Harvey Weinstein returns to court for retrial of MeToo case

Harvey Weinstein returns to court for retrial of MeToo case

Harvey Weinstein is going on trial again in New York this week for a retrial of his #MeToo-era case. In the original proceedings, he was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual assault and third-degree rape, but was acquitted of three other charges, including the most serious charge, predatory sexual assault.

According to a report by The Guardian, the legal proceedings for Weinstein’s retrial will begin with jury selection, which is expected to take up to a week. This retrial revisits one of the most notable convictions from the #MeToo era, now unfolding in the context of a larger backlash against women’s rights in the US—an environment marked by threats to abortion access and the rising influence of controversial male figures like Andrew Tate.

Weinstein’s 2020 conviction was overturned in April of last year after an appeals court found that the trial judge had wrongly permitted testimony from women whose allegations were not directly related to the charges. Appeals Judge Sallie Manzanet-Daniels criticized the inclusion of that testimony, calling it “incredibly prejudicial.”

The upcoming trial for the 73-year-old film producer is likely to be a shortened version of the original proceedings—comparable to a movie remake—with one major difference: it features a new charge based on an accusation from a woman who wasn’t part of the initial case.

Weinstein was also found guilty of rape in Los Angeles, a conviction he is currently appealing. His appeal argues, as in the New York case, that the jury was unfairly swayed by testimony regarding alleged assaults that weren’t part of the formal charges. He continues to assert his innocence and has pleaded not guilty to all allegations.

All legal cases are shaped by their timing and context. Weinstein’s prominent legal team is hoping that, five years after his first trial and nearly eight years since the #MeToo movement gained widespread attention following Ronan Farrow’s explosive New Yorker article on Weinstein’s alleged abuses, public attitudes in the US toward high-profile cases like his may have shifted.

“It’s a social justice witch-hunt,” Weinstein’s publicist Juda Engelmayer told the Guardian last week.

Weinstein has actively sought support from conservative figures. “I want to take a moment to sincerely thank Candace Owens for believing in me and helping me reach millions of new supporters, and to Joe Rogan for amplifying that support even further,” Weinstein said recently.

Owens has expressed support for Weinstein, despite calling him an "immoral man," and questioned the prosecutors' intentions during a February live stream. Meanwhile, prominent podcaster Rogan has previously praised Weinstein's film contributions, describing them as "some awesome movies."

Beyond the political implications, attention is now turning to Harvey Weinstein’s health. He is currently being held at New York’s Rikers Island jail complex while awaiting a retrial. In January, he pleaded with a Manhattan judge to move up the court date, expressing doubt that he would survive until spring in what he described as a “hellhole.”

In a lawsuit filed last year against New York City, Weinstein alleged that he was receiving inadequate medical care for various health issues, including chronic myeloid leukemia and diabetes, and accused officials of negligence. In December, he was hospitalized for urgent treatment after a blood test revealed concerning results, according to his spokesperson.

Arthur Aidala, the lead attorney representing Harvey Weinstein, has said the defense will not mention the prior conviction during the upcoming New York trial, as it was overturned by the state's highest court and deemed unlawful.

He also pointed out the difficulty of pursuing criminal charges for incidents that happened many years ago, especially when the case depends entirely on conflicting testimonies without any physical evidence or independent witnesses to support either account.

Harvey Weinstein has consistently maintained that all sexual encounters with his accusers were consensual—a stance expected to remain central to his new defense.

“You may not like Harvey Weinstein. He might be a dirtbag to you. He may try to get over on women, flirting and finagling, just being a cad, but that’s not a crime,” Hermann Walz, a criminal defense attorney and adjunct professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

This retrial follows the overturned sexual assault conviction of comedian Bill Cosby in 2021—another major figure from the #MeToo movement era. It also coincides with the looming, high-profile criminal case against Sean “Puffy” Combs, who is scheduled to stand trial in May on charges related to sex trafficking and prostitution.

Ahead of Harvey Weinstein’s retrial, Judge Curtis Farber has made several important decisions concerning admissible evidence and testimony. He granted the prosecution permission to bring in psychologist Dawn Hughes as an expert witness to discuss the psychological effects of sexual assault. Additionally, he ruled that an accuser who previously testified in Weinstein’s first trial may use the term “force” in her account, even though Weinstein was acquitted of first-degree rape—a charge that demands proof of “forcible compulsion.”

Judge Curtis Farber also approved a defense request to ban the use of the word “survivor” when referring to Weinstein’s accusers. Instead, they will be identified as “complaining witnesses” throughout the trial.

The case will focus on the allegations of three women: a production assistant who claims Weinstein forcibly performed oral sex on her in 2006; an aspiring actress who says he raped her in 2013; and a new accuser who alleges he forced oral sex on her in a Manhattan hotel room, also in 2006.

Weinstein’s legal team argues that the additional charge, filed in September, is unfairly prejudicial, claiming that prosecutors intentionally left it out of the first trial to use it in the second one if necessary.

Weinstein also made headlines last week by commenting on a separate civil case between actor Blake Lively and director Justin Baldoni. He suggested that Baldoni had been unfairly treated by The New York Times, much like Weinstein himself, who believes the newspaper misrepresented him when it reported on the sexual abuse allegations against him.

“They did the same thing: cherrypicked what fit their story and ignored critical context and facts that could have challenged the narrative,” Weinstein told TMZ.

In response, The New York Times highlighted a letter of apology Weinstein issued after the story was published, in which he expressed his "regret" and "remorse" for his behavior toward women.

Weinstein’s legal team appears to be hoping that his retrial will take place in a very different societal landscape than the one surrounding his first case. Ultimately, it will be up to a New York jury to determine if they are correct.