Are there professional disciplinary actions or investigations into jack polanski related to these claims?

1. The likely confusion: Roman Polanski, not “Jack Polanski” — reporting focuses on the filmmaker’s criminal case

The documents in the search results repeatedly recount Roman Polanski’s 1977 plea and his flight from U.S. sentencing, and they detail later court developments and public reactions — for example, accounts of sealed transcripts, victim appeals, and a 2024 French defamation trial outcome — but none of the sources identify a professional named Jack Polanski or allege disciplinary proceedings against that name ^{[2] [3] [4]}.

2. What the sources actually say about institutional and legal consequences for Roman Polanski

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences publicly signaled it retains authority to act on member conduct, a statement tied to discussions about Polanski’s membership status and standards of conduct ^[1]. Reporting also documents legal maneuvers and newly revealed testimony that shaped perceptions of judicial misconduct and the long-running criminal matter — for instance, unsealed testimony and timeline summaries that explain why Polanski fled the U.S. and why the case has endured for decades ^{[2] [3]}.

3. No documented professional disciplinary actions in the supplied files against a ‘Jack Polanski’

A careful reading of the supplied fragments shows mention of other names connected to the Polanski case (Jack Nicholson as the homeowner where a photo shoot occurred, and Roman Polanski himself) but there is no source item that names or describes a “Jack Polanski,” nor any record in these materials of licensing-board investigations, bar complaints, or other professional-discipline proceedings against that name ^{[5] [6]}.

4. Where institutional discipline appears in the record — and its limits

When institutions appear in the reporting, they concern possible membership or reputational responses to Roman Polanski: the Academy’s bylaws and its stated duty to enforce standards; European cultural bodies canceling roles or honors in response to public pressure; and courts adjudicating defamation claims unrelated to professional licensing per se ^{[1] [4] [7]}. Those examples establish precedent for institutional sanctioning but do not equate to licensing-board disciplinary actions, and none are attributed to a person named Jack Polanski in the supplied files ^{[1] [4]}.

5. Alternative explanations and reporting gaps that matter

The most plausible explanations for the user’s query are either a misremembered name (confusing “Jack Nicholson” or “Zack Polanski” with “Jack Polanski”) or a conflation of different stories; for example, sources mention Jack Nicholson and a politician named Zack Polanski, but neither equals “Jack Polanski” nor is linked in these excerpts to disciplinary investigations tied to the sexual-assault allegations centered on Roman Polanski ^{[5] [6]}. The supplied reporting does not allow verification of any professional discipline against a “Jack Polanski”; absence of evidence in these sources is not proof such investigations have never occurred elsewhere, only that they are not documented here ^[8].

6. Bottom line — direct answer to the question

Based on the provided reporting, there are no documented professional disciplinary actions or investigations into anyone named Jack Polanski related to these claims; the materials instead document actions, legal history, and institutional responses concerning Roman Polanski and associated figures like Jack Nicholson, but they do not substantiate any proceedings against a “Jack Polanski” ^{[1] [2] [3]}.