[ad_1]
The Manhattan DA office filed Wednesday its opposition to Harvey Weinstein's motion to dismiss his rape case, refuting Weinstein's claims that the grand jurors were unaware of his consensual relationship with one of the accusers .
Weinstein's attorney, Ben Brafman, tried to have the case dismissed because the prosecution had not shared any kindly emails between Weinstein and the alleged victim. The motion is expected to be heard in a New York courtroom on September 20.
In his opposition, the Attorney General's Office stated that it provided "a complete and accurate account of the relationship between the defendant and the victim before and after the rape charged".
"The accused does not claim, because he can not, that one of the emails contains a denial of the rape charged," wrote Joan Illuzzi-Orbon, DA assistant. "On the contrary, the defendant argues that, at most, e-mails could suggest a state of mind inconsistent with what the defendant believes to be that of a rape victim."
Brafman has been beaten for months to get emails from the Weinstein Co. He quoted about 40 of them in his motion to dismiss the case, including one of 2017, in which the woman told Weinstein: "I love you, always. But I hate to feel like a loot call.
Related
Weinstein faces six charges of rape, criminal sexual acts and predatory sexual assault involving three victims. He could face life imprisonment if he is convicted.
Illuzzi-Orbon also rejected Brafman's claims that the DA office was under political pressure to charge Weinstein. The bureau had refused to sue Weinstein for allegedly fumbling with Italian model Ambra Battilana in 2015, angering NYPD detectives who thought they had strong arguments against him. In April, Governor Andrew Cuomo asked Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to investigate the matter.
In his opposition, Illuzzi-Orbon argued that the decision to impeach was the responsibility of the grand jury, which was isolated from political considerations.
"The grand jury members are under no pressure to charge or not," she wrote. "Their vote is secret. Their deliberations are secret. The defendant, in his charges against the District Attorney, does not explain how this so-called pressure resulted in independent deliberations and the grand jury vote. "
The prosecution responded to the defense motion on only five of the six counts. The sixth charge relates to Weinstein's alleged oral copulation against Lucia Evans in 2004. On this point, Illuzzi-Orbon referred to "recent developments" which are the subject of an ongoing investigation. Additional information was provided to the defense subject to a confidentiality order. Brafman had argued that the charge should be dismissed because Evans was vague as to when the incident occurred, alleging that it had occurred between the 1st and the 1st day. June and 1 September 2004.
Brafman issued a statement in response to the opposition: "We believe that the response of the people in its entirety clearly shows that the case against Mr. Weinstein can not be successfully pursued. Period."
DA's response to Weinstein's dismissal request by gmaddaus on Scribd
Source link
