Harvey Weinstein tries to overturn 2020 rape conviction

Harvey Weinstein ought to have his first rape conviction overturned as a result of he was made a ‘poster boy’ for the MeToo motion, a court docket heard at the moment.

The disgraced Hollywood producer’s attorneys made arguments to an enchantment court docket on Valentine’s Day, claiming that he didn’t get a good trial in New York in 2020.

Arthur Aidala claimed that Weinstein’s character relatively than the proof was the main target of the case.

The allegations amounted to a ‘man courting a woman’ as a result of the relationships have been consensual, Aidala advised the enchantment court docket in Albany, upstate New York.

Seeking to display how unfair the case was, Aidala mentioned: ‘They tried his character to the purpose the place they stripped him bare and took footage and handed it to the jury. Literally!’

Weinstein, 71, who’s ill, is serving a 23-year sentence after being convicted of intercourse assault and rape throughout a trial in Manhattan in 2020.

He was jailed for one more 16 years in February final 12 months in Los Angeles after being convicted on three costs of rape and sexual assault.

Unless Weinstein, who as soon as dominated Hollywood and received 81 Academy Awards, wins his appeals on each circumstances then he’ll possible die in jail.

The listening to came about 100 miles from the Mohawk Correctional Facility the place Weinstein is serving his sentence.

Aidala advised the court docket that the conviction was unfair as a result of trial choose James Burke allowed in three different ladies as prior dangerous act witnesses, or Molyneaux witnesses.

If the jury believed the primary accusers then there was no want for extra ladies to present proof as Weinstein’s intent was apparent, Aidala argued.

In that case the query was: ‘What was his intent? It’s to not make macaroni and cheese, it’s to sexually assault her (a sufferer),’ Aidala mentioned.

In his handle to the court docket, Aidala mentioned that ‘our client did not get a fair trial’ and described the case as ‘basically a case of a man courting a woman’ as a result of it was consensual.

Allowing the extra witnesses ‘should not have been allowed’ as a result of there was ‘no ambiguity’ concerning the alleged behaviour.

Raising his voice, Aidala, described how Mimi Haleyi, considered one of Weinstein’s victims, was ‘yelling and screaming no, no, no’.

Judge Madeline Singas responded: ‘Aren’t you basically misunderstanding the character of this sexual assault?’

Aidala mentioned he wasn’t.

He mentioned: ‘Because he (Weinstein) became the poster boy for a movement he’s held to a special customary’.

According to Aidala, it was Weinstein’s ‘character that was on trial, it wasn’t the proof’.

Aidala insisted that it was a ‘textbook abuse of discretion’ to permit Haleyi to explain 10 different intercourse acts with Weinstein.

Doing so made him appear to be a ‘bad guy’.

Aidala additionally objected to juror 11, who was writing a e book a few predatory man whereas serving on the jury.

Raising his voice once more, Aidala mentioned: ‘We get more information this book is about a predatory man. ee confront her with it and basically she says I lied. I was mistaken, I wasn’t certain, I didn’t know what you meant. It was a quite simple query’.

Steven Wu, the Manhattan District Attorney’s chief of appeals, argued that Weinstein was in an ‘exalted’ place in Hollywood who abused that place.

‘He had a pattern where he would reach out to these women, make offers to these women….the repetition of the unlawful conduct makes an innocent explanation unlikely’.

Wu mentioned that the extra witnesses have been introduced in to indicate ‘young women were willing to have certain types of relationship with him and yet were not consenting to sexual acts’.

In response Aidala mentioned he was ‘a little offended’ by Wu’s argument.

He mentioned that it amounted to saying that ‘all women react the same way’ and that if a highschool senior was rejected by a promenade date, he ought to anticipate all different ladies to reject him too.

‘All women are different’, Aidala mentioned. ‘That’s in opposition to humanity’.

Aidala claimed Weinstein was ‘begging to tell his side of the story’ till the choose allowed within the extra witnesses.

He went on: ‘They tried his character to the point where they stipped him naked and took pictures and handed it to the jury. Literally!’

During the trial the jury have been certainly proven photographs of Weinstein’s bare physique, full with blackheads, to corroborate his accusers.

Aidala mentioned that the Manhattan District Attorney’s workplace arrange a hotline for ideas, calling it ‘1-800 Get Harvey’.

Urging the court docket to revive his religion within the justice system, he signed off with: ‘And your honours, happy Valentine’s Day’.

The judges will make their choice at a later date.

Weinstein’s fall from grace started in 2017 amid the MeToo motion which took intention at excessive profile males who had a historical past of sexual misconduct.

His trial in New York was arguably probably the most excessive profile and his conviction was seen as a watershed second for ladies’s rights.

Among those that gave proof at his trial in Los Angeles was Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the spouse of California governor Gavin Newsom.

She who repeatedly broke down in tears whereas describing how Weinstein raped her at a resort in Beverly Hills in 2005 when she was an aspiring actress.

During cross examination Weinstein’s lawyer Alan Werksman tried to say that the accusers had consensual relationships with him to spice up their careers, branding them ‘fame and fortune seekers’.

He known as Siebel Newsom, a documentary filmmaker, a ‘bimbo’ and mentioned her frequent crying throughout her testimony was a ‘theatrical, overly dramatized performance’.