Harvey Weinstein faces new trial after r*pe conviction overturned, returns to prison

Found this gem gloating about the "victory" two years ago.

The New York Times

OPINION

GUEST ESSAY

Tali Farhadian Weinstein

Weinstein's Prosecutors Brought His Past Into the Courtroom. Good.

Dec. 19, 2022

From the comments:

Declaring that "s*x crimes differ from other crimes," is willfully ignorant of the due process that the Constitution affords all defendants, regardless of the nature of the alleged crime.

More importantly though, it reinforces the stigma that is associated with crimes deemed to be "sexual" - rather than a type of assault and/or battery that can (or can't) be proven in court. This stigma is a major contributor to the late reporting and incomplete evidence collection that often makes "sexual" cases more difficult to prosecute.

If you went to the police and reported a textbook assault and battery, that 10 years ago, an acquaintance threatened you verbally and then punched you in the face - but there were no witnesses and no physical evidence - you probably wouldn't be surprised to find law enforcement and prosecutors unwilling to press charges.

"It is better that 10 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man be convicted" This has been a principle of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence for centuries, and is still true today.

If the DA cannot produce sufficient that this defendant committed the specific crime they are accused of, without bringing up past offenses, then that defendant should go free.

That sounds so noble. We should all be proud of a legal system that protects the defendant. Too bad we don't have one. How many people have been exonerated this year? But we also needs one that protects the victims. I have heard that under Sharia law, four witnesses are needed to convict. In the US it takes dozens and dozens for the a rich and powerful man to get indicted. Just ask Bill Cosby. Oh, yeah. Each person attacked by a predator is a witness to the the predator's capacity to commit the behavior on trial. Once a defendant claims he'd never r*pe a victim, that's testimony that can only be refuted by witnesses.

Sure - so let's start parading the teenage transgressions of violence into sentencing arguments while 'folks' are in their 20's.

Funny - it only seems to work in some 'magical' cases

SHOW MORE