Will Harvey Weinstein get the Cosby treatment? Decades of Alleged Sexual Assault and Harassment

Harvey Weinstein Is Finally Getting Extradited to Los Angeles
By Victoria Bekiempis

Photo: Seth Wenig/AP/Shutterstock
Harvey Weinstein will be extradited to Los Angeles for sex-crime charges, a judge decided Tuesday afternoon. During the extradition hearing, prosecutors revealed that authorities in Los Angeles would likely try transferring him to California in the first half of July.
This development came after more than a year of delays; Weinstein’s transfer was postponed repeatedly for things ranging from the COVID-19 pandemic to Weinstein’s declining health.
“I will respectfully deny your petition,” Judge Kenneth Case told Weinstein’s attorney, Norman Effman, of his latest request for a delay. Case also denied Effman’s request for a ten-day stay — basically, a hold on this ruling going into effect — telling him it’s “more appropriate” to petition an appeals court.
Weinstein, who appeared in court virtually via video from Wende Correctional Facility in upstate New York, put his head in his hands moments after Case’s ruling.



Prosecutors in L.A. first announced sex-crime charges against Weinstein on January 6, 2020 — one day before the disgraced movie producer’s Manhattan rape trial began. Los Angeles prosecutors alleged that Weinstein raped one woman and sexually assaulted another woman in separate incidents over two days in 2013.
That April, the L.A. District Attorney’s office charged Weinstein with another count for an alleged sexual assault on a woman at a Beverly Hills hotel in May 2010. L.A. prosecutors then said in October 2020 that Weinstein faced six more counts: three felony counts each of forcible rape and forcible oral copulation. Weinstein has since been hit with an indictment on sex-crimes charges in L.A.
Weinstein is now serving a 23-year sentence following his conviction on
first-degree criminal sexual act and third-degree rape on February 24, 2020. He is appealing his conviction.
Asked for comment on the judge’s decision, a spokesman for Weinstein said in an email: “We are disappointed by the judge’s ruling but we are appealing his decision in New York and we have filed a habeas corpus petition in the Los Angeles Superior Court to prevent the Los Angeles District Attorney from transporting Mr. Weinstein to Los Angeles until he can receive the medical care he needs in New York.”
 








champan-1624212295024.jpg
 
Bill Cosby accuser Andrea Constand says his sentence being vacated is 'disappointing'

The woman at the center of the comedian's sexual assault conviction is worried about the implications of this ruling.
By Christian Holub
July 01, 2021 at 10:56 AM EDT




ADVERTISEMENT
SaveFBTweetMore
Andrea Constand returns to the courtroom during a lunch break at the sentencing hearing for the sexual assault trial of entertainer Bill Cosby at the Montgomery County Courthouse September 24, 2018 in Norristown, Pennsylvania.

| CREDIT: DAVID MAIALETTI-POOL/GETTY IMAGES
Bill Cosby is a free man once again after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court vacated his sexual assault conviction on Wednesday. Some people are happy about this, such as Cosby's former sitcom co-star Phylicia Rashad, but the women who tried for years to get the world to believe that the formerly beloved comedian assaulted them feels differently.
Although Cosby has been accused of sexual assault by more than 60 women, his 2018 conviction was based on his alleged 2004 assault of Andrea Constand, then a Temple University employee who considered him a mentor. When Bruce Castor, then the district attorney of Montgomery County, investigated Constand's accusation in 2005, he decided not to criminally prosecute Cosby. By declaring this publicly, he insured that when Constand brought a civil suit against Cosby, the accused would not be able to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights. As a result, Cosby gave sworn depositions in the civil suit in which he admitted to drugging women he wanted to have sex with.

Castor's successor as Montgomery County DA later used these depositions to finally convict Cosby in 2018. On Wednesday, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that convicting Cosby on the basis of incriminating testimony he gave while unable to invoke the Fifth Amendment was a violation of due process and his constitutional rights. In a statement posted to Twitter, Constand and her lawyers Dolores Troiani and Bebe Kivitz expressed disappointment with this ruling, and wondered whether it would have a chilling effect on other sexual assault survivors.
"Today's majority decision regarding Bill Cosby is not only disappointing but of concern in that it may discourage those who seek justice for sexual assault in the criminal justice system from reporting or participating in the prosecution of the assailant or may force a victim to choose between filing either a criminal or civil action," they said in their statement.



The court's decision relied on a public press release from Castor in 2005 saying he wouldn't prosecute Cosby, but in their statement Constand, Troiani, and Kivitz said "the press release had no meaning or significance to us in 2005." They also noted that Castor's office did not consult with them about any decisions or deals.
 
Harvey Weinstein Pleads Not Guilty to 11 Counts of Rape and Sexual Assault

54630629ef155d049de9ab6d9f4e13579c-weinstein.rsquare.w330.jpg


By Zoe Haylock@zoe_alliyah
Photo: Scott Heins/Getty Images
Harvey Weinstein emerged for his first court appearance in Los Angeles this Wednesday. The disgraced movie producer arrived in a wheelchair, his arms bound to the rests, to plead not guilty to 11 counts of rape and sexual assault. According to Variety, he spoke briefly, after which Judge Sergio Tapia wished him “good luck.” On Tuesday, Weinstein was extradited from New York, where he is serving a 23-year sentence for first-degree criminal sexual act and third-degree rape, to the Twin Towers Correctional Facility in downtown Los Angeles. On January 6, 2020 — the day before his trial began in Manhattan — the Los Angeles district attorney’s office alleged that Weinstein had raped and sexually assaulted two women in separate incidents over two days in 2013. In April 2020, he was additionally charged with a sexual assault that had taken place in May 2010. Six months later, prosecutors said Weinstein faced three more felony counts each of forcible rape and forcible oral copulation, six total. During Wednesday’s hearing, his attorney Mark Werksman asked for a medical evaluation and said he planned to file a demurrer — an objection based on irrelevance — challenging three of the counts on statute-of-limitations grounds.

The Los Angeles trial has been delayed repeatedly because of the COVID-19 pandemic and Weinstein’s own health. Weinstein’s attorneys began fighting the extradition in April, arguing that he needed treatment for his worsening eyesight at a nearby facility in Buffalo. Per Variety, the Sheriff’s Department and the district attorney’s office confirmed that they do have medical facilities in Los Angeles. Following the trial, Weinstein will be sent back to New York to serve the remainder of his sentence.
 
^


'Anybody can look at my naked body, any time of day': Jennifer Lawrence reflects on the 'eternal trauma' of 2014 iCloud leak and her disgust at being used in Harvey Weinstein's defence

  • The star, 31, who is expecting her first child with her husband of two years art gallery director Cooke Maroney, spoke to Vanity Fair about the experience
  • In 2014, Jennifer and a host of other stars were left traumatised when hackers broke into her iCloud and posted nude photos online on August 31
  • Speaking about the hack, she said: 'Anybody can go look at my naked body without my consent, any time of the day. Somebody in France just published'
  • Jennifer also touched on her name being dragged into Harvey Weinstein 's lawsuit, after the disgraced movie boss took a quote from the star out of context to use in his legal defense against sexual assault claims
By Ciara Farmer For Mailonline

Published: 10:58 EST, 22 November 2021 | Updated: 11:28 EST, 22 November 2021



 
Mel Gibson can testify in Harvey Weinstein assault trial, judge rules

The producer is accused of four counts of rape and seven counts of sexual assault involving five women.
By Emlyn TravisOctober 15, 2022 at 01:24 PM EDT

image



Mel Gibson can be called upon to testify in Harvey Weinstein's Los Angeles rape and sexual assault trial, a judge ruled on Friday, reports the Associated Press.
The controversial actor's name was among those revealed as potential witnesses in Los Angeles Superior Court. Judge Lisa B. Lench said Gibson could testify about what he says he learned from one of Weinstein's accusers, known as Jane Doe No. 3, about her alleged encounter with the disgraced movie producer.
Prosecutors claimed that in May 2010 a naked Weinstein followed the woman into a Beverly Hills hotel bathroom after receiving a massage from her and masturbated. Weinstein is accused of four counts of rape and seven counts of sexual assault involving five women in the trial, which began jury selection on Monday. He has pled not guilty and denied any nonconsensual sexual activity.


Mel Gibson; Harvey Weinstein

| CREDIT: STEVE GRANITZ/FILMMAGIC); ETIENNE LAURENT-POOL/GETTY
Weinstein's lawyers objected to Gibson being allowed to take the stand, citing that Gibson obtained information about the incident while getting his own massage and, as such, it was not a "fresh complaint." Per California law, a "fresh complaint" allows the introduction of evidence of sexual assault or another crime if the victim reported it to another individual within a short period of time after it occurred.
However, prosecution responded that Gibson understood that Weinstein had sexually assaulted the woman after she had an emotional reaction when the 66-year-old actor mentioned him. While Gibson could not recall when the moment took place, prosecutors say they will call an additional witness, Allison Weiner, who spoke with the woman and Gibson back in 2015.
The judge noted, however, that her decision to allow Gibson to testify could change depending on Jane Doe No. 3's forthcoming testimony.

One of Weinsten's attorneys, Mark Werksman, also claimed that, should Gibson be allowed to testify, prosecutors should be allowed to cross-examine him about his history of anti-Semitic and racist remarks.
Gibson previously launched into an anti-Semitic tirade against a police officer in a leaked recording from his 2006 D.U.I arrest. His ex-girlfriend, Oksana Grigorieva, later accused him of physical assault and released a secret recording of him hurling racist comments at her in 2010. Gibson pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor charge of battering Grigorieva in 2011, under a deal that would allow him to avoid jail and deny liability for the incident in any civil litigation. A judge of Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, accepted the plea and sentenced Gibson to 36 months of probation.
Judge Lench stated that Gibson's history of racist remarks was not relevant to the case but that she would allow prosecution to question the star about whether or not he had any animosity or personal bias toward Weinstein.
Werksman then claimed that there were already grounds for bias because his client is Jewish and once criticized Gibson's portrayal of Jewish people in his 2004 film The Passion of the Christ in a book.
"Any evidence of Mr. Gibson's racism or anti-Semitism would give rise to a bias against my client, who challenged him," he said, per the Associated Press. Weinstein's lawyers also suggested that Gibson was attempting to rectify his tarnished image by testifying against their client and positioning himself as an ally of the greater #MeToo movement.
The prosecution denounced the claims, asserting that Gibson had made no such comments about himself, and that at the time he mentioned Weinstein to the masseuse, Gibson was attempting to broker a deal with the producer.
Gibson previously spoke about the scandal surrounding Weinstein in 2017, telling The Guardian that he considered alleged victims speaking out "a precursor to change."
EW has reached out to Gibson's representatives, who declined to comment.
Weinstein is currently serving a 23-year sentence in New York after he was convicted of rape and sexual assault in 2020. He was granted a chance to appeal the conviction in August. His Los Angeles trial is expected to last eight weeks.
 









63963593-0-image-a-13_1666999330483.jpg
 






64069869-11375041-image-a-4_1667309443378.jpg
63962925-11375041-Ashley_M_a_dancer_is_seen_in_court_on_Friday_wiping_away_tears_a-a-3_1667309390249.jpg
63936991-11363735-image-a-3_1666944752071.jpg
 
Weinstein watched from the defence table while Ms Siebel Newsom gave evidence.

His lawyers argue the pair had consensual sex and she was seeking to use the once powerful producer to advance her career.

Ms Siebel Newsom is the fourth woman Weinstein is accused of sexually assaulting who has taken the stand in Los Angeles. Her testimony was the most dramatic and emotional so far in the three-week trial.


 
Obviously these videos are recirculating around.
But it always gets me that so many women in power
supported the man.
All the while he was abusing all those women.


 
I am no fan of Harvey Weinstein, and if anyone has been following the Los Angeles County case, and has details on the trial I would appreciate hearing them.

I believe there was no physical evidence presented, no police reports, no rape kit tests. Therefore, the jury had to base their decision on the testimony of the alleged victims.

I guess the question or questions that I ponder is did Harvey Weinstein physically hold these women down and force them to perform oral sex on him? In addition, did he hold these women down and force them to engage in sexual intercourse?

Or were the alleged victims involved with Harvey Weinstein because they believed he could advance their careers and the encounters were part of a transactional agreement, which would be between consenting adults.

I honestly don't know the answer, but it is something to ponder in the "Me too" era.
 
Last edited:
Obviously these videos are recirculating around.
But it always gets me that so many women in power
supported the man.
All the while he was abusing all those women.



Also didnt help that he hung around/got advice from people who got caught up with similar offenses or are considered enablers(Eli Roth,Quentin Tarantino,Harry Knowles etc)
 
I read writes ups on some of the testimony from the Jane Joes and yeah, according to testimony, there was force used. He'd tell them what he wanted to do and them if they said no or tried to extricate themselves from the situation he'd throw them on a bed or back them up into a counter or some shit and finger them and try to fuck, and they'd be crying or saying no. Again, this is their testimony, although as with Cosby, I have no doubt that there are gonna be some false accusations from people jumping on the bandwagon, I also am pretty sure that he's guilty of a great deal of this shit.


The thing is that because of who he is, a lot of women would go along with "hey let's go to my hotel room for a meeting" type shit. Also, he'd use his female assistant to make them feel a little more at ease, because they'd assume that she was gonna be with them, but then the assistant would exit and close the door shortly after they got to the room, leaving Harvey and the chick(s) alone. The audio tape from the italian (I think) actress that was made with the help of the NYPD that came out early in the me too era let me know what he was up to. In that tape, he didn't put hands on her, but I think only because she never entered his room, but he was like, breathlessly telling her to come in the room and not to fuck up her career by not coming in, etc.









.




I am no fan of Harvey Weinstein, and if anyone has been following the Los Angeles County case, and has details on the trial I would appreciate hearing them.

I believe there was no physical evidence presented, no police reports, no rape kit tests. Therefore, the jury had to base their decision on the testimony of the alleged victims.

I guess the question or questions that I ponder is did Harvey Weinstein physically hold these women down and force them to perform oral sex on him? In addition, did he hold these women down and force them to engage in sexual intercourse?

Or were the alleged victims involved with Harvey Weinstein because they believed he could advance their careers and the encounters were part of a transactional agreement, which would be between consenting adults.

I honestly don't know the answer, but it is something to ponder in the "Me too" era.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top