John McTiernan, the acclaimed director behind blockbuster hits like Die Hard and The Hunt for Red October, is on the verge of being incarcerated in federal prison due to his entanglement in the notorious Anthony Pellicano wiretapping scandal. This development follows a prolonged legal battle stemming from his involvement with the disgraced Hollywood private investigator.
Back in late 2010, Director John Mctiernan received a one-year prison sentence along with a $100,000 fine after admitting to making false statements to the FBI. These statements were part of the investigation into Pellicano, who was already imprisoned for his illegal wiretapping activities. McTiernan’s guilty plea marked a significant turn in the case, but the ensuing years have been marked by attempts to overturn this decision.
Recently, McTiernan’s final recourse, a request to reverse his guilty plea, was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court. This decision effectively closes the door on his appeals process, which had previously seen a rejection from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in August. The core of his appeal revolved around suppressing a digital recording where director John McTiernan discussed Pellicano’s illegal wiretapping on producer Chuck Roven, whom McTiernan had hired Pellicano to investigate.
Despite the denial of his appeal, McTiernan was granted a stay of imprisonment while the Supreme Court deliberated his case. With the high court’s refusal to intervene, the director is now expected to face incarceration imminently. In addition to the prison term, John McTiernan will also be subject to three years of supervised release following his time behind bars.
Charles Sevilla, McTiernan’s attorney based in San Diego, has not yet issued a public statement regarding the Supreme Court’s decision. The wiretapping incident dates back to 2002 when McTiernan was involved in the remake of Rollerball, a film produced by Chuck Roven.
Another lawyer associated with director John McTiernan suggests that there might be further delays in the process. A pending motion before the judge seeks to reduce or eliminate McTiernan’s sentence, arguing the lack of concrete evidence proving Pellicano actually wiretapped Roven. An affidavit from a former assistant of McTiernan supports this claim, stating that to her knowledge, Roven was never subjected to illegal wiretapping.
However, the legal charge against director John McTiernan is for lying to the FBI, not for the wiretapping itself. His defense team hopes to persuade the judge that these false statements were a consequence of wrongful accusations. Historically, the judge has not been receptive to these arguments, but the defense remains optimistic that it might lead to further discovery, evidence hearings, and potentially additional appeals.
During initial interviews with authorities approximately seven years prior, director John McTiernan initially downplayed his association with Pellicano, characterizing it as minimal. However, when confronted with a recording confirming his hiring of the private investigator, he conceded and agreed to plead guilty.
Subsequently, McTiernan engaged new legal counsel and initiated efforts to retract his guilty plea and suppress specific evidence. In his initial appeal to the federal court, judges acknowledged that his initial legal representation might have provided inadequate advice, allowing him to withdraw his plea.
However, director John McTiernan was subsequently re-indicted. Following renewed unsuccessful attempts to suppress evidence, he entered a second guilty plea.
An appeals court also dismissed McTiernan’s assertion that U.S. District Court Judge Dale Fischer should have recused herself due to alleged hostile remarks directed at him during court proceedings, as she consistently denied his requests to suppress the incriminating tapes.
Now, the director and producer, celebrated for his work on iconic films such as Predator, Last Action Hero, and Basic, is once again required to appear before Judge Fischer. She is anticipated to issue an order for him to report for incarceration. If the judge does not rule favorably on his remaining motions, legal experts suggest the final steps leading to imprisonment could take several weeks or potentially a couple of months.
