Judge rejects Polanski bid to disqualify L.A .courts

LOS ANGELES -- A judge on Friday rejected a motion by Roman Polanski's lawyer to disqualify all judges in Los Angeles County from hearing a bid to dismiss the director's rape case because of bias.

Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza said the county had 600 judges and that only in extremely rare instances could it be possible to find no judge qualified to preside over the matter. He also said he was not biased against or in favor of Polanski, whose lawyers were seeking to dismiss a conviction in the rape of a 13-year-old girl in Los Angeles.

"I have not yet decided or prejudged any of the issues presented by counsel for defendant's motion pending before me," Espinoza said.

Polanski, 75, has been a fugitive living in France for 31 years after pleading guilty to a single charge of sexual intercourse with a minor. His attorneys filed the dismissal request last month because of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct that was detailed in a television documentary.

Espinoza also said in the ruling Friday that the court's public information officer had been correct to suggest Polanski had to be present in court for his motion to be heard. The officer, Allan Parachini, was not named in the ruling but had been singled out in a filing by Polanski attorney Chad Hummel.

"In this matter, there is an outstanding arrest warrant that requires the defendant's presence in court," Espinoza said. "This reflects the order of the judge who issued the bench warrant."

Espinoza also rejected Hummel's claim that the Los Angeles County Superior Court must be disqualified because one of its members, Judge Larry Paul Fidler, played a role in negotiations for Polanski to return to the country and would probably be a witness in the case.

"The fact that a judge of the court is a witness in the proceeding is not alone disqualifying given the size and diversity of the court," Espinoza said, noting the county's 50 courthouses spread over 4,000 square miles.

Espinoza let stand a hearing scheduled for Jan. 21 in which he will preside. However, the district attorney's office has said that if Polanski does not plan to attend, the hearing should be canceled.

Prosecutors have said that if Polanski were to return to Los Angeles, he would be arrested.

Espinoza reminded attorneys that his ruling on the question of disqualification cannot be appealed. But he said a mechanism called a writ of mandate allows them to seek a review by a state appeals court within 10 days.

A call to Hummel seeking comment on the ruling was not immediately returned Friday.