Harvey Weinstein’s Last Stand: A Trial That Could Rewrite #MeToo Rules

by

While immersed in the initial episode of Candace Owens’ new endeavor aimed at clearing Harvey Weinstein’s name, I found myself munching on an elk steak, and surprisingly, I found myself aligning with her viewpoints as a gamer.

He expressed astonishment, stating, ‘I never thought I’d be defending Harvey Weinstein,’ during a March 22 podcast. ‘Initially, I believed him to be guilty of horrific crimes, but then I listened, and I found myself questioning, ‘What’s happening here?'”

Or even simpler:

“During a podcast on March 22, he expressed surprise, saying, ‘I never thought I’d find myself siding with Harvey Weinstein. I believed him to be guilty of terrible crimes, but then I started listening and found myself wondering, ‘What’s going on here?’

This episode subtly referenced significant events in the #MeToo movement’s timeline following Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 sex crimes conviction, which some commentators have claimed went too far. Notable examples include Johnny Depp’s defamation win against Amber Heard, Danny Masterson’s initial mistrial on rape charges (he was eventually found guilty), the drama surrounding Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, among others.

Rogan’s perspective: “If this case against Weinstein had occurred in the 80s, it likely would have been dismissed,” he stated. “However, with the rise of the #MeToo movement, it’s become a fiery pursuit instead.” He and Owens are part of a rising group expressing doubt not only about Weinstein’s guilt but also about accusations of sexual misconduct from various victims. This is particularly true for those whose interactions with the accused seemed to oscillate between coercion and consent, a situation that some experts argue is too complex to result in convictions due to its ambiguity.

Arthur Aidala, attorney for Weinstein, feels that the current #MeToo environment may work to his client’s advantage, or at least not be detrimental. In his view, the phrase “believe women” is seen as an un-American and unjust statement. He believes we should not blindly believe everyone but instead use our common sense to evaluate if they are telling the truth.

On April 22nd, Weinstein is expected to be transported to the 13th floor of the Manhattan Criminal Courts Building from a detention cell. This will be for his opening statements in what marks his third trial, where he stands accused of being a sexual predator who misused his power within the entertainment industry to repeatedly abuse women around him. He has been indicted twice for committing three sex crimes against Miriam Haley, Jessica Mann, and an unnamed accuser referred to as witness #3 in court documents.

Lindsay Goldbrum, attorney for the accuser, stated outside the courthouse on April 15, before jury selection, ‘Justice is taking time in this situation.’ She has shared her client’s account and repeated it to the DA. One point she emphasized repeatedly: this was not a consensual act. It was a sexual assault involving force.

For Weinstein’s recent trial, he has gathered an impressive team of top-tier criminal defense lawyers, each renowned in their respective fields. Defending Weinstein involves presenting your case not only to the jury but also to the media. Aidala, who has represented clients such as Rudy Giuliani, Roger Ailes, and Lawrence Taylor, is particularly skilled in handling high-profile media cases. He hosts a weekday radio show, “The Arthur Aidala Power Hour,” where he shares his views. He also has strong connections with the entertainment industry, having served as the last dean of the Friars Club, a popular hangout for Manhattan’s entertainment elite before it closed last year. When Leslie Moonves was accused of sexual misconduct, Aidala was among his first calls. Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard Law School professor known for taking on controversial cases and clients as a criminal defense lawyer years ago, has referred to Aidala as “the new me.

Michael Cibella, an accomplished courtroom attorney renowned for his skill in identifying discrepancies in witness statements, will sit beside him. Known for his assertive approach during cross-examination, he’ll be crucial in a case that has turned into a back-and-forth of testimonies. Completing the defense team is Jennifer Bonjean, a tenacious lawyer who successfully worked to overturn Bill Cosby’s sexual assault conviction and represented R. Kelly and NXIVM founder Keith Raniere. In this trial, she has served as the overall strategic guide for the defense.

In this upcoming confrontation, they will be matched against Nicole Blumberg, Shannon Lucey, and Matthew Colangelo – a previous high-ranking Justice Department official who played a crucial role in the settlement money case involving President Donald Trump. Unlike the initial trial, which was managed by homicide prosecutors, this time it’s being directed by the newly established special victims unit.

The upcoming trial is anticipated to span between four to six weeks. Its focus will be on accusations against Harvey Weinstein, primarily from Haley, a former assistant on Project Runway, who claims he coerced oral sex at his TriBeCa apartment in 2006, Mann, an ex-actress who alleges rape at a Midtown Manhattan hotel in 2013, and an unidentified third accuser who asserts forced oral sex at a Manhattan hotel in 2006. In contrast to the previous trial, these accusations will not be bolstered by testimony from three women whose claims didn’t result in formal charges against Weinstein but asserted they were assaulted by him. The prosecution believes this evidence was crucial in demonstrating that Weinstein knew his accusers would not consent to sex with him as a condition for advancing their film careers, and instead had to employ force.

Last year, New York’s Supreme Court overturned Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 rape conviction, largely due to the inclusion of testimonies from women known as “Molineux witnesses”. This decision, seen by some as a significant evaluation of the flaws within the #MeToo movement, was made by a panel of seven judges. In a 4-3 ruling that included a strong dissent, they determined that the trial court had wrongly admitted testimony about unrelated, alleged previous sexual acts, which amounted to an unfair bias against Weinstein due to an abuse of judicial discretion. During the initial trial, these testimonies were mainly considered because Weinstein’s accusers had also engaged in consensual relations with him.

Deborah Tuerkheimer, a former prosecutor in Manhattan and currently a law professor at Northwestern, was not surprised by the overturning of Weinstein’s conviction from last year.

Beyond the courtroom, it’s hard to argue that Weinstein didn’t misuse his influence in Hollywood to coerce women into sexual acts. Almost a hundred people have made accusations against him, and the quantity of evidence is immense, with prominent figures in the industry confirming stories of inappropriate behavior. However, most of the alleged crimes committed by Weinstein against these women are not sufficient for an indictment, as they mainly involve claims of civil sexual harassment rather than assault or rape. Some incidents took place in California, where charges were eventually brought, and others happened too long ago to be prosecuted. Consequently, while there is a loud outcry against Weinstein, only a few women’s accusations could realistically form the basis of a trial.

In 2018, with federal investigators considering a possible case and facing criticism from the governor for not acting on charges earlier, the District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan took a risk that ultimately resulted in Weinstein’s sex crimes conviction being overturned. Without the testimony of three additional women whose accusations did not result in charges, Halim Dhanidina, a former prosecutor who served as a state and appeals court judge for nine years, notes that securing a conviction this time will be more challenging. “It will have a significant impact,” he says. “The burden on the prosecution is heavier. The charges they filed must now be able to stand alone.

The central argument in Weinstein’s defense is that his accusers willingly engaged in sexual activities with him, sometimes for professional advancement. This is expected to be one of the most challenging aspects for the jury to understand. Defense attorneys might emphasize that Haley had sex with Weinstein two weeks after he allegedly assaulted her, and she addressed one of her emails to him as “Lots of love.” She explained during the first trial that she did this by simply pushing aside the incident and acting as if it never happened.

Six years ago, during cross-examination, Damon Cheronis (former lawyer of Weinstein) portrayed Haley as having enjoyed her sexual encounter with Weinstein when she agreed to meet him at a hotel room. He presented the jury with hearts that Haley had drawn on her calendar in the days following the incident.

As a gamer putting my thoughts into words, I found myself doodling hearts those days, July 27th, 28th, and 29th. Was that a reflection of how I felt during that time?

“It may have been,” Haley replied.

Defense lawyers may also anticipate drawing an argument based on Mann herself admitting that her three-year relationship with Weinstein involved consensual intimacy. As Cheronis pointed out, it’s hard to claim love in 2016, express frustration about being a casual fling in 2017, and then label him as a predator in 2020, given the messages she sent him after the alleged incident.

Testimony was given by Mann stating that Weinstein frequently coerced her into sexual acts, wielding significant power over her professional life. Dawn Hughes, a specialist in the psychological and traumatic aspects of sexual assault, will provide testimony for the prosecution to shed light on certain behaviors observed in victims like Mann and Haley, such as their responses to the traumatic events they experienced.

Matthew Galluzzo, a previous attorney for the New York County District Attorney’s Office, points out that it’s challenging for juries to comprehend why, following the attacks, they seemed to pursue friendly relations with the suspect. He explains that such cases are tough for prosecutors, often causing them to feel apprehensive about bringing them forward.

Significantly, Weinstein has already served the prison sentence associated with Mann’s rape charge that was later overturned. If the jury finds him guilty again, he will receive credit for this time, which essentially means it won’t affect his new sentence. Primarily, his legal team aims to challenge the accusations made by Haley and the third accuser.

In the trial, credibility proved crucial, perhaps more so than in other cases. This was the key element that led to Johnny Depp’s significant defamation victory over Amber Heard in 2022, based on her op-ed piece published in The Washington Post. Out of the $15 million the jury granted Depp, $5 million were intended as punitive damages, serving as a punishment for Heard’s conduct deemed particularly offensive. The verdict suggested that jurors found it hard to trust Heard’s testimony, who broke down in tears on the stand while narrating an incident where she claimed she was physically assaulted and raped by Depp.

It wasn’t until the court granted the prosecution the ability to claim that Masterson had drugged his victims, contradicting his argument that the encounters were consensual, that the actor was found guilty of rape charges. Despite this shift from the initial trial, which resulted in a deadlock, jurors remained divided on a charge involving Masterson’s former long-term girlfriend.

The court permitted the prosecution to assert that Masterson drugged his victims, contradicting his claim of consensual encounters, leading to the actor’s rape conviction. Although this alteration was made from the original trial, which ended in a stalemate, jurors were still split on a charge concerning Masterson’s ex-long-term girlfriend.

Aidala believes the situation might be different now. He’s optimistic about the outcome. He says that #MeToo, which was supposedly an impeccable movement, has shown cracks in its perfection. “Harvey Weinstein was portrayed as the symbol of this movement,” he adds.

If he succeeds in this trial, there’s a chance he won’t be required to remain at Rikers Island for the remainder of his life. Instead, attention will shift towards California.

Read More

2025-04-19 16:25