Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Weinstein is clearly a fat pervert, but this is just more zeitgeist motivated shit, like the trials against satanic nurseries back in the 80s.

If he really is a fat male feminist, it should be easy enough to cough up enough evidence to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

In the rush to look good, seems like the NY justice system just let anyone with a beef against him talk to the jury.

(I am somewhat curious as to how a fat cripple managed to force so many women to have s*x.)

"We will continue to pursue charges until we get the politically-convenient result we want"

In his dissent, Judge Anthony Cannataro wrote that the court's decision was an "unfortunate step backwards."

:#soyjaktantrumfast:

>You fricking chuds we'll be on the wrong side of hxxstory

At the hearing, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg insisted Weinstein be remanded for now and emphasized the office's plans to retry the film producer on the sexual assault charges as quickly as possible.

"We have every belief the defendant will be convicted again at trial," he said.

>Don't you worry, I'll get the verdict I want


A New York appeals court overturned Weinstein's 2020 r*pe conviction on April 25, ordering a new trial in a stunning reversal of a landmark #MeToo case.


In a 4-3 decision, the court found that Weinstein's trial judge allowed prosecutors to call women who said Weinstein had assaulted them to testify, even though their accusations did not specifically relate to the entertainment mogul's charges.

Weinstein was sentenced to 23 years in prison after being convicted in February 2020 of forcing oral s*x on TV and film production assistant Mimi Haley in 2006 and third-degree r*pe of hairstylist Jessica Mann in 2013.


He was acquitted of first-degree r*pe and two counts of predatory sexual assault from actor Annabella Sciorra's allegations of r*pe in the 1990s. He has denied ever engaging in non-consensual s*x.

The 72-year-old former movie bigwig's 23-year sentence on one count of r*pe and one count of a criminal s*x act was reversed on appeal Thursday after a panel of judges ruled he didn't get a fair trial.


Harvey is innocent and never should have been convicted or even tried for these allegations," Weinstein's rep, Juda Engelmayer, told Fox News Digital at the time. "The trial failed at objectivity from the minute former Judge Burke berated Harvey, asking him if he wanted to spend the rest of his life in prison over the use of a cellphone that occurred before the judge ever entered the courtroom or began the day's proceedings."

"Burke was rejected from the bench as a result, and the case should have been too. From the lies a juror told to private lawyers representing non-case-related complainants acting as prosecutorial surrogates, as we were often gagged, the jury was steered in a direction they never would have gone in if it were honest."

Ultimately, the appeals court found the trial judge should have only allowed witnesses to testify about the sexual assault encounters that Weinstein's charges stemmed from. During his trial, multiple women testified about sexual assaults allegedly performed by Weinstein even though it wasn't what he faced charges for.


lol NYC prosecutors' office and the State Courts must be recruiTTTing from Cooley.

>"Next on the stand, we have a man who claims he saw the defendant steal a piece of candy when he was 16"


The Appellate Judge:

"We conclude that the trial court erroneously admitted testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes because that testimony served no material non-propensity purpose. The court compounded that error when it ruled that defendant, who had no criminal history, could be cross examined about those allegations as well as numerous allegations of misconduct that portrayed defendant in a highly prejudicial light. The synergistic effect of these errors was not harmless. The only evidence against defendant was the complainants' testimony, and the result of the court's rulings, on the one hand, was to bolster their credibility and diminish defendant's character before the jury. On the other hand, the threat of a cross-examination highlighting these untested allegations undermined defendant's right to testify. The remedy for these egregious errors is a new trial."


From the original trial:

Weinstein — who also had an appeal for a retrial denied — also spoke, in a desperate bid to proclaim his innocence, claiming to have never even met Chernyshova

“This is another story, and with all due respect, Jane Doe 1 is an actress. She can turn the tears on. Please don't sentence me to life in prison. I don't deserve it. There are so many things wrong with this case,” he told the court.

“This is a setup. I beg your mercy.”

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.



Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.