A lengthy motion filed with the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division argues that the disgraced Hollywood mogul’s conviction should be overturned in 2020 because his first trial was tainted on several levels, but mostly by a biased judge and a biased juror.
“With a juror already biased on the case against Mr. Weinstein and a judge seeking to deny him a fair chance to defend himself, a guilty verdict was inevitable. put it, “” says a press release announcing the appeal on the defensive.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, which has heard the case before the government, will formally respond in a legal letter submitted to the court, spokesman Danny Frost told CNN.
Weinstein, 69, is serving a 23-year sentence for his conviction of first-degree criminal sex act and third-degree rape in a maximum security prison outside Buffalo, according to state records.
Weinstein, who has consistently maintained his innocence and denied all charges against him, was found not guilty of three other charges – two charges of predatory assault and one charge of first-degree rape.
During last year’s lawsuit, Weinstein’s attorneys repeatedly followed legal avenues for a null and void trial, including allegations that the judge was hostile to Weinstein.
“All I wanted to do was scare him so much that he wouldn’t use his phones anymore,” Burke said at the time, denying the defense’s motion to relief and refusal. “I never really meant to put your client in prison for life.”
According to the new defense, a sitting juror violated Weinstein’s right to a fair and impartial jury.
Chief Prosecutor Joan Illuzzi argued at the time that Juror No. 11’s questionnaire contained the fact that she liked “writing novels.”
A defense attorney told CNN at the time that the juror gave inconsistent answers during the interrogation.
According to the court’s indictment on Monday, she was unfair about the contents of the book. The defense argues that the book, now published, is at least partly autobiographical.
CNN tried to reach juror No. 11 for comment on Monday.
“Weinstein’s trial was overwhelmed by outrageous, arbitrary and highly dubious evidence of past wrongdoing, which does not shed any light on disputed issues relevant to the crimes charged,” the document said.
Because the evidence on the accused crimes was weak, the Prosecution inundated the jury with copious stories of alleged wrongdoing (most of which were not criminal in nature) that served no legitimate purpose of evidence, but merely portrayed Weinstein as disgusting.
The charges for which he was ultimately convicted were largely based on testimony from Miriam Haley and Jessica Mann. Haley testified that Weinstein forcibly gave her oral sex in his Manhattan apartment in 2006, and Mann testified that he raped her in 2013 during what she described as an abusive relationship.