A lengthy motion filed at the New York Supreme Court Appeals Division argues that the conviction of the disgraced Hollywood tycoon in 2020 should be reversed because his first trial was tainted on several levels, but particularly by a biased judge and a biased judge.
“With a juror who had already pre-judged the case against Mr. Weinstein and a first instance judge intending to deny him a fair opportunity to defend himself, a guilty verdict was inevitable. correct this judicial error, “says a press release announcing the defense’s appeal.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, which has ruled the case by the government, will formally respond in a legal petition filed with the court, spokesman Danny Frost told CNN.
Weinstein, 69, is serving a 23-year prison sentence for his conviction for first-degree criminal sex and third-degree rape in a maximum-security prison outside Buffalo, according to state records.
Weinstein, who has always maintained his innocence and denied all charges against him, was found innocent of three other charges – two of predatory sexual assault and one of first-degree rape.
During last year’s trial proceedings, Weinstein’s lawyers repeatedly sought legal avenues to overturn the trial, including allegations that the judge maintained animus for Weinstein.
“All I wanted to do was scare him enough to stop using his phones,” said Burke at the time, denying the defense’s request for relief and refusal. “In fact, I never meant to put your client in prison for the rest of his life.”
The new defense case says a seated juror violated Weinstein’s right to a fair and impartial jury.
Chief prosecutor Joan Illuzzi argued at the time that Judge No. 11’s questionnaire included the fact that she liked to “write novels”.
A defense lawyer told CNN at the time that the juror gave inconsistent responses during the interrogation.
Monday’s lawsuit says it was dishonest about the book’s content. The defense argues that the book, now published, is at least partly autobiographical.
CNN on Monday tried to contact judge No. 11 for comment.
“Weinstein’s trial has been overwhelmed by excessive, random and highly doubtful evidence of previous inappropriate acts, none of which has clarified controversial issues relevant to the accused crimes,” says the document.
“As the evidence on the accused crimes was weak, the prosecution flooded the jury with copious stories of alleged misconduct (many of which were not of a criminal nature) that did not serve any legitimate evidential purpose, but only described Weinstein as disgusting. . ”
The charges for which he was convicted were largely based on the testimony of Miriam Haley and Jessica Mann. Haley testified that Weinstein had forced oral sex with her in 2006 in her Manhattan apartment, and Mann testified that he raped her in 2013 during what she described as an abusive relationship.