What you should know
- Almost four years after Harvey Weinstein found guilty of rape and sent to prison, New York’s highest court will hear arguments Wednesday in its bid to overturn the landmark verdict of the #MeToo era.
- Weinstein’s lawyers are asking the state Court of Appeals in Albany to throw out the disgraced movie mogul’s 2020 conviction, arguing that the judge trampled on their right to a fair trial by “succumbing to pressure” of America’s reckoning with sexual misconduct perpetrated by powerful figures.
- Judge James Burke allowed testimony from three women whose allegations were not part of the case and ruled that prosecutors could confront Weinstein about other unrelated misconduct if he had testified, which he declined to do.
NEW YORK — Nearly four years after Harvey Weinstein found guilty of rape and sent to prison, New York’s highest court will hear arguments Wednesday in its bid to overturn the landmark verdict of the #MeToo era.
Weinstein’s lawyers are asking the state Court of Appeals in Albany to throw out the disgraced movie mogul’s 2020 conviction, arguing that the judge trampled on their right to a fair trial by “succumbing to pressure” of America’s reckoning with sexual misconduct perpetrated by powerful figures.
Judge James Burke allowed testimony from three women whose allegations were not part of the case and ruled that prosecutors could confront Weinstein about other unrelated misconduct if he had testified, which he declined to do.
“What we are arguing is that there should not be a different set of rules for an individual in society who is vilified,” said Weinstein’s lawyer, Arthur Aidala. There can be “the Weinstein rule that only applies to that small portion of society that everyone decides to really hate,” he said.
Weinstein, 71, was convicted on February 24, 2020, of criminal sexual act for forcibly performing oral sex on a film and television production assistant in 2006, and of third-degree rape for an attack on a female applicant. to actress in 2013. He was sentenced to 23 years in prison and is incarcerated at the Mohawk Correctional Center, a state prison about 100 miles (161 kilometers) northwest of Albany.
Weinstein was acquitted in the same Manhattan trial of first-degree rape and two counts of predatory sexual assault stemming from actress Annabella Sciorra’s accusations of a rape in the mid-1990s. The Associated Press generally does not identify people who allege sexual assault unless they consent to be identified; Sciorra has spoken publicly about her accusations.
Last year, Weinstein was found guilty in Los Angeles of raping and sexually assaulting an Italian actor and model, who he said showed up uninvited at his hotel room door during a film festival there in 2013. He was sentenced to 16 additional years in prison in that case, meaning he would still be locked up even if the Court of Appeals ruled in his favor.
Weinstein maintains his innocence. He maintains that any sexual activity was consensual. He is not expected to attend Wednesday’s arguments, which concern only the New York case, but he can monitor the court’s live broadcast from prison. The court is not likely to rule immediately.
The New York Court of Appeals agreed last year to accept the Weinstein case after a court of Intermediate appeals will confirm his conviction. Weinstein’s lawyers want a new trial, but only on the criminal sexual act charge. They argue that the rape charge cannot be retried because it involves alleged conduct outside the statute of limitations.
The allegations against Weinstein, the once powerful and feared studio boss behind Oscar-winning films like “Pulp Fiction” and “Shakespeare in Love,” marked the beginning of the #MeToo movement. His trial in New York generated intense publicity, with protesters chanting “rapist” outside the court.
In their appeal, Weinstein’s lawyers argued that Burke influenced the outcome of the trial with repeated rulings favorable to prosecutors, including decisions that “overwhelmed” the trial with “excessive, random and highly dubious prior evidence of wrongdoing.” Burke’s term expired at the end of 2022. He was not re-elected and is no longer a judge.
Had Weinstein testified, Burke ruled that prosecutors would have been able to question him about more than two dozen alleged acts of brutal behavior over 30 years, including whether he had stranded a colleague in a foreign country or yelled at staff. a restaurant while demanding a late-night meal.
Weinstein’s lawyers argued that Burke’s rulings went beyond what is normally allowed (detailing motive, opportunity, intent or a common scheme or plan) and essentially prosecuted the former studio head for crimes he was not charged with and that He hadn’t had a chance to defend himself. That evidence would have served “only to make the jury hate Weinstein,” his lawyers said.
Rules vary by state regarding calling witnesses to testify and allowing prosecutors to present evidence of “prior bad acts” in addition to the actual charges. New York’s rules are among the most restrictive.
They also questioned Burke’s refusal to dismiss a juror who had written a novel about predatory older men, as well as his decision to allow prosecutors to have an expert on victim behavior and rape myths testify, while rejecting testimony on similar topics from defense experts.
A five-judge panel of the New York intermediate appeals court ruled unanimously in 2022 that Burke had “providentially exercised” his discretion, although some of the judges had previously raised questions about his conduct. During oral arguments, Judge Sallie Manzanet-Daniels said Burke had let prosecutors accumulate “incredibly damaging testimony” of additional witnesses.
Aidala said he wants the Court of Appeals to remind the state’s trial courts “that a defendant cannot be tried based on his character, but must be judged based on the conduct for which he has been accused.”
2024-02-14 16:11:13
#High #Court #Hear #Arguments #Harvey #Weinsteins #Attempt #Appeal #Rape #Conviction
