Manhattan DA Stands By Grand Jury Presentation in Harvey Weinstein Case
Prosecutors on Wednesday asked a judge to reject the movie mogul's motion to toss rape and sexual assault charges.
September 12, 2018 at 07:14 PM
4 minute read
Manhattan prosecutors said they presented a “fair and full account” of the relationship between disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein and one of his accusers, despite not producing emails to the grand jury that the defense claims shows he had a consensual relationship with one accuser.
In a response filed Wednesday, Assistant District Attorney Joan Illuzzi-Orbon, who is leading the prosecution against Weinstein, called on Acting Manhattan Supreme Court Justice James Burke to deny a motion by Benjamin Brafman, Weinstein's lead counsel, to dismiss two counts of predatory sexual assault, two counts of first-degree criminal sexual act, first-degree rape and third-degree rape.
Brafman argued in the motion to dismiss, filed last month, that emails between Weinstein and one of three alleged victims could have been read as “consistent with an ongoing, warm, friendly relationship” that carried on after his alleged 2013 attack, and not that of a rapist and his victim.
Brafman also peppered the motion with excerpts from communiques between Weinstein and his accuser, including from an email in which they allegedly said: “I love you, always do. But I hate feeling like a booty call.”
But Weinstein does not claim the emails contain a denial of the rape allegation, Illuzzi-Orbon wrote in her motion—rather the emails could suggest a state of mind that is inconsistent with what Weinstein feels “should be that of a rape victim.”
With respect to arguments from Weinstein's lawyers that they were not given enough time to prepare him to testify before a grand jury, prosecutors said Weinstein was given notice last October and again on May 16—nine days before he was arrested—that he would have the chance to testify before a grand jury.
Additionally, prosecutors said, Weinstein could have told the grand jury of his relationship with his accuser without having the emails physically on hand.
Three of the counts in the indictment pertain to an alleged 2013 attack where the accuser remains unnamed.
The remaining counts relate to Lucia Evans, an aspiring actress who said Weinstein forced her to give him oral sex in 2004; and Mimi Haleyi, a production assistant who said Weinstein forced himself upon her in 2006.
Weinstein, who has pleaded not guilty to the charges, faces a maximum sentence of life in prison on the predatory sexual assault counts.
Weinstein is scheduled to appear for a Nov. 8 hearing before a Manhattan Supreme Court justice.
Illuzzi-Orbon also addressed a portion of Brafman's motion to dismiss in which he characterized Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. as being under “unprecedented” pressure to indict Weinstein, citing the fact that his office had not brought charges against Weinstein regarding allegations that he sexually assaulted actress Paz de la Huerta, despite the fact sources within the New York City Police Department told media outlets there was enough evidence to make an arrest.
Brafman also said the pressure on Vance was ratcheted up by Gov. Andrew Cuomo's executive order for the attorney general to investigate how the DA handled allegations by Italian model Ambra Gutierrez that Weinstein groped her during a meeting at his office, allegations also investigated by the NYPD that did not materialize into criminal charges for Weinstein.
Prosecutors said Brafman's motion mischaracterizes Cuomo's letter to then-Attorney General Eric Schneiderman as an order to investigate “failures to prosecute Weinstein” when it was actually to direct an inquiry into the working relationship between the Manhattan DA and the NYPD with regard to the handling of the allegations against Weinstein.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBen & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250