Harvey Weinstein’s 23-Year Prison Sentence Upheld – The Hollywood Reporter

A New York appeals court on Thursday affirmed the conviction of Harvey Weinstein for rape and sexual assault, turning down his bid to overturn the decision based on arguments that the trial was stacked against him.

In a unanimous decision, a five justice appellate panel of the New York Supreme Court backed the trial judge’s rulings that Weinstein claimed were procedurally improper and unfair.

“We reject defendant’s arguments, and affirm the conviction in all respects,” reads the 45-page order.

Weinstein was convicted in February 2020 on two of five charges of committing a criminal sexual act in the first degree and third-degree rape. He was sentenced to 23 years in a New York state prison.

On appeal, Weinstein’s attorneys argued that Supreme Court Justice James Burke, who oversaw the trial, committed several procedural missteps and issued other rulings that unfairly favored the prosecution. They pointed to Burke refusing to excuse an allegedly biased juror and allowing evidence of uncharged crimes.

Another of Weinstein’s central arguments on appeal was that he was deprived of his constitutional right to take the stand in his own defense because prosecutors were allowed to cross-examine him on 28 incidents spanning nearly 30 years with the goal of undercutting his credibility. The incidents related to allegedly engaging in a variety of business-related acts of misconduct that ranged from encouraging executives to lie on his behalf to threats and acts of violence against people who worked for him, among other things.

The appeals court, however, concluded that the judge was within his authority to make those decisions.

“While we acknowledge the sheer size of the impeachment material that the court allowed, we have analyzed that decision within the larger context of all of the circumstances presented by this case, and have concluded that the court providently exercised its discretion,” the order reads.

The justices found that all of the material allowed by Burke was “unquestionably relevant.” They sided with prosecutors that allegations of Weinstein soliciting lies speak to his credibility and that claims of abusive behavior in business settings “reflected a willingness to place [his] self-interest above the interests of another person.”

Juda Engelmayer, a spokesman for Weinstein, said, “We are disappointed, but not surprised.”

Engelmayer added, “We are reviewing all of our options and will seek to petition the court of appeals and beyond.”

A New York appeals court on Thursday affirmed the conviction of Harvey Weinstein for rape and sexual assault, turning down his bid to overturn the decision based on arguments that the trial was stacked against him.

In a unanimous decision, a five justice appellate panel of the New York Supreme Court backed the trial judge’s rulings that Weinstein claimed were procedurally improper and unfair.

“We reject defendant’s arguments, and affirm the conviction in all respects,” reads the 45-page order.

Weinstein was convicted in February 2020 on two of five charges of committing a criminal sexual act in the first degree and third-degree rape. He was sentenced to 23 years in a New York state prison.

On appeal, Weinstein’s attorneys argued that Supreme Court Justice James Burke, who oversaw the trial, committed several procedural missteps and issued other rulings that unfairly favored the prosecution. They pointed to Burke refusing to excuse an allegedly biased juror and allowing evidence of uncharged crimes.

Another of Weinstein’s central arguments on appeal was that he was deprived of his constitutional right to take the stand in his own defense because prosecutors were allowed to cross-examine him on 28 incidents spanning nearly 30 years with the goal of undercutting his credibility. The incidents related to allegedly engaging in a variety of business-related acts of misconduct that ranged from encouraging executives to lie on his behalf to threats and acts of violence against people who worked for him, among other things.

The appeals court, however, concluded that the judge was within his authority to make those decisions.

“While we acknowledge the sheer size of the impeachment material that the court allowed, we have analyzed that decision within the larger context of all of the circumstances presented by this case, and have concluded that the court providently exercised its discretion,” the order reads.

The justices found that all of the material allowed by Burke was “unquestionably relevant.” They sided with prosecutors that allegations of Weinstein soliciting lies speak to his credibility and that claims of abusive behavior in business settings “reflected a willingness to place [his] self-interest above the interests of another person.”

Juda Engelmayer, a spokesman for Weinstein, said, “We are disappointed, but not surprised.”

Engelmayer added, “We are reviewing all of our options and will seek to petition the court of appeals and beyond.”