Harvey Weinstein does not plan to testify at sex crimes retrial
The trial will move on to closing arguments on Tuesday without testimony from Weinstein, Arthur Aidala said on Sunday night.
The court handles other cases on Mondays.
It is unclear whether jury deliberations would begin on Tuesday afternoon or Wednesday.
It was a fraught decision for Weinstein, who has never answered questions in open court about any of the accusations women have made. He did not testify at previous trials in New York and California and was convicted in both.
He denies the allegations, and lawyer Mr Aidala has said that Weinstein was giving a lot of thought to whether to take the stand this time.
While his California appeal winds on, Weinstein won a new trial in his New York rape and sexual assault case when the state's highest court overturned his 2020 conviction.
He is charged in New York with raping Jessica Mann in 2013 and forcing oral sex on Miriam Haley and Kaja Sokola, separately, in 2006.
Ms Mann was an actor and hairstylist, Ms Haley a production assistant and producer, and Ms Sokola a model who aspired to an acting career.
All three women have testified for days at the retrial, giving emotional and graphic accounts of what they say they endured from a powerbroker who suggested he would help them achieve their show-business dreams, but then manoeuvred them into private settings and preyed on them.
His lawyers have argued that anything that happened between him and his accusers was consensual.
ADVERTISEMENT
In the US, defendants in criminal cases are not obligated to testify, and many decide not to, for various reasons.
Among them: the prospect of being questioned by prosecutors.
Weinstein has been watching the New York retrial intently from the defence table, sometimes shaking his head at accusers' testimony and often leaning over to one or another of his lawyers to convey his thoughts.
One of the lawyers, Mr Aidala, said outside court on Thursday that Weinstein thought a lot of holes had been poked in the accusers' accounts, but that he also was pondering whether jurors would feel they needed to hear from him.
The jury has heard from a few other defence witnesses — one of them via a transcript read by court employees.
That witness, Talita Maia, testified at the 2020 trial but was unavailable this time, so jurors instead got a reading Friday of her earlier testimony.
One court stenographer voiced the 2020 lawyers' questions, while another stenographer sat in the witness box and rendered Ms Maia's answers, at times with emphasis.
Ms Maia and Ms Mann were roommates and friends in 2013, but later fell out.
According to Ms Maia, Ms Mann never mentioned in those days that Weinstein had hurt her in any way.
Both Ms Maia and another witness, Thomas Richards, met up with Ms Mann and Weinstein shortly after Ms Mann has said she was raped.
Both witnesses testified that they saw nothing amiss.
Mr Richards, who was subpoenaed to appear and said he did not want to be seen as a Weinstein supporter, recalled Ms Mann and Weinstein having a 'friendly conversation' at a meal he shared with them that day.
Ms Mann testified earlier this month that she never told police or anyone else that Weinstein had sexually assaulted her because she didn't think she'd be believed, and she was scared of how he might react.
Weinstein's defence also brought in Ms Sokola's pal Helga Samuelsen, who also has friendly ties to the former producer.
Ms Samuelsen testified on Thursday that Weinstein visited Ms Sokola once and spent about a half- hour in a bedroom with her in a New York apartment the women briefly shared in 2005; Ms Sokola told jurors no such thing happened.
The Associated Press generally does not name people who say they have been sexually assaulted, but Ms Sokola, Ms Mann and Ms Haley have given their permission to be identified.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTÉ News
23-07-2025
- RTÉ News
Retrial opens for South Korean woman who bit off attempted rapist's tongue
A South Korean court has reopened a decades-old case after the country's #MeToo movement inspired a woman to challenge her conviction for defending herself against sexual violence 61 years ago. Choi Mal-ja was 19 when she was attacked by a 21-year-old man in the southern town of Gimhae in 1964. He pinned her to the ground and forced his tongue into her mouth, court records showed. Choi managed to break free by biting off about 1.5 centimetres of his tongue. In one of South Korea's most contentious rulings on sexual violence, the aggressor received only six months in prison, suspended for two years, for trespassing and intimidation - but not attempted rape. But Choi was convicted of causing grievous bodily harm and handed a 10-month prison sentence, suspended for two years. The court said at the time her action had "exceeded the reasonable bounds of legally permissible self-defence". Choi's case gained renewed momentum decades later after #MeToo movement, which took off globally in 2017 and inspired her to seek justice. In South Korea, massive women's rights protests led to victories on issues ranging from abortion access to tougher penalties for spycam crimes. Choi filed for a retrial in 2020, but lower courts initially rejected her petition. After years of campaigning and an appeal, South Korea's top court finally ordered a retrial in 2024. "For 61 years, the state made me live as a criminal," Choi told reporters outside the Busan District Court ahead of her retrial hearing. She said she hoped future generations could "live in a world free from sexual violence where they can enjoy human rights and a happy life". Choi Sun-hye, executive director of the Korea Women's Hotline counselling centre, which supported her case, said her decision was also meant to "become a source of strength for other victims of sexual violence and correct past wrongs". At the retrial hearing, the prosecution asked the court to clear her of the past conviction, the Busan District Court said. The verdict is expected in September this year.
RTÉ News
05-07-2025
- RTÉ News
What next for MeToo after Sean Combs verdict?
It was a verdict that sent shockwaves around the world. Last Wednesday in New York, music mogul Sean Combs was cleared of the sex trafficking and racketeering charges that could have put him behind bars for life but found guilty of lesser prostitution-related offences. As the jury's decision was read out, the disgraced rapper fell to his knees in Manhattan federal court and appeared to pray; his defence team described the verdict as "A great victory for Sean Combs . . . a great victory for the jury system." Outside on the street, supporters of the 55-year-old self-styled bad boy from Harlem clashed with women's rights campaigners, trading insults and threats that have opened up yet another fault line in America's toxic culture wars. It was an extremely ugly end to seven extremely ugly weeks of one of the most closely watched court cases in years. It was clear that after decades surrounded by 'yes' men and women who were ordered never to say no, rap's little emperor thought he was untouchable. Last Wednesday he got a very rude awakening. The often grotesque and graphic testimony heard over the past weeks painted a disturbing picture of Babylonian excess at Combs' notorious "freak offs," the sex parties he had publicly boasted of, often on late night US chat shows, over the years. The verdict has been met with dismay and horror by many who thought the MeToo movement would bring a halt to the behaviour of people like Combs and elation from supporters who seem to have a cult-like devotion to a man who clearly revelled in some truly repugnant activities. Of course, Combs' troubles are far from over. Having already served ten months in a forbidding maximum security facility in Brooklyn, he could face up 20 years in prison for the charges he is guilty of, although that seems unlikely. He also faces up to fifty civil cases, some of which were only filed this week. He is due to be sentenced next October although his legal team are already pushing for his hearing to be brought forward. On Wednesday evening he was denied bail and sent straight back to prison. The verdict now poses many questions about what is next for the MeToo movement that had done so much to encourage women to come forward to face their often powerful and influential tormentors. Speaking outside the courthouse on Wednesday, Douglas Wigdor, an attorney for Comb's former girlfriend Cassie Ventura, who was the main witness for the prosecution, said that "although the jury did not find Combs guilty of sex-trafficking Cassie beyond a reasonable doubt, she paved the way for a jury to find him guilty of transportation to engage in prostitution." "By coming forward with her experience," he added, "Cassie has left an indelible mark on both the entertainment industry and the fight for justice." Actress Rosie O'Donnell, who recently moved to Ireland following the re-election of convicted felon Donald Trump to the White House, was outraged. "I guess a jury just never wants to believe that a woman stays because of power and coercion," she wrote on social media. "Wow - they just think women stay because what? money - fame - 'they love the abuse' - what a f***ing joke _ this decision got me angry." Combs, who often boasted of "going from Harlem to Hollywood" and used a series of ridiculous aliases, may not have been convicted on the more serious charges he faced, but will the verdict make self-absorbed, self-obsessed entertainment figures change their ways? The rapper is a big scalp for the MeToo movement and the basic concept of justice. Other recent triumphs include the conviction of film producer Harvy Weinstein, while actor Gérard Depardieu was handed a suspended sentence last May for sexual assault. So, is the party over for predatory celebrities who think their fame and money can insulate them from reality? You will often hear tales of the bad old days of the Hollywood casting couch, a culture that Weinstein still practised well into the 21st century, but the music industry that Combs thrived in is often overlooked for its own disgraceful record when it comes to the mistreatment of both women and men. Weinstein was protected by a disturbing omertà in the film world but Combs' methods were far more brutal and appear to have been based on a network of coercion, threats of violence and blackmail. In a country where a person's good name doesn't seem to mean much anymore either way, it will be interesting to see what impact the court's findings will have on Combs' already battered career. Most famous for sampling The Police song Every Breath You Take on his sanctimonious paean to slain rapper Biggie Smalls, Combs' music was truly egregious and for once gave credence to the idiotic rockist joke "is rap spelled with a K or a C?" Will he attempt a comeback? Back in its nineties heyday, rap and hip-hop often traded in thuggish criminality and violent braggadocio so will Combs now have extra cachet among young man who have been seduced by the manifold evils and idiocies of the manosphere and the likes of professional misogynist Andrew Tate? After all, when it first went mainstream over thirty years ago, rap was lapped up by white middle class boys, attracted by the whiff of cordite, the rampant sexism and the chance to appal their parents. So, will the self-aggrandising Combs double down on his behaviour and brag about his exploits or will he do a Russell Brand and turn to god? Combs fell to his knees in prayer last Wednesday so will we see him reborn in the white collar and raiment of a man of faith, rapping spirituals and sampling chapter and verse from the good book? Are we now living in a post MeToo era? Trump's war on woke has shifted the culture in the US and helped created a climate where people like Combs can thrive not in spite of their crassness and criminality but because of it. As we await the sentence, we can now add a new name to his long list of aliases - convicted criminal.
RTÉ News
25-06-2025
- RTÉ News
Spain's High Court upholds sexual assault conviction of ex-soccer chief Luis Rubiales' in kiss case
Spain's High Court on Wednesday upheld a verdict that found former soccer federation president Luis Rubiales guilty of sexual assault for an unsolicited kiss on the lips of national team player Jenni Hermoso at the 2023 World Cup in Sydney. The court rejected multiple appeals against the conviction, reaffirming Rubiales kissed Hermoso without her consent during the medal ceremony after Spain's women had won the trophy, according to the ruling seen by Reuters. Rubiales was fined over €10,000 but acquitted of coercion charges alongside three co-defendants. Prosecutors had sought a two-and-a-half-year prison sentence and called for a retrial, both of which were dismissed. The incident sparked widespread debate about sexism in Spanish society and women's football, fuelling momentum for the "Me Too" movement in the country. Rubiales argued that his actions were motivated by an uncontrollable joy, but the court ruled that his restraint with other players and attendees demonstrated he could have avoided such behaviour with Hermoso. "Since that emotion did not lead him to express his joy so effusively by kissing the other players or the accompanying persons in the box, and he restrained himself, he could also have done so, without too much effort, with the captain of the team," the court said.
