First Jurors Seated in Harvey Weinstein Criminal Trial Told Trial Is Not About #MeToo
Manhattan Criminal Court Judge James Burke told the jurors that the trial would not be a referendum on sexual harassment, women's rights, or the #MeToo movement.
January 16, 2020 at 05:49 PM
4 minute read
Seven jurors were seated in the criminal trial of former Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, who has pleaded not guilty to charges of predatory sexual assault and rape.
The seven were seated on the first day that void dire shifted to in-court questioning of prospective jurors.
Manhattan Criminal Court Judge James Burke told the jurors that the trial would not be a referendum on sexual harassment, women's rights, or the #MeToo movement. Conversations on those subjects accelerated as dozens of women accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct, but he has been criminally charged in just a handful of cases in New York and Los Angeles.
"You are, of course, allowed to have strongly held beliefs, but that is not the question [in this case]," Burke said.
Donna Rotunno, one of Weinstein's defense attorneys, asked potential jurors if they had heard anything positive about Weinstein.
"Let the record reflect that no hands have been raised," she said. One potential juror said positive things have, in fact, been said about Weinstein, while another mentioned his successful career in the movie business.
Thursday's pool of about 140 potential jurors was winnowed from six days of juror prescreening. During each day of prescreening, about 100 potential jurors answered basic questions about scheduling and their ability to be impartial.
Burke defended the process in court Thursday morning as he denied a defense motion for private one-on-one questioning with each potential juror.
"This voir dire is hardly business as usual," he said. "We are conducting a multiple-stage jury selection and voir dire, and it is in fact revealing the very individuals who should not serve."
A total of about 200 people got through the screening process and filled out juror questionnaires, but prosecutors and Weinstein's defense team agreed to dismiss about 60 potential jurors after receiving their questionnaires.
While hundreds of potential jurors have already been dismissed from the case, Burke called one man back into court Thursday morning and told him to prepare for a court date in March on a potential contempt charge. The man had tweeted about his potential role in the Weinstein case despite instructions not to do so, Burke said.
Opening statements in Weinstein's trial are scheduled to begin next week, though the former producer's defense team made another motion Thursday in the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department to move the trial out of New York City.
The First Department rejected a change-of-venue motion in the fall, but Weinstein's lawyers argued that their concerns about publicity surrounding the trial have been confirmed during its first days.
"Indeed, this is more than just press," they wrote in the motion. "It is a media and entertainment circus, with many non-press attendees outside the courthouse. The atmosphere inside the courtroom is frenzied."
In response to an earlier defense motion calling for his own recusal, in which Weinstein's lawyers raised some of the same concerns about publicity, Burke disagreed with this assessment of the courtroom atmosphere. He said reporters have been well-behaved and quiet, noting that the courtroom has not been full every day.
The First Department did not issue a ruling on the change-of-venue motion Thursday.
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 AllPost-Pandemic Increase in Live Events Prompts Need for Premise Liability Action
7 minute readAs Uncertainty Hovers Over PGA Merger, LIV Golf Hires Entertainment Industry Veteran as Legal Chief
'Rampant Piracy': US Record Labels File Copyright Suit Against French Distributor Believe
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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