In the wake of Harvey Weinstein’s conviction for rape and subsequent imprisonment nearly four years ago, the highest court in New York grappled with the potential reversal of the landmark #MeToo-era verdict during oral arguments on Wednesday.
Mr. Weinstein’s legal team pressed the state’s Court of Appeals to invalidate the film producer’s 2020 conviction, contending that the trial judge, James Burke, compromised Mr. Weinstein’s right to a fair trial through rulings perceived as unduly favorable to the prosecution, effectively transforming the proceedings into a one-sided affair.
Arthur Aidala, representing Mr. Weinstein, asserted before the seven-member court in Albany: “It was his character that was on trial. It wasn’t the evidence that was on trial.”
Mr. Weinstein, now 71, was found guilty of a criminal sex act for coercing oral sex from a TV and film production assistant in 2006 and third-degree rape for assaulting an aspiring actress in 2013, resulting in a 23-year prison sentence. Additionally, last year in Los Angeles, he was convicted of another rape, garnering an additional 16-year term.
Counsel for the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, which prosecuted Mr. Weinstein in New York, countered that Judge Burke’s rulings were appropriate and the conviction should be upheld.
Mr. Weinstein’s legal team sought a new trial solely for the criminal sexual act charge, contending that the rape charge cannot be retried due to exceeding the statute of limitations.
Should the Court of Appeals rule in Mr. Weinstein’s favor, he would remain incarcerated due to his conviction in California. Although Mr. Weinstein did not attend the proceedings, he reportedly monitored a livestream from Mohawk Correctional Facility, where he is serving his sentence.
The accusations against Mr. Weinstein catalyzed the #MeToo movement, marking a significant shift in societal awareness and response to sexual misconduct. The trial in New York garnered substantial attention, with demonstrators outside the courthouse condemning Mr. Weinstein. Originating as a social media campaign in 2017, #MeToo quickly evolved into a global phenomenon, seeking to empower survivors of sexual harassment, assault, and abuse to speak out and share their stories.
Maintaining his innocence, Mr. Weinstein insists that any sexual encounters were consensual.
Mr. Aidala asserted that Judge Burke’s rulings significantly influenced the trial, particularly by permitting testimony from three women regarding allegations unrelated to the case and allowing prosecutors to introduce Mr. Weinstein’s past behavior. Mr. Aidala contended that Mr. Weinstein wished to testify but refrained due to concerns about addressing numerous alleged incidents spanning decades.
The judges hearing the arguments oscillated between skepticism and empathy for the opposing counsels. While acknowledging the unique circumstances of Mr. Weinstein’s case, some judges questioned the legal rationale for admitting testimony from additional accusers.
The Court of Appeals agreed to hear Mr. Weinstein’s case following an intermediate appeals court’s affirmation of his conviction. Before the ruling, lower appellate court judges expressed reservations about Judge Burke’s handling of the trial, noting concerns about the admission of potentially prejudicial testimony.
Mr. Burke’s tenure ended in 2022, and he no longer serves as a judge.
