Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Polanski: The Extradition Question Again



Poland Revives Effort to Extradite Roman Polanski
By SEWELL CHAN and JOANNA BERENDTMAY 31, 2016

LONDON — The Polish government said on Tuesday that it would revive an effort to extradite the filmmaker Roman Polanski, whom the American authorities have wanted for decades, after he fled over a 1977 conviction for having sex with a 13-year-old girl.

The announcement is the latest twist in a long-running legal battle that, at least in Poland, seemed to have ended.

On Oct. 30, a judge in Krakow, Poland, ruled that turning over Mr. Polanski would be an "obviously unlawful" deprivation of liberty and that the state of California was unlikely to provide humane conditions of confinement for the filmmaker, who is 82. The next month, the Krakow prosecutor's office said it would abide by the judge's ruling.

But in a statement on Tuesday, Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro, who is also Poland's chief prosecutor, said he had decided to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, calling the trial judge's decision a "serious breach" of the extradition agreement between the United States and Poland.

Mr. Ziobro did not cite the judge, Dariusz Mazur, by name, but he said the judge had "assessed the gathered evidence in a biased and selective way." Mr. Ziobro added that Mr. Polanski's crimes were subject to a statute of limitations in the United States.

The justice minister also said he disagreed with the judge's decision that Mr. Polanski had effectively already been punished. Mr. Polanski spent 42 days in jail before fleeing the United States in 1978, and he was held in Switzerland from 2009 to 2010, before the Swiss government declined to extradite him.

The detention in Switzerland was "a consequence of his escape abroad from American justice and avoiding criminal liability, not a punishment for a crime of which he is accused," the minister said.

Mr. Ziobro said he also found "incomprehensible" the Krakow judge's comments that Mr. Polanski would face inhumane or degrading treatment if extradited to the United States.

The practical implications for the filmmaker, who holds dual French and Polish citizenship, were not clear.

Mr. Polanski has been working on a film in Poland about Alfred Dreyfus, a French Army captain who was wrongly convicted of spying for Germany in 1894. Last week, Mr. Polanski appeared at a news conference in Katowice, Poland, with the French composer Alexandre Desplat, who has written the scores for several of Mr. Polanski's films.

Jan Olszewski, a lawyer for Mr. Polanski, told the Polish television network TVN24 that the announcement was not a surprise. "We had been expecting the minister to do it," he said.

"We are not pondering here the question of whether Polanski is guilty or not — the judge was very clear in this regard," he added. "We are discussing whether Roman Polanski can be extradited. These are two different things."

Several institutional and political changes have occurred in Poland since the Krakow court's ruling. In November, a government led by the right-wing Law and Justice Party, which swept parliamentary elections, took office.

The party has moved Poland to the right and taken steps to curb judicial and news media independence, alarming European Union leaders, who say the shift might violate the democratic norms of the 28-nation bloc.

The party is known for its law-and-order approach, and for its appeal to Roman Catholic and nationalist voters.

Mr. Ziobro, who became justice minister in November, has consolidated power, and regional prosecutors like the one in Krakow now report to him.

In his statement, Mr. Ziobro suggested that his decision was not politically motivated. He noted that his predecessor as chief prosecutor, Andrzej Seremet, requested a review of the Krakow court's ruling in December, with an eye toward a possible appeal.

Mr. Polanski was arrested in 1977 on charges that included the rape of a teenage girl at the home of the actor Jack Nicholson.

He fled the United States the next year on the eve of sentencing, after learning that the trial judge in California, Laurence J. Rittenband, had decided to revise a plan to limit his sentence to a 90-day psychiatric evaluation, a portion of which Mr. Polanski had already served in a state prison.

In 2009, a California appeals court panel suggested that Mr. Polanski could be sentenced in absentia, opening the way to a possible resolution of the standoff.

Under that proposal, Mr. Polanski would be sentenced to time served, but the plan was rejected by the Los Angeles County Superior Court.

After the unsuccessful effort to have Mr. Polanski extradited from Switzerland, where he was arrested while at a film festival, the United States Department of Justice asked Poland in December 2014 for help in extraditing Mr. Polanski.

Mr. Ziobro, in his statement on Tuesday, took pains to recite the serious crimes for which Mr. Polanski was convicted, including sex with the 13-year-old, who was under the influence of alcohol and methaqualone, a sedative.

In a 2013 memoir, the victim, Samantha Geimer, said she had forgiven Mr. Polanski and moved on with her life.

During the court proceedings in Krakow, two of Mr. Polanski's defense lawyers, Mr. Olszewski and Jerzy Stachowicz, repeatedly cited the 2008 documentary "Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired," which suggested prosecutorial overreach and judicial misconduct by officials in the United States.

They argued that extraditing Mr. Polanski would violate the European Convention on Human Right and his right to a fair trial.





51 comments:

Robert Hendrickson said...

"and the state of California was unlikely to provide humane conditions of confinement for the filmmaker, who is 82."

I've WAITED decades to hear those relevant words: NOW, come Black people, IF you really THINK "Black Lives Matter" - as much as an Academy Award WINNING filmmaker - BERN those Hell-Holes (prisons) down !

grimtraveller said...

Just out of interest, what would you do if they actually did ?

Logan said...

Pretty much the same ol' same ol' with polanski's legal issues it seems...

Logan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
wayward said...

Cf. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attica_Prison_riot
Pls see boxed quote by LD from 1971.
Pls note GT in re: RH's comment/query/challenge.


(NB: Apologizes if this comment posts numerous times, issues with browsers and touchpad).

Farflung said...

The older I get, the less acceptable this crime becomes. The explanations appear to be straight from the pedophiles handbook of "why it's OK to do this."

It's been a long time.

I'm working on a new film.

I've received many awards.

I'm old.

The prisons in the US are cruel. (as opposed to whoms?)

She wanted it.

She doesn't care about the crime. (which opens the door to the rape of the mentally unstable)

But he made some good movies, so he should be allowed to sodomize, or kill a few lessor citizens, because 'Rosemary's baby' was such a hit.

Wealth and fame isn't enough, and us ordinary folk OWE such people more. Even if you have never seen one of his flicks.

Robert C said...

It goes down something like this ....

She's 14 with 'advanced' physical development like a Lolita (by all accounts). She's found a svengali who might further her career. All signs are 'yes' except that final 'no'. He's a lonely horny guy, doesn't check ID's, has power and control, sees an opportunity without benefit of hindsight, thinks no means yes because it looked like yes all along. In the END (pun intended) he's apologized profusely and paid her cash damages, she's said she's now good with it all.

Meanwhile on the side the age of consent in the US is 18. In the UK it's 16. In the rest of the world it varies including most of it no age consent. In the US one is legally able to kill for their country at 18, have a beer at 21, in some States now have a smoke at 21. Historically for thousands of years women married at puberty, were 'promised' before then. Of course the life expectancy was about 35 years up until the last couple of hundred so people has to get rolling early.

But it's still The Law !!! How much taxpayer money has been spent trying to rope this guy in ? Should he pay the same as the average Jill & Joe for same ? What is fair and reasonable ? Are his attempts to make right and her forgiveness enough ?

I leave it to you, the jury, to decide this matter .... I'm going out for a beer 'cause I'm a zillion years old and have a right, dammit..

secret mutilator said...

10/10, would stick it in, again. - Roman

Robert Hendrickson said...

OMG Grim: You didn't know "BERN" is the nickname of our "socialist" Presidential candidate?

AND you can't "burn" down a prison anyway - it's made of cement.

BUT let's assume the prisons were burnt down. The first thing I would say is: "WOW, I guess 'they' did it." AND then I would begin preparing for a whole NEW world.

Robert Hendrickson said...

Thank you WAYWARD: Encyclopedia Britannica website also says the "Black Muslims" where considered a "political organization" at Attica Prison and NOT allowed to hold religious services.

So NOW I'm THINKING maybe we should consider ALL religious groups "political organizations" and cut-off THEIR tax EXEMPT status. I mean IF the conservative religious RIGHT is NOT a political organization, just what the fuck is it ?

BTW: For you historians: The Reverand Billy Graham actually ignited the "religious RIGHT" and its WAR against non-believers. Soon they infected then US President Esienhower and that organization actually garnered enough Political Power to make or break a US President, BUT where's the "political" connection in that?

grimtraveller said...

Robert Hendrickson said...

OMG Grim: You didn't know "BERN" is the nickname of our "socialist" Presidential candidate?

No. But had I done so, I was still curious as to what you'd've done.

Robert C said...

I like "you'd've". I haven't seen that used in a long time.

ColScott said...

Robert C

Conveniently left out of every discussion

1- Polanski served the sentence agreed to with a judge. When it became clear the fucking judge was going to alter the sentence because of a need for publicity he said "fuck no" and left. It has been agreed even by the then prosecutor that the Judge was wrong

2- The victim is so over it it is beyond over. So why beat this drum any longer?

Robert Hendrickson said...

YES Farflung: it certainly seems like we ALL are more sensitive NOW to the RAPE of children.

Just look at the Bill Cosby case(s) and HIM now being prosecuted for shit many of Hollywood's elite have been doing for ages.

BUT the CRIME is actually against the "state," so IF the "victim" later changes her tune (swears under oath that SHE maliciously had the "perp" arrested,) maybe SHE should PAY for HER crime.

Matt said...

Col, Polanski served no sentence. He only agreed to a plea bargain which BTW, judges are not bound to anything until they slam the gavel. They can change their minds any time they want, including agreed-to pleas. The judge wasn't "wrong". He just changed his mind.

Polanski has not had his day in a US Court yet. It doesn't matter what the victim says. A crime is a crime and US courts do not need anyone to press charges if the DA decides to move forward.

Let him have his day in court.


DebS said...

In a sense Polanski did serve a sentence, he spent X number of days being evaluated which as per a previous agreement was to be his sentence. Polanski did plead guilty to sex with a minor so really no day in court necessary. What is at issue is that Polanski did not show up for his formal sentencing. The reason being that he learned the judge changed his mind about letting Polanski off with time served, the evaluation.

The statute of limitations ran out on the sex with a minor charge long ago but the failure to show up for formal sentencing has no statue of limitation therefore he can seemingly be screwed with forever by the various agencies, be it the LA DA's office or Poland and the sudden apparent reversal of their own ruling on Polanski's extradition to the US.

DebS said...

There are some documents online regarding this case. They are at a pro-Polanski site but if you just read the official documents you won't run the risk of being overly annoyed.

The first few pages are Grand Jury testimony by the doctor who examined Samantha in the emergency room the night of the incident. Read these pages closely, it is my opinion that Samantha was not anally violated, if she was, she was experienced because there was no evidence of penetration.

There are three pages of the probation report where it does say on the first page that Polanski plead guilty.

The remaining pages are letters from Samantha.

http://polanski-oddmanout.blogspot.com/p/documents-of-case_25.html

Farflung said...

The age of consent in more than half of the US is 16. Several states are 17, with California at 18.

Hard to believe I could "legally" troll a high school parking lot in Nevada for a lil sumtin, sumptin. Creepy as hell, but legal.

The aforementioned rationalizations allow a step-daddy with four daughters in waiting (being groomed), to be violated because they wanted it, weren't blood related, wanted to please daddy, and on, and on.

I'm baffled by the default selection of the lowest denominator, as a way to establish fair treatment.

Well OK then. The Gov of Mississippi pardoned hundreds of murderers, who worked in the mansion. One was a woman who killed her spouse, released after 2 years, 9 months. So for now on, when a spouse is murdered, it would be fair to make that the defacto sentence.

Hmmm... Get a divorce and pay alimony for life... Or blow her away and be done in 33 months.

That mass shooter in Sweden (?), killed around 20 people, and got 10 years? Perhaps we should adopt that standard, and reduce our prison population.

Robert C said...

Farflung said --- "The age of consent in more than half of the US is 16. Several states are 17, with California at 18."

The federal age of consent **without restrictions** is 18. States with ages of 16 and 17, as you accurately mentioned, have certain restrictions regarding authority, age-gap, circumstance and degree of mutual consent, etc. It actually gets quite complicated. Convictions are often tough unless circumstances are straight forward without complication which is rarely the case. I'm not talking about rape here, just mutual convivial connections.

My understanding is Polanski's big worry is his case would become a media zoo that could effect the outcome, and he doesn't want to do any time (at his age that may be "it") but might be willing to pay a hefty fine. But without hard guarantees, I doubt he'll surrender.

Maybe if he reaches age 95 he'll say ok, I'm ready for free three square meals a day, lodging and some great cable TV.


Fiddy 8 said...

I saw the documentary *Roman Pokanski: Odd Man Out*. The victim on camera makes it very clear that she desperately does not want any extradition. The documentary was made in 2012.

Robert Hendrickson said...

Maybe this will help provide an understanding of just how crimes and LAW investigations are promoted.

ALL we seem to hear regarding the "Gorilla and the young boy" is that THEY are investigating the parents for possibly causing the DEATH of the Gorilla.

BUT what about the ZOO and its total neglect in providing a SAFE environment for visitors.

The FENCE that is supposed to protect youngsters and adults is absolutely worthless. BUT the "authorities" won't even let YOU see a photo of that. Instead promoting the idea that the parents are somehow responsible.

BUT guess what, there is actually video of ZOO people out trying to repair / alter the "fence" EVIDENCE.

The fence itself would NOT even be acceptable as a second story balcony fence according to the California Los Angeles Building Code. It is only 36" high and any child can crawl through its railing separations. Cal Code demands that NO vertical or horizontal rails can be less than 4" apart. Of course, the subject ZOO is NOT in California, BUT it was inspected by the Federal Inspectors just 2 months ago.

The point being: maybe Charles Manson was "responsible" for the Tate/LaBianca massacre - just as the parents are responsible for THEIR son climbing through the fence and falling into the moat.

THUS, the "establishment" controls what YOU will believe. AND they will always protect their own at the expense of the public. Until YOU understand that it is THEM against US, you will always be living in a dark hole.

Robert Hendrickson said...

I was in court one day and the judge said something that applies to ALL criminal cases and especially HERE. The defendant's attorney was going on and on about how HIS client had NOT been arrested for ANYTHING during a probationary period and how this meant the defendant had changed HIS evil ways and had become a model citizen.

The judge responded with: "what a wonderful JOB Mr. Attorney is doing with representing HIS client, BUT that "how do we know that the defendant didn't actually do many more crimes, BUT didn't get caught."

Of course, this is the foundation of ALL "crime and punishment" principles. In the Polanski case, the actual physical "victim" was a "13' year old girl and maybe she was actually a whore or she and her mother had some kind of a "blackmail" scheme going, BUT the primary principle of arresting and prosecuting the elder pervert is to afford a certain measure of protection for ALL other 13 year old girls in the State of California. Because, it is more than likely, the perp in this case has or will ACT upon HIS attraction of little girls again.

Just look at the Bill Cosby cases(s)

AND hey, just look at the Manson Family case(s) did THEY really END with "Shorty" ?

If YOU know the answer to that question, YOU are more aware than GOD, or THINK you are.

BTW: It was Polanski's attorney WHO actually "screwed HIM" with HIS incompetency (trusting a JUDGE and a Prosecutor for Christ's sake) THEY are LAWYERS ! Kind'a like Polanski trusting a 13 year old girl to keep QUIET.


Farflung said...

Robert,

I agree with the gorilla paradox. According to the zoo, 1.5 million people visited from 2014 - 2015. If that time frame is a single year, then accotding to the NTSB, 180 of those visitors would have died in car crashes. But let's assume it"s two years, which makes it a more conservative 90 deaths per annum.

Now there's ONE child who (since 1977) managed to fall into a mote, and survived. Let's focus the outrage on a systematically safe zoo, while ignoring highway safety.

Stepping cautiously off soapbox.

HellzBellz said...

@ Farflung Says : ,,That mass shooter in Sweden (?), killed around 20 people, and got 10 years?
Who do you mean excactly Farf ?? I think you talk about the Norwegian guy ?? His name: Anders Breivik. But HE got 25years, and not 10 years. Not if thats enough,I think, I mean, first he killed a few by bombing the gouvernement building in the Norwegian Capitol ,after the bombing he kills youth who are on a holyday-camp,by excecuting them in cold blood,one by one. When finished, the death toll was 77. You should say that this guy realy deserves the Death-Penalty. But here in Europe there is no Death-Sentence anymore.

Owh.....and about Polanski: Give him to USA, and make him Charlies celmate....

Farflung said...

Hellz,

Thanks for calling me out on that.

You've got the right (way right) guy. He killed 77, and injured 319 people. He was sentenced to 21 years (3.27 months @ murder), with a mind boggling minimum of 10 years (47 days @ murder).

Life is truly cheap at that schedule.

Matt said...

And LVH I'd at 47 and counting for stabbing a corpse.

DebS said...

And Bill Nelson got probation for diddling 2 girls under the age of 12.

The boy wonder said...

That's the whacky world of the judiciary for you, ahem " no sense makes sense ".

starviego said...

I fantasize about RP becoming a cellie with CM, and being a fly on the wall, listening to the conversation. Maybe they'd talk about all the young loves they'd had. Slick Willie would dig it.

Robert Hendrickson said...

This relates directly to the MANSON Family mystique.

ZOOs of late have been altering THEIR "dangerous" animal exhibits in order to provide a MORE realistic experience, which in layman's terms means THEY have been re-designing the barriers specifically to give the visitors a MORE scary feeling while they are fixated on the "very' dangerous exhibits.

It's kind'a like the roller-coaster syndrome. It's like most folks won't pay to SEE the blue 'birds' BUT a razor-back monster can be a big draw IF you can be made to feel 'vulnerable.'

Same with movies and definitely the case with human "monsters" like Charles Manson.

I'd love to represent the "mother" of the little boy in court, especially when THEY sign the deed to the ZOO over to HER. BUT wait, ZOOs are regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, so maybe this is another Obama / Hillary screw-up.

Robert Hendrickson said...

46 years ago East LA was on fire along with the American Flag torched and the Mexican Flag waving proudly. That's right, and YOU can SEE it today right from your DVD player. The movies are called "MANSON" and "Inside the MANSON Gang."

BUT don't THINK the above mentioned has anything to do with TODAY - cause that would make sense.

There are a few differences, today they throw "water" bottles and back then hey threw 'beer' bottles. What a difference a 5 cent deposit can make. NOW the "establishment" can gather up all the plastic water bottles and make $ money $ off the revolution.

BERN Baby, BERN !


ziggyosterberg said...


@joseph esposito - Hey Joe, where you going with that hexaphonic gun in your hand?

Little House On The Prairie was an awesome show. They don't make shows like that anymore. Michael Landon's hair should be in the Smithsonian, if it isn't already.

Trump or Manson are good choices for Prez, but have you considered Max Frost and Chatsworth Charlie?

Donald Trump has given them his endorsement.

ziggyosterberg said...


Where did Joe goe?

Panamint Patty said...

He's not allowed here

grimtraveller said...

Matt said...

And LVH.......at 47 and counting for stabbing a corpse

I think she genuinely thought at the time that Rosemary LaBianca was dead before she began stabbing. The medical evidence actually sank her theory way back in the day though. She says she stabbed the body 14 to 16 times {depending on when she's said it} but only 13 of the stab wounds were after death so even if all the post mortem wounds were accountable to Leslie, there is still at least one and possibly three that aren't.


Farflung said...


He killed 77, and injured 319 people. He was sentenced to 21 years (3.27 months @ murder), with a mind boggling minimum of 10 years (47 days @ murder).

Life is truly cheap at that schedule


Norway's sentencing laws on murder seem almost incomprehensible at first glance. Murderers don't do more than 20 years and are usually out quite a bit before that time, 14 to 15 years.
But they do have this indeterminate sentence that in theory can add up to life imprisonment if the murderer is still considered as dangerous at the end of their sentence. It gets reviewed every five years. The murderer can apply for parole once a year once their minimum time for re~detention has passed and the state has to show why they are considered a danger in order for them to still be kept inside.
Thus far Anders Brevik hasn't been demonstrating any remorse or change in view, quite the opposite actually. Unless he undergoes a real change {or becomes a convincing actor over the years} I suspect the Norwegians will invoke their right to detain him further once his 21 year sentence is up as he's on one of those preventive detention sentences.

ziggyosterberg said...


@Panamint Patty - The inventor of the HEXAPHONIC guitar amplifier is not allowed here? Surely, you jest?

ziggyosterberg said...


Grim, are you planning on seeing the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie this weekend?

HellzBellz said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Hendrickson said...

I woke up to all that "gun control" talk from Obama this morning and I began to THINK:

How would that have stopped Bill Cosby and Roman Polanski from raping girls. Of course, it would NOT have, BUT "drug control" may have. Bill used "drugs to sedate HIS victims and Polanski used 'drugs' to weaken the defenses of HIS victim(s). Without "drugs" THEY would have been reduced to fornicating with donkeys in Tejuana.

AND the NEED for "drugs" has CAUSED countless others to violate the 'peaceful' living experience of so many others.

Maybe our fellow 'stat' bloggers could come-up with some numbers on this.

Like what would the US be like without GUNS vs without illegal DRUGS ?

AND because Child molestation seems to be such a sore spot in the American Spirit, why NOT bring back the good old Lobotomies ? They actually have the 'operation' perfected NOW.

AND for those who THINK Polanski was "cured" after a month of jail, THINK 'again'. ONLY this time actually THINK.

Robert Hendrickson said...

WHAT are the chances of this: Type in search block:

"Professor Laurence Merrick JFK UFO"

orwhut said...

Robert,
I did the search and found the UFO Kennedy information. Is Professor Robert Merrick related to your former associate?

Robert Hendrickson said...

PLEASE Orwhut: I just found this out morning and I am still cleaning the shit out of MY pants.

Merrick could have been a code name. Nobody EVER knew anything about HIM, except that HE was an "Isreali." I once met a relative visting and staying with Merrick and Merrick couldn't wait for the man to leave.

READ more on the internet, Before JFK died HE asked the CIA about cooperating with the Russians concerning UFO's. AND Area 51 was a CIA Project Base.

Take a day and read all you can about this subject and then realize JFK was murdered, HIS brother was murdered, Merrick was "supposedly" murdered. Merrick had very personal chats with Ronnie Howard and SHE was murdered. Vincent Bugliosi became good friends with Merrick and WIFE Joan and then Merrick was murdered. Then Bugliosi writes a lengthy book declaring Oswald acted alone when HE "supposedly" killed JFK. AND Joan has disappeared, maybe forever.

Of course, EVERYTHING in life is a conspiracy theory.

Did you know Mahammond ALI was the FIRST Black Muslim (joined the nation of Islam) of any note.

orwhut said...

Woops! I should have said Professor Laurence Merrick. So, I take it that you're not even sure Laurence Merrick was your associate's real name. I thought the professor might be his son.

My favorite Ali quote. "I don't want you living with roaches. Wipe 'um out with Decon power."

Robert Hendrickson said...

ORWHUT: Merrick's REAL name from Isreal was "Zev LaHav."

NOW I'm thinking the TATE / Polanski meet for dinner with RFK just before HE was murdered, may NOT be a coincidence.

AND Bugliosi with HIS obsession regarding the Kennedy / Oswald assassination - maybe wasn't a coincidence either.

DebS said...

According to Social Security records and naturalization records Merrick' name was Zeev Lahav but his headstone spells his first name Zev.

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=9032

There is an additional last name attributed to Merrick on his Social Security record. I know this record is for Merrick because the dates of birth and death jibe with other records.


Name:
Zeev Lahav
[Zeev Schneidnesser]

SSN:
085301633

Gender:
Male

Race:
White

Birth Date:
22 Apr 1926

Birth Place:
Petah Tiqva, Israel

Death Date:
Jan 1977

Father:
Ben Z Lahav

Mother:
Zippora Raskin

Type of Claim:
Original SSN.

Notes:
Jul 1954: Name listed as ZEEV LAHAV

Farflung said...

Grim, DebS,

I believe you two could solidify the murder of little Sherrice Iverson, in Primm, Nevada.

Her father wanted to gamble, and was willing to accept a six pack, and $100 for her disappearance. So that's good.

Then David Cash witnessed Jeremy Strohmeyer strangle the child in a womens bathroom stall... And faced NO charges.

Are you your brothers (sisters) keeper? No...yes ...um whatever.

orwhut said...

I wonder whether Merrick borrowed his last name from Elephant Man?

ziggyosterberg said...


Deb has amazing research skills.

@orwhut - Just a guess here, but he may have taken "Laurence" from Laurence Olivier, and "Merrick" from Broadway producer David Merrick.

@Robert Hendrickson - Zev/Larry sounded like a drill instructor barking questions/commands at Ronnie Howard in "Inside the Manson Gang". Is that the way he talked to students at his theatre school, and to people in general? It's a dickheaded way to communicate, but a good way to piss off someone who is already mentally unbalanced.

orwhut said...

Ziggy,
That guess is as good as mine. Elephant Man was the only other Merrick I could remember.

Robert Hendrickson said...

ZIGGY got a BINGO: David Merrick is correct, at least per educated rumor, BUT Ziggy is the FIRST person ever to comment on Merrick's "tactic" to get R. Howard to talk about the COPS who would likely eventually KILL her.

OFF-camera Ronnie would "say-it" but as soon as the camera was turned on she would clam-up.

It was very frustrating, because "film" was NOT cheap.

The REAL problem became Merrick's BIG mouth. Because a few of us KNEW who the corrupt KILLER cops were. I'm sure Merrick mentioned it to Bugliosi and of course HE would mention it to the COPS.
Especially because IF Merrick was out of the way HE could move on Joan. And THEY remained in close contact through out the years.

BTW; OBAMA is pardoning a whole lot of NON-violent drug offenders from prison. AND I'm wondering how someone can ever associate 'drug abuse" with NON-violence. Maybe a "drug distributor" doesn't actually "physically" KILL someone, BUT hey - isn't that like the Bernard Crow / Charlie Manson AFFAIR. "Nobody got KILLED, so it be cool Jack !

Farflung said...

Most prison terms (95-97 percent) are the result of plea bargains. What did the person do who got a "non-violent" drug conviction? Murder, rape, armed robbery, which was reduced for a guilty plea of a lessor offense? I don't know, but I wouldn't take most convictions at face value.