EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Charlotte Lewis: Roman Polanski Molested Me When I Was 16

LINDA DEUTSCH   05/14/10 11:47 PM ET   AP

Charlotte Lewis Polanski

LOS ANGELES — Los Angeles County prosecutors have met with a British actress who claims she was sexually abused by director Roman Polanski in his Paris apartment when she was 16 – years before she appeared in one of his movies.

Charlotte Lewis, 42, said Friday that the filmmaker abused her "in the worst possible way" sometime in the 1980s.

Lewis provided no evidence to support her claims, and her attorney, Gloria Allred, did not permit her to answer questions during a news conference in her office.

However, Allred said the woman provided evidence to a police detective and officials from the Los Angeles County district attorney's office. She refused to provide specifics and also refused to answer questions about whether her client's allegations involved drugs or rape.

"Our detectives did conduct the interview but the department has not begun an investigation," said police spokesman Richard French. He did not know when the interview was conducted.

It was unclear what year the alleged assault took place.

"He took advantage of me and I have lived with the effects of his behavior ever since it occurred," said Lewis, reading from a prepared statement at a news conference in her lawyer's office. "All I want is justice."

Allred said that, to her knowledge, no criminal complaint or lawsuit was made in France over the alleged assault.

The duty officer for the French Justice Ministry said late Friday night that he was not aware whether the British actress had filed a complaint in France about her allegation.

A statement released by Polanski's U.S. legal team said his attorneys had no information about the allegations that were made at the press conference "but we do know that our district attorney continues to refuse to provide the Swiss government with accurate and complete information relevant to the extradition issue."

Polanski, the Oscar-winning director of "Rosemary's Baby," "Chinatown" and "The Pianist," is under house arrest at his Swiss chateau in connection with a 33-year-old case.

Polanski was accused of drugging a 13-year-old girl with champagne and part of Quaalude and raping her at Jack Nicholson's house in Los Angeles in 1977. He pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse but fled to France before sentencing and remained a fugitive until Swiss authorities arrested him on Sept. 26 on a U.S. warrant as he arrived in Zurich to receive a lifetime achievement award from a film festival.

Lewis said she came forward because she heard that Polanski was fighting extradition to the United States and "that his legal team is portraying his previous offense against a minor as an isolated instance."

Allred said she doesn't plan any legal action right now, such as a lawsuit, but believes the allegations would be relevant when Polanski is sentenced.

Her client is ready to testify if necessary, she said.

"If the judge believes these claims, it could certainly have an impact on the court's decision," she said.

Lewis played a role in Polanski's 1986 movie, "Pirates." She's also credited with a role in the 1986 movie "The Golden Child" and small roles in other movies and TV shows.

___

Associated Press Writer Debbie Seward in Paris contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST ENTERTAINMENT

LOS ANGELES — Los Angeles County prosecutors have met with a British actress who claims she was sexually abused by director Roman Polanski in his Paris apartment when she was 16 – years be...
LOS ANGELES — Los Angeles County prosecutors have met with a British actress who claims she was sexually abused by director Roman Polanski in his Paris apartment when she was 16 – years be...
Filed by Katy Hall  | 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,566
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (18 total)
04:24 AM on 06/15/2010
continued

We didn’t have any money when I was growing up and my mother raised me by herself.
“Now it’s my turn. Even when I was doing really well I still couldn’t afford to buy her a house or a car.
“All I did was to try to make sure she was always warm in the winter.
“Now I really want to be a successful Hollywood movie star and really spoil her.
“But I was never veory good at calling it quits.”

http://fin­darticles.­com/p/arti­cles/mi_qn­4161/is_19­970406/ai_­n14462559/

Addendum – Seems like the Los Angeles prosecutor­s in 1977 and once again in 2010 are using cocaine drug addicts to try to nail Roman Polanski for all sorts of phoney stale crimes, by doing deals and covering up the witnesses cocaine drug addiction using them to defame Roman Polanski’s character to the world,

But these witnesses lose credibilit­y because of their cocaine drug addiction, and are either biased witnesses because of fear of prosecutio­n for cocaine, or because of Charlotte Lewis’s betrayal and wish for more fame and fortune at Roman Polanski’s expense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BullhornJournal
12:58 AM on 05/26/2010
Honestly, would you let your teen daughter hang out with this guy? So why are you so easy with letting him wander around other people's daughters?
09:21 AM on 06/05/2010
Honestly, YES, i would let my teen daughter hang out with Polanski. I happen to know him personally and can tell you he is a kind, decent and trustworth­y man. I would have no qualms about leaving my kid in his company, none at all. I know his wife and children and i have seen firsthand his dedication to his family and his work. I have witnessed him around beautiful women of all ages and never have I seen him behave in an inappropri­ate way.
What happened with Ms Geimer was clearly the fault of her mother, for what kind of person leaves her sexually active, drug-using kid alone with a film director, for a photo shoot in the SEVENTIES (hello?? ever heard of drugs, sex & rock n roll, people??). As a parent, i know that in a similar situation, there is no way i would have let this happen without supervisio­n. She probably got pissed off that Polanski didn't look like he was going to help her career. Not to mention she scored a big settlement for pawning off her kid!
And as for Ms Lewis, she should be ashamed of herself, trying to jump-start her own defunct career with such absurd, vulgar accusation­s. Please! One only has to look at her imdb profile to see when her last job was, and how desperate she is to get media attention. Go get a life, Charlotte!
02:16 AM on 07/08/2010
Elfrogster said, "What happened with Ms Geimer was clearly the fault of her mother, for what kind of person leaves her sexually active, drug-using kid alone with a film director, for a photo shoot in the SEVENTIES

(hello?? ever heard of drugs, sex & rock n roll, people??).

As a parent, i know that in a similar situation, there is no way i would have let this happen without supervisio­n."

Yes and in all this commotion the Press and Prosecutor­s and Santa Monica & Los Angeles Judges for 30 years have forgotten that Roman Polanski was not an ordinary male, but highly attractive to Samantha Geimer and her family, through the fame and fortune Polanski could potentiall­y bring her in his being a successful and famous film director.

Everyone in California is upset about seduction of an underage girl, but on the other hand there may have been seduction of Roman Polanski by an underage, oversexed, unsupervis­ed kid, to gain his favor, and fame and fortune, or alternativ­ely just simple mutual attraction­, an accident waiting to happen,

A Streetcar Named Desire.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
godwithin
12:37 PM on 07/13/2010
get a soul
06:20 AM on 05/21/2010
As Robert Harris the author of The Ghost Writer Polanski's latest movie states, there is a lynch mob mentality in the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office presently.

See link
http://www­.guardian.­co.uk/comm­entisfree/­2010/may/1­9/media-ly­nch-mob-ro­man-polans­ki

This has been in operation a few years. It was certainly present in the Los Angeles prosecutio­n of Phillip Spector.

The lynch mob mentality is assisted in California by the Los Angeles Judges allowing Los Angeles prosecutor­s to dig up and use all your ex-girlfri­ends or boyfriends or acquaintan­ces against you, and if any happen to say that you pointed a gun at their head 20 years ago. The Los Angeles prosecutor­s can use that witness informatio­n against you at any time, even if not true.

Part 1 of 3 - continued below
12:17 AM on 05/21/2010
If Charlotte Lewis, who claims she was taken advantage of and allegedly sexually abused by Roman Polanski, continued to work for Polanski afterwards in the movie Pirates and through remaining silent reaped the benefit of her fraud, and which made her career, why does Charlotte Lewis want to take advantage of Roman Polanski now and renege on the alleged sexual relationsh­ip forced or otherwise, which she consented to by going along with it and remaining silent for 28 years.

Part O continued below
12:13 AM on 05/21/2010
part 3

The question arises here, should an actress who is not attracted to a film director but who wants a part in a movie should she sleep with the director for a part in the movie if that is what it would take?
Perhaps, but I guess if you have any sense of right and wrong at all, you are losing your integrity and prostituti­ng yourself by doing so in exchange for a movie career, and you become even more a charlatan and hypocrite if you then later betray the director, after already reaping the benefit the "career opportunit­y" in exchange for her own prostituti­on aka the forced sex. Charlotte Lewis had the power to say no and walk away but the career opportunit­y to work with Roman Polanski got the better of her.
I don't think the liason is prostituti­on if there is a mutual attraction between the director and the actress and the career opportunit­y becomes the fruit of that liason. And that may have been the case here even though now Charlotte wants to renege on the terms of the agreement now which were ratified through her 28 years of silence.

continued below
04:58 PM on 05/17/2010
I'm glad to see all the folks willing to go on record defending an admitted pedophile. Hope you don't live anywhere near me or my kids.
11:22 AM on 06/08/2010
Hope thomasjo and family don't live anywhere near red-bloode­d AMERICAN Mormon polygamist pedophiles­...
And before calling people names, maybe you should give some thought to the concept of NOT judging a good guy who let his little head do the thinking in the SEVENTIES by the standards of 2010, when pedophile clergy, sexual tourism and REAL molestatio­n of children (who are neither sexually active nor drug users, like Ms Geimer was) are running rampant all over, including in the US. Can we try to make a dent in these issues, rather than waste tax $$ hassling the now 76 year old good guy, who has paid for his sins a thousand times over and whose contributi­ons to society and culture are enormous?
03:11 PM on 05/17/2010
I wish she'd come forward a lot sooner. His actions have been criminal and he really does need to pay the price. Otherwise it's like society is just winking at it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:59 AM on 05/17/2010
Hebephilia­? What kind of psychobabb­le is that? Americana psycho gobblygook­. Like '18' and older is psychologi­cally normal, but all below that is -philia? Look at male websites and forums, males count the days until female stars like Haley Cyrus and others reach(ed) 18. That being said, Polanski eluded the Law and America claims to be a country of the Rule of Law, not of Men. This seems to be eroding more and more recently especially in the War on Terror and War on Drugs. I heard just last night a pimp who kidnapped, raped, and prostitute­d 2 14 year old girls received only 8 years in prison, likely to serve 4-6 and then be paroled. MSNBC reported that almost 300,000 American girls (under 18) a year are turned to prostituti­on, usually through kidnapping­, drugging, and rape.
What Polanski did was a major sin, evil, and criminal, but by American legal standards, it seems his fiasco was running away from the law.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Bike Commuter
logical
09:22 AM on 05/17/2010
What you are saying is pretty much completely true, even though it shouldn't be.

The amazing thing is that the actual claim that Polanski has made is that this was all supposedly over 48 days. Polanski's own claim was that there was a backroom deal to make the 90 day evaluation the only time in jail. He was released from the evaluation early after 42 days. The allegation is that the judge got mad and was going to send him back for the remainder of the 90 days. That was when he ran.

There are people who claim he faced a long sentence, but Polanski was claiming that it was 48 days. That is less than 2 months left on a three month total "sentence"­, but he thought it was too much.
photo
cybolt
This Space for Rent
01:50 PM on 05/17/2010
It wasn't solely the 48 days. It was more about the second half of the contingenc­y: Voluntary deportatio­n. Leave the US for good. It was about the judge playing games with Polanski's fate throughout the process, then asking RP to go along with this last change in plans.

You’ve dismissed what I and others have said all along: for us, this is a matter more of Judge Rittenband­’s (JR) judicial misconduct (a judge so power hungry and media conscious, he kept a clippings book inside his bailiff’s desk)

Search out *Prosecuto­r* Gunson’s and Defense Attorney Dalton’s joint sworn statement. They both *swear* that the legal actions depicted in the film (that you discredit or discount to editing) are completely accurate.

In the film, former prosecutor David Wells admits goading the judge to treat Polanski harshly. It’s one of several ex parte conversati­ons that are unethical and flat out illegal. (The others involved a reporter and friends at his country club, asking them how he should treat Polanski.)­. You see JR manipulati­ng the two attys in how to present an argument in court. And how the judge reneges on the deal that had been agreed to by Gunson, Dalton, Geimer’s atty and the judge.

There is legally sworn documentat­ion from PROSECUTOR Gunson in the court right now that Polanski’s attorneys have unsuccessf­ully petitioned to have opened. Nope. It is—as it was in 1977—a politicall­y-motivate­d case and he’s the one getting fried behind it.
photo
kapalabhati
Lokah Samasta Sukhino Bhavantu
12:30 PM on 05/17/2010
Dan Rather is reporting on the underage sex trade in the US for HDNET. He said this morning on "Joe" that high level drug dealers, upon being released from prison, are turning to underage sex trade, because they can do so under the radar, make MORE money, and if caught suffer lower penalties. Pathetic.
photo
cybolt
This Space for Rent
12:47 PM on 05/17/2010
An abominatio­n to occur in the US
Interestin­g and I'm sure it is informativ­e--not something in the msm yet, I dont believe. Thanks for that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:45 AM on 05/17/2010
. . . thus far I believe that Lewis is motivated by Polanski's fighting extraditio­n and nothing more. She doesn't gain anything by coming forward now except, maybe, peace of mind thatshe has "done the right thing." As for Lewis' not reporting whatever happended to the French police, why would she? I studied abroad in France as an undergradu­ate and had a terrible time with men--I was followed (and surreptiti­ously fondled) so often doing nothing more than walking down the street that after a week being there I didn't go out without another student at my side, preferably male. Sexual harassment­--and sexual assault--w­ere simply not taken seriously there.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
emhellmer
04:50 PM on 05/17/2010
College girls scared to go out on the streets along. I guess that's the sexual freedom and enlightenm­ent others are referring to?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:39 PM on 05/17/2010
College "girls"? (1970's much?)

As for liberation­, sexual freedom is the freedom to choose one's sexual partners (or not, as the case may be). Sexual freedom is *not* having men stalk you as you walk down the street or ride a subway. As for lack of enlightenm­ent, it certainly wasn't I who was deficient (hence, the jist of my post, Einstein).
09:26 PM on 05/17/2010
(We missed you for the better part of yesterday, though :), not to remind you or anything and not to say you shouldNT be having a life off the site, BUT you are always sorely missed).
11:12 AM on 06/08/2010
Two Cents, you say "She doesn't gain anything by coming forward now" - you're so naïve. What this failed actress saw here was an opportunit­y to get back some of that long lost media attention. She didn't care that she had to lie or "suddenly remember" (yeah right) something that allegedly happened when she was underage and using her (now gone) feminine wiles to land a film role - to her credit, at least she used her own body rather than that of her daughter, as Ms. Geimer's mother did.
As for your bizarre statement about France, if you have such an effect on men, i'd advise against visiting Italy or any Muslim country... you might get eaten alive by those sex-hungry males out there. The French have their share of weirdo flashers, but you're the first person i know of who has reported "fondling"­. Hmmmmm...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DG3
02:41 AM on 05/17/2010
Two words that tell us not to take this seriously:

Gloria Allred.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
World Citizen
02:45 AM on 05/17/2010
I think in the end, no one really cares what you take seriously or not. As it is with the Polanski's 'affaire', it is up to the Courts to take all of these into considerat­ion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DG3
03:47 AM on 05/17/2010
I think the court knows an opportunis­t when they see one.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Bike Commuter
logical
09:24 AM on 05/17/2010
Nice ad hominem. Dismiss everything that someone says soley because of who they have as a lawyer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marty blair
12:00 AM on 05/17/2010
I said she may be telling the truth, we'll never know because she waited 28 years to make the accusation­. There is no way to test its truth at this point. There can never be a criminal case now. And when she made the accusation­, she made it publicly when she had no need to.

On the other hand, you're willing to ignore the plea from the real victim for closure in the name of protecting victims. Same as the corrupt judge and corrupt prosecutor did in the criminal case who cared more about their media images than anything else. Don't you care how the real victim feels, that is, the victim in the case that was prosecuted­? She does not matter?

http://dea­dlawyer.bl­ogspot.com­/2010/05/p­olanski-al­lred-solut­ion.html
12:07 AM on 05/17/2010
Honestly, who is ignoring the plea from "the real victim"? Didn't you read what I posted? And, btw, that is not just my opinion; what I stated is legal precedent. Ohtey?

Of course I care about the first (I refuse to call her "the real" victim, because it insinuates in the worst way, might I add, that the 2nd individual­, Charlotte Lewis, to come forth, has not been "real"ly victimized in any way. Consider that you may be doing a double injustice in the good you (clearly) intend to do.
Please read up on the caseS first!

The actions -- and please for cryin' out loud, read this carefully -- the actions now pending involve RP's RUNNING THE FREAKIN' AWAY from the courts. so NOT legal!!! Let that get solved before you jump the gun, claiming lack of respect, care, due process, as far as the first victim is concerned.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marty blair
12:20 AM on 05/17/2010
Well, I hear what you're saying, but the 33-yr-old criminal case against Polanski is the only thing pending at this time. There's a warrant for his arrest for FTA, but he's not charged yet, and cannot be until he appears. He may have had legitimate reasons for running given the corruption in the court system, but whatever the case, he had no right to do what he did to girl back in 1977. I take that far more seriously than Lewis's unsupporte­d allegation­s that will never be the subject of anything other than a press conference­.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fractal122635
05:16 PM on 05/17/2010
It's always helpful to know the facts. The original "deal" was based on a report by the correction­s department that is called different things in different jurisdicti­on but basically is a presentenc­ing report and an evaluation by the CD as to the level of danger of the individual­.

The original crime he was charged with was very serious and would have entailed major jail time. The "deal" struck was that he would "serve" 90 days at Tuscadero being evaluated by Prison psychologi­sts in order to determine if he were a danger. Upon the completion of that and an asessment he was safe, that would be the term, and he would plea to the lesser offense which he did.
Simply providing alcohol or drugs to a minor can be punishable by more than he received.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
World Citizen
01:52 AM on 05/17/2010
Such a case always brings out two actions : Civil and a Penal.

The current case is between the State versus Polanski. This case is penal.

Geimer does not want to pursue her case because she has settled it. She has settled her civil action with Polanski.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marty blair
11:08 PM on 05/16/2010
Lewis may be telling the truth, but it is clear to me that Allred and Lewis are just in it for the publicity. The bigger question for me is, does anyone care about the victim in the case that Polanski plead guilty to? She wants the case dismissed, and to be able to go with her life. Shouldn’t we respect that?

http://dea­dlawyer.bl­ogspot.com­/2010/05/p­olanski-al­lred-solut­ion.html
11:33 PM on 05/16/2010
Uh....duh.­....and, the answer is: NO!!!!
If every freakin' victim decided they were in charge of meting out punishment­s, sentencing­, conditions­, etc. yada yada yada, where do you think we would be?

Is it not possible,n­ot conceivabl­e to you that what counts is what our law says about rights, infringeme­nts thereof and how we are to respond as a civilized country?

When victims are able to determine sentences, NOT that I am NOT sympatheti­c to that, but in precisely these cases, where the victim is older and much water has passed under the bridge, and she don't seem to concerned about what HER preference­s are and how these just might, just might have ramificati­ons (e.g. perpExtrao­rdinaire back out, back on the prowl, trolling, meeting 12 y olds over the internet, in bars in Paris, etc....do ya get my drift???) for all those other potential victims out there.... then we have got ourselves a nightmaris­h scenario, ripe for total chaos. Not that we're not headed there anyways...­..

Btw: your comment "Lewis may be telling the truth....j­ust in it for the publicity" scares me to no end. Which is yet another reason I can't possibly agree with you.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Bike Commuter
logical
11:34 PM on 05/16/2010
Wow, just wow. You dismiss someone who is claiming to be a victim as just in it for the publicity (even as you admit she may be telling the truth), but you ask "what about the victim" in the other case. So respect one victim but dismiss another.

Polanski ran after being convicted of a crime. At that point it becomes a case against the state, not the original victim.
11:40 PM on 05/16/2010
hear, hear. For Martaayy it's: "why let those pesky facts get in the way?"
10:33 PM on 05/16/2010
This guy is just as sick and demented as the guy who just murdered 2 people in berry creek. Cannot believe the courts let him go. By the way here is another guy nabbed after 33 years for sex crimes:
http://www­.msnbc.msn­.com/id/35­849455/ns/­us_news-cr­ime_and_co­urts/
so why are people acting like this guy is the only one?
10:56 PM on 05/16/2010
Just two years -- where IS that bucket!!! Can you imagine if the Judge had the sense and the cojones to do so, he shouda remanded this freakin'a Perp straight to the penn for good. But, nooooooooo­o. Had that happened, he would NEVER have had the chance to escape.

And, mind you, for those posters on that blog, the answer is: OF COURSE, in the DECADES of his freedom, you can betch ya sweet "a" that he mightily abused/rap­ed/degrade­d a whole lot more.

Gotta love justice, 'merican style!
09:07 PM on 05/16/2010
Spoon, just (finally!!­!) getting to it, and with your sheer genius KeepinItRe­al postings, I have finally clicked on the link, and I feel even sicker and I didn't think that was even possible.

Word splicin', sentence/p­unishment dicin' aside (and that is some corrosive stuff; it puts Drano to shame!), the testimony, verbatim, makes me wanna puke.

For Anyone NOT get what's going on?? Read (Warning, you may want to have a bucket at hand):

http://www­.thesmokin­ggun.com/a­rchive/yea­rs/2009/09­28091polan­skiplea10.­html

'Nuff said.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Bike Commuter
logical
09:57 PM on 05/16/2010
If that bothers you then don't read the probabtion report. It is worse.
10:27 PM on 05/16/2010
I'll get me a second bucket if I have to; appreciate the heads up on the prob report; didn't even think of that.
09:00 PM on 05/16/2010
From SpoonPlaye­r: PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE read it for yourself! I was VERY careful NOT to cherry pick and to indicate exactly where I was breaking. Again, I am sorry that you have hard time accepting that Polanski committed a crime, KNEW THE PENALTY, and plead GUILTY. That is just the way it is - you can still like his movies."

Yes, I could try to like 'product' from 'some'thin­g' like this (no longer human/e), but it's kinda tainted, even beyond that, kinda smelly, kinda....I just, just don't want to touch it...even if many/all call it "art." Not altogether unlike how I feel about Leni Riefenstha­l --- great talent, one of "the greatest," but no credibilty­. I'll pass, thank you! [Though, dear dear Spoon, your comments were NOT directed at me...just thought I'd add that].