According to news reports: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/30/pivotal-player-in-polansk_n_305772.html, the Polanski prosecutor lied when he told a French documentary that he had an ex parte commucnication with the sentencing Judge in the Polanski rape case, and that he, the Prosecutor encouraged the Judge to put the screws to Polanski despite a plea deal.
My first reaction to this report is a big so what, because prosecutorial misconduct of any kind is not relevant to the real story--the march of the Hollywood apologists.
On reflection, as an attorney you see the reason why the rules governing professional conduct require lawyers in public office not to act in ways that bring discredit on the profession; i.e. carrying on ex parte communications with a sentencing Judge, lying about professional acts to the media--this kind of stuff brings discredit on lawyers in the most direct way and more importantly undermines trust in the "just us" system. So, now you have one of the major actors, the prosecutor, in a symbolically important rape case undermining the faith one could have had in the fairness with which Polanski was treated at the time of his rape conviction. In actuality it's ridiculous, Polanski was treated more than fairly, but the sheer fact that the prosecutor admits to a lie gives wind to the bogus arguments of the apologists.
At the end of the day, this lawyer needs a good smack.