The witness at the centre of the Roman Polanski libel trial today denied that he had made up a lurid story because he did not think he would be called to account.
Lewis Lapham, a journalist on whose evidence the Vanity Fair story was based, said the US magazine's article was "substantially accurate" but said you could "argue over the adjectives".
Under cross-examination by Polanski's QC, John Kelsey-Fry, Mr Lapham said he did not speak to Polanski before or after the alleged incident at his table in Manhattan restaurant Elaine's in 1969.
He told the court how Polanski had "romanced" the model girlfriend of his friend Edward Perlberg and offered to make her the "next Sharon Tate".
Mr Lapham also said he did not remember talking about the incident to either Mr Perlberg or his girlfriend, Beate Telle.
"Would it not have been humanly impossible not to turn to both of your companions and discuss the extraordinary events of the previous minutes?" asked Mr Kelsey-Fry.
"It might have been humanly possible," said Mr Lapham. "It is not in my nature to respond in a dramatic fashion or to tell tales." Asked what happened next, Mr Lapham said: "I believe Beate discouraged him and moved his hand off her thigh."
"She moved his hand off her thigh?" asked Mr Kelsey-Fry.
"I cannot say for certain," said Mr Lapham. "What did you do?" asked Mr Kelsey-Fry.
"I did not intervene."
"Is the answer nothing?"
"The answer is nothing."
Mr Kelsey-Fry described the approach attributed to Polanski as the "most astonishing asinine chat-up line in history".
Mr Lapham said "it was a cliche" but Mr Kelsey-Fry said it was "astonishing" the director should have used the name of his wife who had been murdered in the same month.
"The sense of his remark was that he was going to make her a star," said Mr Lapham.
"Using his murdered wife's name as a way of currying favour?" asked Mr Kelsey-Fry. "I think so. That was what was surprising."
Polanski is suing the Condé Nast magazine for libel over an article published in July 2002 in which it claimed he made sexual advances to a Swedish woman in Elaine's, a fashionable New York restaurant bar, on the way to his wife's funeral. His wife, Sharon Tate, was brutally murdered by the Manson Cult in August 1969.
Mr Kelsey-Fry showed the court an edition of the New York magazine Harpers, which is edited by Mr Lapham.
The September 2004 issue included an article that made reference to speeches made at the Republican convention in New York, even though it had been written by Mr Lapham two days before the convention had taken place.
It was pointed out in a reader's letter in the following issue and Mr Lapham blamed an editing mistake.
Mr Kelsey-Fry asked: "You were guessing what the speeches were going to be?"
"I was guessing accurately," replied Mr Lapham. "The passage was entirely correct two days later, well, four days later."
Mr Kelsey-Fry also read three extracts from a book written by Mr Lapham called Lapham's Rules of Influence. In one Mr Lapham described slander as the best and most satisfactory form of gossip especially when smeared on the names of people who happen to be rich, good-looking or famous.
Mr Lapham described it as a short satirical book. Finishing his cross-examination, Mr Kelsey-Fry said: "Everyone knows why Roman Polanski cannot go back to the United States. Everyone knows he carries reputational baggage from his conviction in 1977. The truth is I would suggest to you that it never crossed your mind that you would be called to account on the story you gave to Mr Hotchner (the author of the Vanity Fair article). That is the truth, is it not?"
Mr Lapham replied: "I did not think I was slandering Mr Polanski."
Asked by Tom Shields QC, for Vanity Fair publisher Condé Nast, whether he had made up the story, Mr Lapham replied: "No."
· To contact the MediaGuardian newsdesk email editor@mediatheguardian.com or phone 020 7239 9857
· If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".
