A number of US appellate judges expressed considerations throughout a listening to on Wednesday over how the 2020 trial of disgraced former movie producer Harvey Weinstein was dealt with, in keeping with media stories from the courtroom.
The disgraced Hollywood mogul was sentenced to 23 years in jail final yr after a jury discovered him responsible of rape and sexual assault. He at present faces further fees of sexual misconduct, with a most penalty of 140 years behind bars.
Weinstein’s authorized staff believes he didn’t obtain a good trial as a result of the decide wrongfully permitted extreme testimony, whose sole objective was to defame his character. They argued that the decide shouldn’t have allowed the testimony of three girls who claimed that Weinstein had sexually assaulted them, as a result of their allegations weren’t a part of the case.
The protection additionally stated Weinstein declined to personally testify in court docket partly as a result of the decide allowed prosecutors to ask him about as many as 28 incidents unrelated to the costs he was dealing with on the time.
Three of the 5 justices on a New York appeals panel that examined the protection’s arguments throughout a listening to on Wednesday appeared to share these considerations, in keeping with media stories from the courtroom. Decide Sallie Manzanet-Daniels was quoted as suggesting the testimonies had been “overkill” and a “pile-on with three uncharged complainants, three uncharged victims.”
“Let’s inflame the jury’s coronary heart by telling them that he beat up his brother throughout a gathering,” she stated. “I don’t see how there is a stability there on that.”
In an analogous vein, Decide Angela Mazzarelli requested prosecutors why it was permitted to query Weinstein in regards to the time he supposedly threw a desk at an worker within the late Eighties, and allegedly threatened to chop off somebody’s genitals.
Decide Judith Gische stated that the jury’s verdict needs to be primarily based on the costs, and “not primarily based on the truth that that is only a horrible particular person.”
“He doesn’t get convicted as a result of he’s a nasty man. He will get convicted for these specific crimes,” Gische stated, noting that the prosecution’s arguments had been “rubbing me the improper means.”
The judges expressed curiosity in a retrial or a conviction reversal, in keeping with Newsweek.
Assistant District Lawyer Valerie Figueredo defended the dealing with of the 2020 trial, saying that the decide in that case “reached a good compromise” and “didn’t permit normal brutish conduct.” She argued that the permitted testimonies had been obligatory as a result of they had been “indicative of how the defendant lived his life,” calling the jury’s responsible verdict “honest and acceptable.”
The ruling on the enchantment is anticipated subsequent spring, in keeping with Deadline. Newsweek reported that the panel is anticipated to determine whether or not to name for a retrial in January. Considered one of Weinstein’s attorneys, Damon Cheronis, stated the protection was “hopeful” after Wednesday’s listening to.
The allegations of rape and sexual assault towards Weinstein, a longtime producer and the co-founder of a now-defunct movie studio, had been delivered to gentle in 2017. The case is likely one of the most well-known examples of the #MeToo motion, a marketing campaign to reveal sexual misconduct by public figures.
You’ll be able to share this story on social media: