Harvey Weinstein’s rape conviction overturned by New York’s highest court docket

“We conclude that the trial court erroneously admitted testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes,” the court docket’s 4-3 resolution stated. “The remedy for these egregious errors is a new trial.”

The state Courtroom of Appeals ruling reopens a painful chapter in America’s reckoning with sexual misconduct by highly effective figures — an period that started in 2017 with a flood of allegations towards Weinstein. His accusers might once more be compelled to retell their tales on the witness stand.

The court docket’s majority stated “it is an abuse of judicial discretion to permit untested allegations of nothing more than bad behavior that destroys a defendant’s character but sheds no light on their credibility as related to the criminal charges lodged against them.”

In a stinging dissent, Choose Madeline Singas wrote that almost all was “whitewashing the facts to conform to a he-said/she-said narrative,” and stated the Courtroom of Appeals was persevering with a “disturbing trend of overturning juries’ guilty verdicts in cases involving sexual violence.”

He will remain imprisoned because he was convicted in Los Angeles in 2022 of one other rape and sentenced to 16 years in prison. Weinstein was acquitted in Los Angeles on fees involving one of many ladies who testified in New York.

Weinstein lawyer Arthur Aidala stated instantly after the ruling got here out: “We all worked very hard and this is a tremendous victory for every criminal defendant in the state of New York.”

Legal professional Douglas H. Wigdor, who has represented eight Harvey Weinstein accusers together with two witnesses on the New York prison trial, known as the ruling “a major step back in holding those accountable for acts of sexual violence.”

“Courts routinely admit evidence of other uncharged acts where they assist juries in understanding issues concerning the modus operandi or scheme of the defendant. The jury was instructed on the relevance of this testimony and overturning the verdict is tragic in that it will require the victims to endure yet another trial,” Wigdor stated in a press release.

Weinstein’s legal professionals argued Choose James Burke’s rulings in favor of the prosecution turned the trial into “1-800-GET-HARVEY.”

The reversal of Weinstein’s conviction is the second main #MeToo setback within the final two years, after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of a Pennsylvania court docket resolution to throw out Invoice Cosby’s sexual assault conviction.

Weinstein’s conviction stood for more than four years, heralded by activists and advocates as a milestone achievement, however dissected simply as shortly by his legal professionals and, later, the Courtroom of Appeals when it heard arguments on the matter in February.

Allegations towards Weinstein, the as soon as highly effective and feared studio boss behind such Oscar winners as “Pulp Fiction” and “Shakespeare in Love,” ushered in the #MeToo movement. Dozens of women came forward to accuse Weinstein, together with well-known actresses resembling Ashley Judd and Uma Thurman. His New York trial drew intense publicity, with protesters chanting “rapist” outside the courthouse.

Weinstein is incarcerated in New York on the Mohawk Correctional Facility, about 100 miles (160 kilometers) northwest of Albany.

He maintains his innocence. He contends any sexual exercise was consensual.

Aidala argued earlier than the appeals court docket in February that Burke swayed the trial by permitting three ladies to testify about allegations that weren’t a part of the case and by giving prosecutors permission to confront Weinstein, if he had testified, about his lengthy historical past of brutish habits.

Aidala argued the additional testimony went past the usually allowable particulars about motive, alternative, intent or a typical scheme or plan, and primarily put Weinstein on trial for crimes he wasn’t charged with.

Weinstein wished to testify, however opted to not as a result of Burke’s ruling would’ve meant answering questions on greater than two-dozen alleged acts of misbehavior courting again 4 a long time, Aidala stated. They included preventing along with his film producer brother, flipping over a desk in anger and snapping at waiters and yelling at his assistants.

“We had a defendant who was begging to tell his side of the story. It’s a he said, she said case, and he’s saying ‘that’s not how it happened. Let me tell you how I did it,’” Aidala argued. As a substitute, the jurors heard proof of Weinstein’s prior unhealthy habits that “had nothing to do with truth and veracity. It was all ‘he’s a bad guy.’”

Aidala additionally took subject with Burke’s refusal to take away a juror who had written a novel involving predatory older males, a subject the protection lawyer argued too carefully resembled the problems in Weinstein’s case.

A lawyer for the Manhattan district legal professional’s workplace, which prosecuted the case, argued that the decide‘s rulings were proper and that the extra evidence and testimony he allowed was important to provide jurors context about Weinstein’s habits and the best way he interacted with ladies.

“Defendant’s argument was that they had a consensual and loving relationship both before and after the charged incidents,” Appellate Chief Steven Wu argued, referring to one of many ladies Weinstein was charged with assaulting. The extra testimony “just rebutted that characterization completely.”

Wu stated Weinstein’s acquittal on probably the most critical fees — two counts of predatory sexual assault and a first-degree rape cost involving actor Annabella Sciorra’s allegations of a mid-Nineties rape — confirmed jurors have been paying consideration and so they weren’t confused or overwhelmed by the extra testimony.

The Related Press doesn’t usually establish individuals alleging sexual assault until they consent to be named; Sciorra has spoken publicly about her allegations.

The Courtroom of Appeals agreed last year to take Weinstein’s case after an intermediate appeals court docket upheld his conviction. Previous to their ruling, judges on the decrease appellate court docket had raised doubts about Burke’s conduct throughout oral arguments. One noticed that Burke had let prosecutors pile on with “incredibly prejudicial testimony” from extra witnesses.

Burke’s time period expired on the finish of 2022. He was not reappointed and is not a decide.

In interesting, Weinstein’s legal professionals sought a brand new trial, however just for the prison sexual act cost. They argued the rape cost couldn’t be retried as a result of it includes alleged conduct outdoors the statute of limitations.

___

Related Press author Dave Collins reported from Hartford, Connecticut.