withdrew their objection to the release of the tapes of the original prosecutor handling the case, Roger Ganson, who retired in 2002, District Attorney George Gascon said. the hollywood reporter There were “certain irregularities” in the case, starting with possible “judicial misconduct” on the part of the judge who initially oversaw the case.

The decision to seal the deposition could result in Polanski’s right to return to the United States without arrest for his underlying criminal case if the court finds that he wrongfully violated the plea agreement he allegedly signed with prosecutors during a psychiatric evaluation. You could be arrested for fleeing the country.

The 45-year-old case has a complicated history that has long focused on allegations of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct.

Polanski was arrested in 1977 for raping Samantha Gamer, then 13 years old. He agreed to a deal to drop five more serious charges, including drug-induced rape, in exchange for pleading guilty to having unlawful sex with a minor. His lawyers hoped he would not spend time in prison and receive a suspended sentence.

Under the terms of the plea agreement, Polanski was allowed to travel to Europe to finish filming the project. He fled to France after learning that Judge Laurence Rittenband, who originally prosecuted the case in the 1970s and died in 1993, would reverse the deal and imprison him for 50 years, according to court documents. remembering the case. Polanski argued that the judge was too influenced by the prosecutor, the press and fear of public backlash to give him a light sentence.

The court consistently refused to seal Ganson’s testimony. The ministers pointed to bigger problems in the criminal justice system and the precedent that would be set if the case against Polanski, who is at large, were dropped. The latest request to open Ganson’s testimony came from freelance journalists Sam Wasson and William Rempel, who say their intention is to test the integrity of the courts.

In a letter sent Tuesday to the appeals court, Gascon’s office said it was “in the interests of justice” to seal Ganson’s request. Although Gascon was initially opposed to this because it appeared that Polanski was trying to play the court, he acknowledged that the petitioners in this case are journalists with interests different from Polanski’s.

“As this court also noted, prosecutors have a broader role in the criminal justice system as guardians of systemic integrity,” the statement said. “The Polanski case tested the judicial system and the set of interests that people must take into account when prosecuting a case.”

The Polanski case is one of the longest in the state’s criminal history. Gascon argued that sealing should not be allowed forever, especially since sealing procedures are intended to protect vulnerable witnesses. According to him, that concern no longer exists in this case. He also emphasized that the public has the right to know and investigate alleged misconduct by judges and prosecutors.

According to Gascon, the plea bargain agreement between Polanski and the prosecutors could be violated. It claimed to be “a reversal of the original agreement”.

“He’s already done some time,” Gascon said. “As I recall, the agreement stated that this would be the maximum time I would have to comply with the conduct.”

Diana Terán, director of prosecution support operations, noted that “many of the negotiations were carried out in front of a judge without a transcript.”

When the prosecutor’s office again objected to the change, it argued that there was no First Amendment right of disclosure because the testimony was not used to resolve Polanski’s main case. Gascón said he changed his office’s position after Terán told him there may have been judicial and prosecutorial misconduct. If there was any wrongdoing on the part of prosecutors, he said, he would open an investigation and “be aggressive with our own process.”

Neither the district attorney’s office nor Polanski know what Gunson said during the deposition.

Allegations of wrongdoing by judges and prosecutors emerged from a 2008 documentary Roman Polanx: Wanted and Wanted. In the film, director Marina Zenovic explored the potentially inappropriate contact between Rittenband and a deputy district attorney that led to the Polanski case. Her lawyers argued that the MP, David Wells, was independently advising the judge on how to proceed with the case. Wells said in the documentary that he was “in the loop about just about everything that was going on” and described consulting the judge about the sentence. He remembers Rittenband telling him, “Look, I don’t know anything about criminal law, I don’t want to. Don’t put me on appeal again. Do what you want, but don’t take me back.”

In 2014, the email obtained by the domestic court The New York Times newspaper His response to the documentary also points to misconduct by other court officials. In a message, Judge Larry P. Fiedler said he had no choice but to pursue the case against Polanski. He expressed his fear of the public’s reaction. “With the law on his side because of Rittenband’s behavior, I was pretty sure it would be a toast if I came back and my career was over,” Fiedler wrote to the court’s public information officer on June 9, 2008.

A state appeals court that considered allowing Gunson’s testimony in 2010 said it was “deeply concerned that the lower court failed to address allegations of misconduct.” A panel of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that “fundamental fairness and justice in our criminal justice system far outweigh the conviction and sentence of any individual.”

The player voted to seal the testimony to settle the longstanding case.

“Our justice system requires that all those accused, accused or convicted of a crime are treated fairly and have their rights fully respected,” he said. THR. “The publication of this testimonial is a long-awaited step in that direction. Justice must try to find the truth in every case.”

When asked about Polanski’s possible sentence, he said, “I was giving him the prison sentence that should have been served and what he was originally promised.”

A representative for Polanski, head of the Los Angeles Superior Court, and Bart Dalton, an attorney, did not respond to requests for comment. Wells, now retired, could not be reached for comment.