Unlock Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, editor of the FT, picks her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
New York’s highest court has overturned Harvey Weinstein’s sex crimes and rape convictions and ordered a new trial for the once-powerful movie mogul whose reported abuse of women fueled the #MeToo movement.
Weinstein was first convicted in New York in February 2020 and sentenced to 23 years in prison. He had appealed the verdict, citing, among other things, damning testimony from women not involved in the case about alleged sexual assaults that may have improperly influenced the jury.
The New York Court of Appeals on Thursday agreed with Weinstein in a 4-3 decision that prosecutors would not have been allowed to use such allegations to establish a “criminal propensity.”
It concluded that trial judge James Burke – who has since retired from the bench – “erroneously admitted testimony of unindicted alleged prior sexual conduct against persons who were not the plaintiffs in the underlying crimes.”
The appeals court ordered a new trial, but Weinstein will not be released – the New York decision will not affect his 2022 sentencing for rape and other sex crimes in California, for which he was sentenced to 16 years in prison.
“There are some people who are very unpopular in society. . . We still need to apply the law fairly. “No one is above the law, but no one is below the law either,” Arthur Aidala, Weinstein’s lawyer, told reporters gathered outside the Manhattan courthouse where former President Donald Trump’s “hush money” trial is taking place . Weinstein’s lawyers scheduled the press conference during reporters’ lunch break so they could attend, a spokesman said.
“I don’t care who the defendant is. Whether it is the former President of the United States or the most famous Hollywood producer of our generation,” Aidala added. “Today’s court decision is a great day for America. . . because it instills in us the belief that there is a justice system.”
He said Weinstein received the news from prison Thursday morning. “Someone just came up to him and handed him a piece of paper. There were two sentences. It was called Harvey Weinstein, conviction overturned.” Weinstein called Aidala shortly after 10 a.m. to thank him.
A spokesman for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, which filed the original case, said: “We will do everything in our power to retry this case and remain true to our commitment to survivors of sexual assault.”
Explosive allegations against the film producer were first published in the New York Times and the New Yorker in 2017. They sparked a reckoning in Hollywood that saw the ouster of dozens of powerful executives over misconduct allegations, including former CBS chief Les Moonves and Pixar co-founder John Lasseter.
The New York jury’s verdict against Weinstein in 2020 was seen as a landmark legal victory for the #MeToo movement, which aims to hold powerful men accountable for sexual abuse and harassment. Activist groups such as Time’s Up called it a “historic moment” for women’s rights. Then-Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance said the ruling “turned the tide in our justice system against men like Harvey Weinstein.”
The six-week trial – which culminated just weeks before the Covid-19 pandemic shut down the US – was marked by graphic and emotional testimony from women who alleged Weinstein took advantage of them and cornered them in hotel rooms and bathrooms driven. Court was adjourned early once because a prosecutor appeared to have a panic attack on the witness stand.
The allegations on which Weinstein was convicted in New York were based on two alleged incidents: the rape of Jessica Mann, an aspiring actress, in 2013 and the forcing of oral sex on Miriam Haley, a production assistant, in 2006.
He was acquitted of the most serious charges against him: predatory sexual assault and first-degree rape.
Three women who were not named in the criminal case against Weinstein testified against him during the trial and reported unwanted sexual advances against them by the former Hollywood power broker.
According to the ruling, a woman said she met Weinstein at a Manhattan nightclub, who later lured her to a hotel room and told her she would “never make it in this business” unless she had sex with him.
Another said she met Weinstein while working as a cocktail waitress, was asked to meet the mogul at his apartment and was sexually assaulted.
The third woman who met Weinstein in Los Angeles said she was invited to his home, ostensibly to discuss a script, when she was led into a bathroom where the producer masturbated in front of her.
New York courts sometimes allow evidence of prior crimes to be presented to establish the defendant’s credibility, or lack thereof.
The jury in this case was instructed that the three women’s statements “shall not be relied upon as evidence that the defendant had any inclination or predisposition to commit the offenses charged.”
But the appeals court majority said the effect of her testimony was to “strengthen her credibility and weaken the defendant’s character before the jury.”
In a dissenting opinion, Appeals Court Judge Madeline Singas said her fellow lawyers’ decision meant “jurors will be kept in the dark going forward and defendants will be spared of previous crimes.”
She added that “ultimately, the path to holding defendants accountable for sexual assault has become significantly more difficult.”