Harvey Weinstein is serving a 23-year sentence on rape and sexual assault charges, which make him ineligible for parole until after his 87th birthday. He’s also facing additional charges in Los Angeles that carry a maximum sentence of 140 years.

But the disgraced producer could go free in just a few months if a New York appeals court overturns his conviction.

Five justices heard arguments on the case on Wednesday, and three of them expressed serious concern about the testimony admitted at trial. One justice, Sallie Manzanet-Daniels, referred to the use of uncharged allegations as “overkill” and “piling on.”

Let me take a look at this “justice” Sallie Manzanet-Daniels.

Weinstein’s attorneys are not making any predictions about how the court will rule, but they are feeling optimistic.

“I think it couldn’t have gone better,” said Donna Rotunno, the lead defense lawyer at Weinstein’s trial, who said that the line of questioning felt like “a wish list of how you want something like that to go.”

The trial judge, Justice James Burke, allowed prosecutors to call three witnesses — Tarale Wulff, Dawn Dunning and Lauren Young — who testified that Weinstein had sexually assaulted them during what they thought were business meetings. Those allegations were not eligible to be charged, but they were used to support the allegations for which Weinstein was on trial.

Burke also ruled that if Weinstein took the stand, prosecutors could cross-examine him about as many as 28 other uncharged acts, including an incident when he threatened to cut off someone’s genitals, and another when he left an employee by the side of the road. Weinstein did not testify, so that evidence was not heard.

Which sort of begs the question of why this is relevant to the subject in the first place, no? So the judge ruled that Weinstein could be questioned on something, but Weinstein didn’t take the stand, making it a moot point. Yet, this is apparently cause for him to get off on appeals.

At the oral argument on Wednesday, the justices questioned whether those decisions — called Molineux and Sandoval rulings, respectively — served to impugn Weinstein’s character, rather than to shed light on whether he committed the charged offenses.

“He doesn’t get convicted because he’s a bad guy,” said Justice Judith Gische. “He gets convicted for these particular crimes.”

“justice” Judith Gische

Thanks “justice” judith Gische. It’s so heartwarming to see a poor oppressed multimillionaire jew get the justice he so desperately deserves.

Bennett Gershman, a professor at Pace Law School, teaches about Molineux testimony, and suggested that its use in the Weinstein case was “dubious.”

“This proof is dangerous because it carries such tremendous prejudice,” Gershman said. “There are a number of cases the courts have reversed. This is an issue the courts monitor very carefully because they know how devastating this proof can be.”

Law Professor Bennett Gershman

Thanks, (((Gershman))). It’s so nice to see people giving impartial advice, with the only motivation being to better inform the public.

[Defense Lawyer] Rotunno argued that Weinstein did not get due process at his trial, nearly two years ago, and was instead subjected to “emotional decisions.” She said hoped there has been a shift in the overall climate since then.

“That was my beef with this case all along,” she said. “There was this ‘convict at all costs’ mentality. I will continue to be bothered by that.”

[Other Defense Lawyer] Cheronis agreed.

“They tried to create this monster we never believed existed,” Cheronis said. “They were allowed to put in evidence that wasn’t relevant, that was prejudicial, and thank God people are now taking it seriously.”

I mean Weinstein literally said that Jennifer Aniston should be killed for complaining about him creeping on her. He also hired ex-Mossad agents, or perhaps still Mossad agents pretending to be retired, who ran the “Black Cube,” spying agency to spy on all the women he was abusing. He forced his secretary to watch him jack off into a ficus plant, under threat of being fired. And the (((media))) protected him for literally decades before it simply became too much, and they couldn’t any longer.

But sure, the goyim were just looking for an innocent little jew to persecute so. Poor little jew rapists, the most oppressed jews of them all.

Weinstein is a huge part of my Anglin Felting series coming up, specifically his defense of him. You can read the first part, which doesn’t mention Weinstein, right here.

Weinstein originally got 23 years in jail, which should take him up until death or close to. If Weinstein gets a retrial, that might actually be politically good for us. And if it happens, we’ll be covering it every day.

You may also like

1 Comment

  1. The people demand the Anglin felting.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *