Honeymoon Period Over for Kamala Harris Polls Show Tight Race

[rooster59]

Movie producer Weinstein seeks to dismiss sex charges based on emails

By Brendan Pierson

 

Film producer Harvey Weinstein arrives at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City, U.S., July 9, 2018. Lucas Jackson/REUTERS

 

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Movie producer Harvey Weinstein's lawyers asked a New York judge on Friday to dismiss rape and sexual assault charges against him, releasing emails between one of his accusers and Weinstein they said were not shown to the grand jury that indicted him.

 

Weinstein has denied having non-consensual sex with anyone following accusations by more than 70 women, mostly young actresses and other women employed in the movie business, of sexual misconduct, including rape, dating back decades.

 

In a motion filed in New York state court in Manhattan, Weinstein's lawyers said the emails showed "a long-term, consensual, intimate relationship" between Weinstein and an unnamed woman who has accused him of raping her in 2013.

 

Weinstein's lawyers said they meant "not to ignore that rape can occur in relationships," but that prosecutors should have shown the grand jurors the emails in order for them to make an "informed decision."

 

The woman and Weinstein communicated over a four-year period after the date she said he raped her, Weinstein's lawyers said.

 

A lawyer or representative for the woman was not immediately known to request comment on the motion.

 

A spokesman for Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, who is prosecuting the case, declined to comment on the motion.

 

The case against Weinstein in Manhattan involves three women. Weinstein, 66, has pleaded not guilty to all of the charges and is free on $1 million bail.

 

Weinstein lawyer Benjamin Brafman said in a statement that the motions "reveal the existence of exculpatory evidence."

 

The accusations against Weinstein led to the #MeToo movement in which hundreds of women publicly accuse powerful men in business, politics and entertainment of sexual harassment and abuse.

 

Weinstein's lawyers said charges against Weinstein in New York involving two other women were flawed and must be dismissed as well. One involves a former actress who said Weinstein forced her to perform oral sex on him in 2004. The other is a former production assistant who said he performed oral sex on her against her will in 2006.

 

Weinstein's lawyers said the charges relating to the former actress failed to provide enough detail because they did not say exactly when the assault happened, instead giving a three-month range.

 

Prosecutors failed to give Weinstein adequate advance notice that they were presenting the "far more serious charges" to the grand jury of the allegation from 2006, his lawyers said.

 

The former production assistant's lawyer, Gloria Allred, said in response to Weinstein's motion to dismiss that the grand jury "would not have indicted him if they did not find the testimony that they heard credible."

 

A lawyer or representative for the former actress was not immediately known to request comment.

 

As accusations against Weinstein mounted, his company Weinstein Co fired him and filed for bankruptcy, and he was expelled from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

 

Through his company and Miramax, Weinstein won plaudits and awards for movies including "Shakespeare in Love," "Pulp Fiction" and "The King's Speech."

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-08-04

[Tchooptip]

This is the first picture of him where I see him shaved 

[spidermike007]

The American judicial system is very corrupt, in a sense that if you have $2-10 million to throw at a legal team, you can often buy your way out of the most serious crimes. A very talented legal team, which means a team without any ethics or morals, will usually be able to find a way to get some juries to doubt the evidence presented against the defendant that they so happily were willing to represent for a good bit of cash. Innocence never enters into the picture. Just cash. And there is nothing a judge can do, if the jury gets deadlocked, or one juror decides he can be bought, or influenced. 

[Jingthing]

I'll never look at a houseplant the same again. You did that, Harvey! 

[timendres]

5 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

The American judicial system is very corrupt, in a sense that if you have $2-10 million to throw at a legal team, you can often buy your way out of the most serious crimes. A very talented legal team, which means a team without any ethics or morals, will usually be able to find a way to get some juries to doubt the evidence presented against the defendant that they so happily were willing to represent for a good bit of cash. Innocence never enters into the picture. Just cash. And there is nothing a judge can do, if the jury gets deadlocked, or one juror decides he can be bought, or influenced. 

Tell that to Bernie Madoff, Martha Stewart, and a long list of others.

 

It is not entirely correct to state that the US judicial system is "corrupt". It is a well defined and structured system that can be gamed, if one has sufficient resources. I would definitely want to walk into that meat grinder with a pile of money than without.

[Enoon]

 

Problem for Harv is that he really, really......looks the part.

 

Casting did a first class job on this one.

 

 

[Bluespunk]

On 8/4/2018 at 5:57 AM, rooster59 said:

 

Prosecutors failed to give Weinstein adequate advance notice that they were presenting the "far more serious charges" to the grand jury of the allegation from 2006, his lawyers said.

My heart bleeds...

[spidermike007]

16 hours ago, timendres said:

Tell that to Bernie Madoff, Martha Stewart, and a long list of others.

 

It is not entirely correct to state that the US judicial system is "corrupt". It is a well defined and structured system that can be gamed, if one has sufficient resources. I would definitely want to walk into that meat grinder with a pile of money than without.

I think it is far harder to beat federal charges. No matter how much money you have to throw at the case. The feds are often willing to spend $10 to $40 million or more on a prosecution, if it is a high profile case. That is hard to compete with. But at the state and local level, the system can be bought with a great legal team. There was no way Madoff was going to get off. That was the crime of the century. Stewart also faced federal charges. Those are hard to beat. I should have qualified my statement to include that variable. 

[timendres]

2 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

I think it is far harder to beat federal charges. No matter how much money you have to throw at the case. The feds are often willing to spend $10 to $40 million or more on a prosecution, if it is a high profile case. That is hard to compete with. But at the state and local level, the system can be bought with a great legal team. There was no way Madoff was going to get off. That was the crime of the century. Stewart also faced federal charges. Those are hard to beat. I should have qualified my statement to include that variable. 

Very good point. State and local judicial lack resources and are often overrun, so they are far more willing to accept plea bargains, and are less likely to have the legal teams that can compete with the teams that money can buy. But I do not see this as "corruption". But, as with any institution, there is going to be some corruption somewhere. And in both directions.

[JLCrab]

It seems that the main reason that NY State in 2006 changed their statute of limitation on Class A felony rape from 5 years to no limitation is that DNA, if properly collected at the time of the offense, could convict someone of the crime many years down the road.

 

However, as in this case there seems to be no 'rape kit' available for any of the accusers, the Prosecution may have a tough time on Class A felony rape and the statute of limitations of 5 years has already expired on all the lesser assault or rape charges that might have been brought.

Edited August 5, 2018 by JLCrab

[JLCrab]

Correction to the above: There is at least one 3rd degree rape charge against Weinstein which means it must have occurred within the last 5 years or 5 years since the alleged victim turned 18.