Five more witnesses will be permitted to testify against former Hollywood film producer and convicted s*x offender Harvey Weinstein at his impending rape trial, but actresses will not be allowed to testify. McGowan, Rose Daryl Hannah, too.
Prosecutors intended to invite 15 witnesses to speak about the producer’s “previous bad deeds,” but the judge ruled that 10 of them could not testify. The court will also allow jurors to hear about Weinstein’s s*xual assault conviction in New York.
Haley, Miriam Haley will not be summoned to testify in Los Angeles. Weinstein is charged with 11 counts of rape and s*xual abuse against five women. The prosecution wants to summon more witnesses to prove Weinstein’s proclivity for committing s*x crimes.
On Wednesday, his defense attorney, Mark Werksman, contended that the witnesses would confuse the jury and serve only to tarnish his character. “Whether they’re prosecuted or not, the jury will be tempted to punish him for all they heard,” Werksman stated.
The main prosecutor, Paul Thompson, claimed that it was not the DA’s fault that so many women wanted to testify against Weinstein. He stated, “There is one individual in this courtroom who is responsible for that.” “Mr. Weinstein is to blame for this.
Harvey Weinstein has assaulted many Female Actresses
Mr. Harvey Weinstein is the one who has perpetrated all of these crimes against so many women over such a long period of time. The DA’s motion and the defense’s response are both sealed. The witnesses were only given first names in court, however, some were easily recognized.
The prosecution was attempting to phone “Daryl,” according to Werksman.”The prosecution seeks to submit her testimony with the incendiary intention of implying that this individual is so horrible that he would try to rape America’s beloved – the mermaid from ‘Splash,'” Werksman said.
Hannah told Ronan Farrow of the New Yorker her account, stating that Weinstein beat on her hotel room door twice and forced her to flee out the back. Weinstein was not even charged with a felony in that event, according to Werksman, making it irrelevant to the case.
“She’s only there to make the jury detest Mr. Weinstein even more than they already do,” he claimed. The prosecution wanted “Rose” to testify that Weinstein had forcibly performed oral s*x on her in a hotel hot tub, according to Werksman.
According to Thompson, the incident occurred in 1997.McGowan was one of Weinstein’s first public accusers, accusing him of assaulting her at the 1997 Sundance Film Festival. McGowan’s testimony was declared inadmissible because the judge barred any testimony relating to activity prior to 2000.
One of the most critical aspects of Weinstein’s first trial in New York, as well as Bill Cosby’s two trials in Pennsylvania, was the question of “previous bad acts” testimony. Three women were allowed to speak in the first Weinstein trial about uncharged s*xual assaults.
Weinstein is now appealing his conviction, which sentenced him to 23 years in prison, in part because of the extra testimony, which he claims swayed the jury. In December, an appeals court heard the case, and a few of the justices appeared receptive to the defense argument.
In his argument, Werksman cited the New York appeal, saying that allowing too many “previous bad actions witnesses” would render any conviction in Los Angeles vulnerable to appeal. “This is a People run kamikaze,” he continued. “Perhaps they’ll blame the (DA’s) appellate unit if the conviction is overturned on appeal.
“Thompson replied that such witnesses were allowed by the legislation for a reason and that courts in California have frequently affirmed their use in trials. He stated, “It’s constitutional.” “It’s all right. “The judge tried to shorten the list by allowing prosecutors to call only Natassia, Miss I., and Kelly S. in court.
Prosecutors will also be allowed to call two additional women, though the judge let the DA’s office choose from a list of seven potential witnesses. The ruling visibly enraged Werksman, who said that the prosecutors had requested a high figure as a “feint” in order to make the judge’s eventual ruling appear fair.
“This is going to turn into a circus,” he said. “I respectfully request that the court reconsider. “The judge stated that the parties plan to begin the trial in September. The date for the next hearing has been scheduled for June 10.