Seven men and five women have begun deliberating their verdict at Harvey Weinstein’s New York rape trial, carrying not only the fate of the fallen movie mogul on their shoulders but also that of the #MeToo movement.
The jury of 12 New Yorkers embarked on Tuesday morning on a potentially testing process of considering whether or not to find the Pulp Fiction producer guilty of rape and sexual assault.
Their collective decision, which must be unanimous, could have monumental consequences. If they find the defendant guilty he could face a maximum sentence of life in prison.
If they acquit, the failure to secure a conviction against a man who has been accused of alleged sexual misconduct by more than 100 women will send waves of shock, anger and dismay throughout the fledgling #MeToo cause that was largely triggered by revelations involving Weinstein in 2017.
Before the jury was brought into court on Tuesday, a furious row erupted between the two teams of lawyers. A prosecutor accused Weinstein’s lead defense lawyer, Donna Rotunno, of jury tampering by publishing an opinion article in Newsweek over the weekend.
In the article, Rotunno repeated the complaint made by the defense several times in the course of the trial that the proceedings were rigged against the defendant. She railed at hostile media coverage, including mockery of Weinstein’s arriving in court each day leaning on a walking frame.
In a highly unusual move, Rotunno went on to address individual members of the Weinstein jury directly.
“I implore the members of this jury to do what they know is right and was expected of them from the moment they were called upon to serve their civic duty in a court of law,” she wrote. “Harvey Weinstein is innocent. His fate hangs in the balance, and the world is watching.”
The lead prosecutor, Joan Illuzzi-Orbon, ripped into Rotunno. “It is completely, 100%, inappropriate behavior that borders on tampering with the jury,” she said, referring to Rotunno’s remarks directly to the jury.
“There is no way that Miss Rotunno did this without the prompting and encouragement of the defendant, and this cannot be allowed because it is blatantly against the rules of judicial procedure.”
Rotunno, who has made a number of extremely controversial comments in the course of the trial and has been admonished by the judge on numerous occasions not to speak to the media, insisted that her article was “not a letter to the jury, it is an op-ed of my feelings about the jury system as a whole”.
The judge presiding over the trial at the New York supreme court, James Burke, ordered Rotunno to “refrain from communicating with the public and press until a verdict”.
He added pointedly: “I would caution you about the tentacles of your public relations juggernaut.”
Weinstein’s defense team also tried unsuccessfully to have a juror kicked off the panel on grounds that she had been found to be reading a French novel that described a relationship between a woman and a predatory older man.
Once the jury was brought into the courtroom, Burke instructed jurors about how they should carry out their deliberations into the five charges facing Weinstein, 67.
First, they must consider the evidence relating to two of the six women who testified: Miriam Haley and Annabella Sciorra. Haley, a former Project Runway production assistant, alleges that the once-powerful titan of Hollywood forced oral sex on her in his Soho apartment in 2006.
Sciorra, a Sopranos actor, gave harrowing testimony in which she described allegedly having her hands pinned above her head as she was held down on a bed and violently raped in her Gramercy Park apartment in the winter of 1993-94.
If the jury finds Weinstein guilty of attacking both women, they must convict on count one – predatory sexual assault. That involves a sex crime against more than one woman, and carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.
If the jury finds Weinstein not guilty on the Sciorra part of the charge, they will then go on to consider Haley’s allegations on their own merits, and can convict Weinstein for attacking her under count two – criminal sexual act. That carries a maximum sentence of 25 years.
Once Haley’s testimony is deliberated, the jury was instructed to move on to the rape allegations raised by the second of the two main accusers in the case. This relates to a witness who the Guardian is not naming because her wishes over identification are not known.
She alleges she was raped by Weinstein in a New York hotel, for which he has been charged with rape in the first and third degrees which carry a maximum sentence of 25 years.
Once again, the jury will begin by considering the woman’s rape accusations alongside those of Sciorra. If Weinstein is found guilty of both, then the jury will convict him on count three – another charge of predatory sexual assault.
If Sciorra’s allegations fall, then again jurors will move on to consider the unnamed woman’s rape claims on their own merits. In counts four and five, Weinstein could be found guilty either of rape in the first or the third degree.
The charge sheet makes for complicated parsing. Within an hour of being sent out of the courtroom to begin deliberations, the jury was brought back in again, having sent a series of questions to Burke seeking clarification.
-
In the US, Rainn offers support at 800-656-4673 or by chat at Rainn.org. In the UK, the rape crisis national freephone helpline is at 0808-802-9999. In Australia, support is available at 1800Respect (1800-737-7328) or 1800respect.org.au. Other international helplines can be found at Ibiblio.org.
