In a legal saga filled with controversy and public outrage, Harvey Weinstein’s lawyer has launched an effort to overturn his client’s conviction, resorting to arguments that border on the absurd. Nearly four years after his initial conviction, Weinstein’s defense team has now launched an appeal, claiming bias and unfair treatment during the trial proceedings.
This move comes after Weinstein was found guilty of r*pe and s*xual assault after multiple women came forward with allegations against him. Weinstein is currently serving a 23-year sentence for r*pe and s*xual assault at Mohawk Correctional Facility in New York and was additionally convicted of separate r*pe charges in Los Angeles and received a 16-year sentence in that case.
Harvey Weinstein’s Lawyer Appealed For Conviction Overturn
Harvey Weinstein’s lawyer, Arthur Aidala, has appealed to overturn his conviction in New York’s highest court, resorting to an argument that could be deemed as desperate and ludicrous. Despite a lower New York court upholding Weinstein’s conviction with a unanimous 5-0 vote in June 2022, Aidala persisted in his efforts.
The crux of his lawyer’s argument revolves around the trial judge’s decision, particularly contesting the testimony of multiple victims against Weinstein and the inclusion of three women as “Molineux” witnesses, who shared the incidents that were not directly connected to charges but established a pattern of misconduct in Weinstein’s behavior.
Although Weinstein was already accused of s*xual assault by dozens of women, Aidala is hinged on the assertion that allowing these testimonies unfairly painted Weinstein in a negative light, essentially undermining his chances of a fair trial. “This is major prejudice,” he said. Weistein’s lawyer further argued, “It’s saying, ‘He’s a bad guy. He’s a bad guy. He’s a bad guy,” as per Variety.
Arthur Aidala Claims Harvey Weinstein Wanted to Tell His Side of the Story
During the trial, the judge allowed testimony from three women whose allegations were not directly related to the case. However, it was also ruled that prosecutors could question Weinstein about other instances of misconduct, that were not related to the charges if he had chosen to testify, which he ultimately declined to do.
Harvey Weinstein’s lawyer, Authur Aidala, also emphasized that the former producer wanted to share his side of the story. However, he lamented that legal rulings, particularly the Sandoval ruling, posed significant hurdles for him to testify without facing severe repercussions.
“It’s a he-said, she-said case, and he said, ‘That’s not how it happened. There was an interaction. I’ll tell you how it happened,'” Aidala said before adding, “Then this Sandoval ruling came down — unlike anything we’ve ever seen.”
Associate Justice Betsy Barros echoed Aidala’s concerns, questioning the fairness of a trial where the defendant’s opportunity to present their side of the story was severely restricted. “This Sandoval ruling — I don’t think anybody in their right mind would testify,” she said, arguing that it’s not fair, considering Weinstein was not able to put in his side of the story.
