Harvey Weinstein's rape retrial is set for opening statements at a different #MeToo moment
NEW YORK (AP) — Five years after Harvey Weinstein 's original #MeToo trial delivered a searing reckoning for one of Hollywood's most powerful figures, the ex-studio boss is on trial again after an appeals court threw out the landmark rape conviction.
Opening statements are set for Wednesday in a trial that could take six weeks.
It's happening at the same Manhattan courthouse as his first trial, and two accusers who testified then are expected to return.
But Weinstein's retrial is playing out at a different cultural moment than the first, which happened during the height of the #MeToo movement. And along with the charges being retried, he faces an additional allegation from a woman who wasn't involved in the first case.
The jury counts seven women and five men — unlike the seven-man, five-woman panel that convicted him in 2020 — and there's a different judge.
The #MeToo movement, which exploded in 2017 with allegations against Weinstein, has also evolved and ebbed.
At the start of Weinstein's first trial, chants of 'rapist' could be heard from protesters outside.
TV trucks lined the street, and reporters queued for hours to get a seat in the packed courtroom. His lawyers decried the 'carnival-like atmosphere' and fought unsuccessfully to get the trial moved from Manhattan.
This time though, over five days of jury selection, there was none of that.
Those realities, coupled with the New York Court of Appeals' ruling last year vacating his 2020 conviction and 23-year prison sentence — because the judge allowed testimony about allegations Weinstein was not charged with — are shaping everything from retrial legal strategy to the atmosphere in court.
Weinstein, 73, is being retried on a criminal sex act charge for allegedly forcibly performing oral sex on a movie and TV production assistant, Miriam Haley, in 2006 and a third-degree rape charge for allegedly assaulting an aspiring actor, Jessica Mann, in a Manhattan hotel room in 2013.
Weinstein also faces a criminal sex act charge for allegedly forcing oral sex on a different woman at a Manhattan hotel in 2006. Prosecutors said that the woman, who hasn't been named publicly, came forward days before his first trial but wasn't part of that case. They said they revisited her allegations when his conviction was thrown out.
The Associated Press does not generally identify people alleging sexual assault unless they consent to be named, as Haley and Mann have done.
Weinstein has pleaded not guilty and denies raping or sexually assaulting anyone. His acquittals on the two most serious charges at his 2020 trial — predatory sexual assault and first-degree rape — still stand.
Lindsay Goldbrum, a lawyer for the unnamed accuser, said Weinstein's retrial marks a 'pivotal moment in the fight for accountability in sex abuse cases" and a "signal to other survivors that the system is catching up — and that it's worth speaking out even when the odds seem insurmountable.'
This time around, the Manhattan district attorney's office is prosecuting Weinstein through its Special Victims Division, which specializes in such cases, after homicide veterans helmed the 2020 version. At the same time, Weinstein has added several lawyers to his defense team — including Jennifer Bonjean, who is involved in appealing his 2022 rape conviction in Los Angeles. She helped Bill Cosby get his conviction overturned and defended R. Kelly in his sex crimes case.
'This trial is not going to be all about #MeToo. It's going to be about the facts of what took place,' Weinstein's lead attorney, Arthur Aidala, said recently. 'And that's a big deal. And that's the way it's supposed to be.'
But there has been some talk of #MeToo already. A prosecutor asked prospective jurors whether they'd heard of the movement. Most said that they had but that it wouldn't affect them either way.
Others went further.
A woman opined that 'not enough has been done' as a result of #MeToo. A man explained that he had negative feelings about it because his high school classmates had been falsely accused of sexual assault.
Another man said he viewed #MeToo like other social movements: 'It's a pendulum. It swings way one way, then way the other way, and then it settles."
None of them are on the jury.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
‘Deeply private': Oregon AG challenges potential sale of 23andMe users' personal data
PORTLAND, Ore. () — Oregon is among several states taking legal action against a biotechnology company that could sell customer's personal information amid financial woes. Attorney General Dan Rayfield has revealed that Oregon, along with 27 other states, has sued 23andMe in an effort to challenge the potential sale of user data. The California-based genetic testing company in late March, around the same time that co-founder and CEO Anne Wojcicki announced her resignation after nearly 19 years in the role. Grant High School community advocates for new lighting at Grant Bowl athletics field 23andMe is now hoping a buyer will acquire the company — along with the 'sensitive' health and genetic data in its possession. 'This isn't just data — it's your DNA,' Rayfield said in a release. 'It's personal, permanent, and deeply private. People did not submit their personal data to 23andMe thinking their genetic blueprint would later be sold off to the highest bidder. We're standing up in court to make sure Oregonians — and millions of others — keep the right to control their own genetic information.' Following the bankruptcy filing, the attorney general's office issued a consumer alert informing Oregonians that they could withdraw their consent and delete their data from the platform. But the new lawsuit claims a potential could still impact around 15 million customers. The Associated Press has reported 23andMe only recently reached a settlement involving a . In 2023, the company revealed that hackers had stolen the personal information of nearly seven million users — including 5.5 million people who used the DNA Relatives feature and another 1.4 million people who had created family tree profiles. But in a statement to KOIN 6 on Wednesday, 23andMe claimed arguments in the new lawsuit are 'without merit.' A company spokesperson said the potential sale is permitted and the potential buyers are required to adopt its policies. Criminal proceedings in Salem mass stabbing on hold amid suspect's mental evaluation 'Customers will continue to have the same rights and protections in the hands of the winning bidder,' the spokesperson added in an email. 'Both remaining bidders are US companies, have committed to abide by 23andMe privacy policies, and will continue to operate 23andMe as it has always been operated.' The U.S. Bankruptcy Court is slated to hear arguments for the objection of the sale on June 17. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Judge blocks Trump administration's attempt to deport Mahmoud Khalil
Editor's note: The video above aired in a previous newscast. (AP)– A federal judge has ruled that the government must release Mahmoud Khalil, the former Columbia University graduate student whom the Trump administration is trying to deport over his participation in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. But Khalil, a legal U.S. resident, will remain in custody until at least Friday, giving the government time to appeal, U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz said Wednesday. More Local News 'The court's decision is the most significant vindication yet of Mahmoud's rights,' said Ramzi Kassem, co-director of CLEAR, a legal nonprofit and clinic at the City University of New York that represents Khalil. 'But we aren't out of the woods until Mahmoud is free and back home with his wife and child.' Lawyers and spokespersons for the Justice Department, which is handling the case, didn't immediately respond to an email seeking comment. Khalil was detained by federal immigration agents on March 8 in the lobby of his university-owned apartment, the first arrest under President Donald Trump's crackdown on students who joined campus protests against the war in Gaza. He was then flown across the country and taken to an immigration detention center in Jena, Louisiana, thousands of miles from his attorneys and wife, a U.S. citizen who gave birth to their first child while he was in custody. Khalil's lawyers challenged the legality of his detention, accusing the Trump administration of trying to suppress free speech. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio says he has the power to deport Khalil because his presence in the U.S. could harm foreign policy. Farbiarz had ruled earlier that expelling Khalil from the U.S. on those grounds was likely unconstitutional. In his new ruling Wednesday, the judge said that Khalil had shown that his continued detention is causing irreparable harm to his career, his family and his free speech rights. However, the judge put his order on hold until 9:30 a.m. Friday to allow the government time to appeal. He also required Khalil to post a $1 bond before he is freed. More Local News In his ruling, Farbiarz cited Khalil's statement to the court last week that the revocation of his green card has damaged his career prospects, including a decision by Oxfam International to rescind a job offer to serve as a policy adviser. The judge also noted that the decision deterred Khalil from engaging in constitutionally protected protests and free speech-related activities. 'The Court finds as a matter of fact that the Petitioner's career and reputation are being damaged and his speech is being chilled — and this adds up to irreparable harm,' the judge wrote. Farbiarz noted in his ruling that the government has also argued it is detaining and deporting Khalil in part because of alleged omissions on his green card application. But the judge said evidence presented by his attorneys showed lawful permanent residents are virtually never detained for such a thing. Khalil, in his statement to the court last week, also disputed that he wasn't forthcoming on the application. For example, he said he was never employed by or served as an 'officer' of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, as the administration claims, but completed an internship approved by the university as part of his graduate studies. More Local News The judge's decision comes after several other legal residents targeted for their activism have been released from custody, including another Palestinian student at Columbia, Mohsen Mahdawi; a Tufts University student, Rumeysa Ozturk; and a Georgetown University scholar, Badar Khan Suri. Rubio has cited a rarely used statute to justify the deportation of Khalil and others, which gives him power to deport those who pose 'potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.' Khalil isn't accused of breaking any laws during the protests at Columbia. The government, however, has said that noncitizens who participate in such demonstrations should be expelled from the country for expressing views that the administration considers to be antisemitic and 'pro-Hamas,' referring to the Palestinian militant group that attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Khalil, then an international affairs graduate student, had served as a negotiator and spokesperson for student activists at Columbia who took over a campus lawn last spring to protest Israel's military campaign in Gaza. The university brought police in to dismantle the encampment after a small group of protesters seized an administration building. Khalil is not accused of participating in the building occupation and wasn't among the people arrested in connection with the demonstrations. But images of his maskless face at protests, along with his willingness to share his name with reporters, made him an object of scorn among those who saw the protesters and their demands as antisemitic. The White House accused Khalil of 'siding with terrorists,' but has yet to give any evidence for the claim. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Harvey Weinstein found guilty of sexual assault
Disgraced Hollywood titan Harvey Weinstein was found guilty of one sexual assault at his retrial Wednesday and not guilty of another, with jurors still considering a rape charge after hearing graphic testimony from his alleged victims. Weinstein was retried for offenses against two women, Jessica Mann whom he is alleged to have raped, and Miriam Haley whom he was found to have sexually assaulted, alongside new charges of assaulting ex-model Kaja Sokola. He was found not guilty of those new charges at the tense proceeding in a Manhattan court on Wednesday. Delivering the verdict of the seven women and five men of the jury on the Haley count, the foreman said: "Guilty." He shook his head when he was asked for a verdict on the rape of Mann, and said "not guilty" on the Sokola count. Weinstein looked on impassively, seated in a wheelchair and wearing a dark suit as he has done throughout the six weeks of hearings. But later, the 73-year-old appeared to mutter "Not true" as he was wheeled out of court. Following the verdict, Haley told reporters that the defense's "victim shaming and deliberate attempts to distort the truth was exhausting and at times dehumanizing." "But today's verdict gives me hope, hope that there is new awareness around sexual violence and that the myth of the 'perfect victim' is fading." - Threats - The verdicts came after a dramatic morning in which tensions in the jury deliberation room spilled into the open. The foreman had told the judge Curtis Farber he could not continue after facing threats. "One other juror made comments to the effect 'I'll meet you outside one day'," the judge said quoting the foreman, adding there was yelling between jurors. After Weinstein's lawyer Arthur Aidala heatedly demanded a mistrial over the jury rupture, Weinstein himself addressed the court, deploying a commanding voice reminiscent of the heyday of his Hollywood power. "We've heard threats, violence, intimidation -- this is not right for me... the person who is on trial here," he said. "My lawyers, the District Attorney's lawyers can fight all they want, (but) this is my life that's on the line and it's not fair." "It's time, it's time, it's time your honor, to say this trial is over," Weinstein added. The judge responded that while unusual, disputes between jurors were not unheard of, before pressing on to hear the jury's partial verdict. - Genesis of 'MeToo' - The Oscar-winner's conviction is a vindication for Haley, whose complaint in part led to the initial guilty verdict in 2020, and helped spur the "MeToo" movement that saw an outpouring of allegations from prominent women who were abused by men. Weinstein underwent a spectacular fall from his position astride the world of Hollywood and show business in 2017 when the first allegations against him exploded into public view. The movement upended the film industry, exposing the systemic exploitation of young women seeking to work in entertainment, and provoking a reckoning on how to end the toxic culture. More than 80 women accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct in the wake of the global backlash against men abusing positions of power. Weinstein's original 2020 conviction, and the resulting 23-year prison term, was thrown out last year after an appeals court found irregularities in the way witnesses were presented. Throughout the trial that began on April 15, Weinstein's sharp-suited attorney argued that the context had shifted since the first proceedings. While the "MeToo" movement was "the most important thing in society" back them, "I think people's heads are in a different place right now," Aidala said. Any sentence will be in addition to the 16-year term Winstein is already serving after being convicted in California of raping a European actress over a decade ago. Weinstein, the producer of box office hits like "Pulp Fiction" and "Shakespeare in Love," did not take the stand during his retrial, but did acknowledge in an interview he acted "immorally." The retrial played out with far less public attention than the initial proceedings, when daily protests against sexual violence were staged outside the court. This time, the case was eclipsed by the blockbuster trial of hip-hop mogul Sean "Diddy" Combs taking place at an adjacent courthouse. gw/nl
