1st Department Confirms Harvey Weinstein's Trial Will Continue on Schedule in Manhattan
The former movie producer's lawyers are expected to argue that his interactions with the women were consensual and, in at least some cases, transactional.
January 21, 2020 at 06:21 PM
4 minute read
Opening statements in the criminal trial of former Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein are expected to begin Wednesday in Manhattan Criminal Court, despite attempts from Weinstein's lawyers to move or delay the trial.
The judges in New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department rejected the defense team's motions for a change of venue and a stay Tuesday in a single-sentence order, echoing their refusal last fall to move the trial outside Manhattan.
News about Weinstein has traveled around the world, prosecutors in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office had argued, so moving the trial to another county in New York was unlikely to make a big difference to the case.
Weinstein is charged with rape, criminal sexual act and predatory sexual assault, which in New York is defined as rape or a related act against multiple people or, alternatively, rape or a related crime involving a weapon or causing injury. He has pleaded not guilty.
The former movie producer's lawyers are expected to argue that his interactions with the women were consensual and, in at least some cases, transactional.
"Who here thinks that someone could have consensual sexual relations with someone at work to get ahead at work?" Arthur Aidala of Aidala Bertuna & Kamins asked potential jurors.
Another member of Weinstein's defense team, Damon Cheronis, asked jurors if someone "could have sex with someone that they may not find attractive for reasons other than love."
Starting in fall 2017, when The New Yorker magazine and the The New York Times each published investigations into Weinstein's interactions with women during his decades in the movie business, more than 100 women have reportedly accused the former producer of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Many said he threatened to derail their careers if they did not cooperate with his advances.
Despite the dozens of accusations, Weinstein has been criminally charged in New York and Los Angeles in just a handful of the cases.
After more than a week of juror prescreening, a jury of 12 Manhattan residents, consisting of seven men and five women, and three alternates were seated in just a day and a half. Judge James Burke told potential jurors that awareness of Weinstein's story would not disqualify them, but they would need to consider only the evidence they heard inside the courtroom.
Dozens of potential jurors were dismissed after saying they could not be objective in the case. Weinstein's lawyers repeatedly objected to the fact that the jurors saw a wall of news cameras both in the hallway outside the courtroom and around the courthouse doors, waiting to film every step Weinstein took outside the courtroom.
Burke dismissed the idea that the media had created a carnival-like atmosphere, saying at one point that reporters have been careful to follow the rules of the court.
The judge also appeared resigned to the fact that the trial has attracted protests. When noise from one street protest reached the 15th-floor courtroom, Burke noted that it was unlikely to be the last time.
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 AllMore Big Law Firms Rush to Match Associate Bonuses, While Some Offer Potential for Even More
Lululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 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