NEW YORK — New York’s highest court on Thursday overturned Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 rape conviction, reversing a landmark #MeToo-era ruling by ruling that the trial judge improperly allowed women to testify about allegations against the former mogul of cinema who were not part of the case. .
Weinstein, 72, will remain in prison because he was convicted in Los Angeles in 2022 of another rape. But New York’s ruling reopens a painful chapter in America’s reckoning with sexual misconduct by powerful figures — an era that began in 2017 with a flood of allegations against Weinstein.
The Manhattan district attorney’s office has signaled its intention to retry Weinstein, and his accusers may once again be forced to retell their stories on the witness stand.
The state Court of Appeals overturned Weinstein’s 23-year sentence in a 4-3 decision, concluding that “the trial court erroneously admitted uncharged testimony of prior alleged sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes.” this is “an abuse of judicial discretion”.
In a scathing dissent, Judge Madeline Singas wrote that the Court of Appeal continued a “disturbing trend of overturning juries’ guilty verdicts in cases involving sexual violence.”
Weinstein has been in a New York prison since he was convicted of criminal sexual acts for forcibly performing oral sex on a TV and film production assistant in 2006 and third-degree rape for attacking an aspiring actress in 2013. He was sentenced to 16 years in prison in Los Angeles case.
Weinstein’s attorney, Arthur Aidala, called the Court of Appeals ruling “a tremendous victory for all criminal defendants in New York State.”
The Manhattan district attorney’s office said in a statement that it would “do everything in our power to retry this case.”
Attorney Douglas H. Wigdor, who represented eight Harvey Weinstein accusers, including two witnesses in the New York criminal trial, called the decision “a major step backwards in holding those responsible for acts of sexual violence accountable.”
“Courts routinely admit evidence of other uncharged acts when it assists juries in understanding issues concerning the defendant’s intent, modus operandi, or scheme. The jury has been instructed on the relevance of this testimony and overturning the verdict is tragic as it will require The victims will endure yet another trial,” Wigdor said in a statement.
Debra Katz, the prominent civil rights and #MeToo lawyer who has represented several Weinstein accusers, said her clients are “feeling devastated” by the ruling, but that she believed — and was telling them — that their testimony had changed the world.
“People continue to speak out, people continue to support other victims who have reported sexual assault and violence, and I truly believe there is no going back,” Katz said, predicting that Weinstein would be convicted again in a new trial.
She said accusers feel very comfortable that Weinstein remains behind bars.
The reversal of Weinstein’s conviction is the second major setback for the #MeToo movement in the last two years, after the US Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of a Pennsylvania court ruling that overturned Bill Cosby’s sexual assault conviction .
Weinstein’s conviction lasted more than four years, heralded by activists and defenders as a historic milestone, but dissected just as quickly by his lawyers and, later, by the Court of Appeal when it heard arguments on the matter in February.
Allegations against Weinstein, the once-powerful and feared studio head behind Oscar winners like “Pulp Fiction” and “Shakespeare in Love,” sparked the #MeToo movement. Dozens of women have come forward to accuse Weinstein, including famous actresses like Ashley Judd and Uma Thurman. His trial in New York attracted intense publicity, with protesters chanting “rapist” outside the courtroom.
Weinstein is incarcerated in New York at the Mohawk Correctional Center, about 100 miles northwest of Albany.
He maintains his innocence. He claims any sexual activity was consensual.
Aidala argued before the appeals court in February that Burke influenced the trial by allowing three women to testify about allegations that were not part of the case and by giving prosecutors permission to confront Weinstein, had he testified, about his long history of brutal behavior. . .
Aidala argued that the extra testimony went beyond normally allowable details about motive, opportunity, intent or a common scheme or plan, and essentially put Weinstein on trial for crimes with which he was not charged.
Weinstein wanted to testify but chose not to because Burke’s decision would have meant answering questions about more than two dozen alleged acts of bad behavior dating back four decades, Aidala said. They included fighting with his film producer brother, overturning a table in anger, fighting with waiters and shouting at his assistants.
A lawyer from the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which prosecuted the case, argued that the judge’s rulings were appropriate and that the additional evidence and testimony he allowed was important in providing jurors with context about Weinstein’s behavior and the way he he interacted with women.
Appeals chief Steven Wu said Weinstein’s acquittal of the most serious charges — two counts of predatory sexual assault and one count of first-degree rape involving actress Annabella Sciorra’s allegations of a rape in the mid-1990s — it showed that the jurors were paying attention and were not confused or overwhelmed. for additional testimony.
The Associated Press generally does not identify people who allege sexual assault unless they agree to be identified; Sciorra has spoken publicly about her allegations.
The Court of Appeals agreed last year to take Weinstein’s case after an intermediate appeals court upheld his conviction. Before their decision, the trial court judges raised questions about Burke’s conduct during oral arguments. One noted that Burke allowed prosecutors to accumulate “incredibly damaging testimony” from additional witnesses.
Burke’s term expired at the end of 2022. He was not reappointed and is no longer a judge.
Upon appeal, Weinstein’s lawyers asked for a new trial, but only on the criminal sexual act charge. They argued that the rape charge could not be retried because it involved alleged conduct outside the statute of limitations.
___
Associated Press writer Dave Collins reported from Hartford, Connecticut. AP writers Jocelyn Noveck and Larry Neumeister in New York also contributed to this story.
This story originally appeared on ABCNews.go.com read the full story
