Connect with us

News

The cases against Harvey Weinstein: A timeline of allegations and trials

Published

on

The cases against Harvey Weinstein: A timeline of allegations and trials

Harvey Weinstein is arraigned in court on September 18, 2024 in New York City, pleading not guilty to a new sex crimes charge.

Jeenah Moon/Getty


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jeenah Moon/Getty

This story was originally published in 2020, and has been updated with more recent information on Weinstein’s legal proceedings.

This report includes descriptions of sexual assault.

For much of Harvey Weinstein’s career, dark rumors of sexual assault and harassment tailed the Hollywood megaproducer. Only in recent years did the allegations gather the heft and momentum that culminated in multiple convictions.

Advertisement

While scores of women have accused Weinstein of crimes dating back decades — ranging from intimidation to rape — this timeline focuses on the incidents cited in criminal cases against him in Manhattan and Los Angeles. Though Weinstein’s New York conviction was overturned in spring of 2024, a new trial is underway in Manhattan. Those updates are below.

Timeline

Winter 1993-94: Weinstein allegedly rapes Annabella Sciorra

The actress Annabella Sciorra, perhaps best known for her Emmy-nominated work on The Sopranos, said Weinstein raped her at her Manhattan apartment after an industry dinner. She says the producer dropped her off, only to reappear at her door and force his way inside.

Sciorra’s allegation went on to become the subject of pretrial arguments in Manhattan. While the alleged incident happened too long ago to be prosecuted under state law and Weinstein’s defense team objected to its inclusion, her testimony was heard anyway during the 2020 trial, in support of the charge of predatory sexual assault.

Summer 2004: Weinstein allegedly forces Lucia Evans to perform oral sex

Advertisement

The former aspiring actress Lucia Evans told The New Yorker — in one of a pair of major stories that trained a national spotlight on the allegations against Weinstein — that he had raped her in his office in Manhattan’s Tribeca neighborhood.

“He forced me to perform oral sex on him,” Evans alleged, adding: “I said, over and over, ‘I don’t want to do this, stop, don’t.’ I tried to get away, but maybe I didn’t try hard enough. I didn’t want to kick him or fight him.”

Her account led prosecutors to pursue a criminal sexual act charge against Weinstein, although it was dismissed in 2018.

July 10, 2006: Weinstein allegedly forces himself on Mimi Haley

Mimi Haley, a former production assistant at Weinstein’s now-bankrupt production company, says that after inviting her to his New York City home, the producer ignored her objections, pulled out her tampon and forcibly performed oral sex on her.

Advertisement

“No woman should have to be subjected to this type of unacceptable abuse,” she said in 2017. “Women have the right to say no. A ‘no’ is a ‘no,’ regardless of the circumstances — and I told Harvey ‘no.’ “

Haley’s claim was included in charges against Weinstein filed in 2018 and she went on to testify in his 2020 trial in Manhattan.

Feb. 18-19, 2013: A pair of incidents in Los Angeles

These alleged incidents prompted Los Angeles prosecutors to file four charges against Weinstein in 2020: one felony count each of forcible rape, forcible oral copulation, sexual penetration by use of force and sexual battery by restraint.

“On Feb. 18, 2013, Weinstein allegedly went to a hotel and raped a woman after pushing his way inside her room,” the office of Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey explained in 2020. “The next evening, the defendant is accused of sexually assaulting a woman at a hotel suite in Beverly Hills.”

Advertisement

March 18, 2013: Alleged rape in New York City

For a long time, few details had been released about this allegation, which prompted two of the charges Weinstein was tried for in New York in 2020: first- and third-degree rape. Indeed, it was not until the trial’s opening statements that prosecutors released the name of the alleged victim, Jessica Mann, and the details of her story.

Prosecutors said Mann, an aspiring actress, had attended several industry events with Weinstein and endured increasingly aggressive sexual advances — including one incident in which, similar to Mimi Haley’s, Mann says Weinstein forcibly performed oral sex on her.

But it was later, on March 18 — one month after the alleged incidents in Los Angeles — that Mann says she tried to confront Weinstein at a hotel in Midtown Manhattan. There, he allegedly coaxed her up to his room, forced her to disrobe and ordered her onto the bed.

“He got on top of her and he raped her, forcing his penis into her vagina,” Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Meghan Hast told jurors in 2020. “Jessica just laid there. When he finished, he got off of her.

Advertisement

March 2015: New York DA decides not to prosecute allegation

Ambra Battilana Gutierrez, a Filipina-Italian model, reported Weinstein to the New York Police Department for allegedly groping her during a meeting at his Tribeca office in 2015. She says that later, at the urging of police, she wore a recording device for an arranged meetup at a Manhattan hotel. She says it was during that meeting that Weinstein admitted to groping her and sought unsuccessfully to get her to come to his room.

However, the office of then-Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. decided not to pursue the case, saying at the time that “a criminal charge is not supported.”

Years later, after the publication of a New Yorker piece detailing Gutierrez’s allegations, her story would become a focus of intense criticism leveled at Vance, whose office became responsible for prosecuting the criminal trial. Then-New York Governor Andrew Cuomo requested a review of the DA’s 2015 decision, though it’s not clear whether that was ever completed.

Oct. 5, 2017: The New York Times publishes allegations

Advertisement

While rumors of sexual harassment and assault had long dogged Weinstein — even supplying punchlines at the Oscars — it wasn’t until The New York Times and The New Yorker published exposés that the allegations found serious traction.

The Times’ story, written by investigative journalists Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, focused on allegations by a series of assistants and actresses, such as Ashley Judd and Rose McGowan.

Weinstein, in a statement released the same day, pledged to take a leave of absence from his production company and acknowledged that “I have a long way to go.”

Adding, “I so respect all women and regret what happened.” Weinstein did not admit any wrongdoing.

Oct. 10, 2017: The New Yorker‘s website publishes more allegations

Advertisement

Published just days after the The New York Times article, journalist Ronan Farrow’s piece in The New Yorker focused on a slew of other accusations — including the allegation by Lucia Evans that had been added but was later dropped from the list of criminal charges Weinstein faces in New York.

Oct. 14, 2017: Weinstein is expelled from the Academy

In one of the first signs that the reaction to The New York Times and The New Yorker reports represented a sea change, complete with real-world implications for Weinstein, the Hollywood producer was expelled from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the influential organization responsible for the Oscars.

“We do so not simply to separate ourselves from someone who does not merit the respect of his colleagues,” the Academy’s 54-member Board of Governors explained in a statement after an emergency meeting, “but also to send a message that the era of willful ignorance and shameful complicity in sexually predatory behavior and workplace harassment in our industry is over.”

March 19, 2018: The Weinstein Company files for bankruptcy

Advertisement

Buffeted by months of negative press, the production company that Weinstein founded with his brother, Bob, went belly up. The Weinstein Company declared bankruptcy and sold “substantially all” of its assets to Lantern Capital Partners. It also voided the nondisclosure agreements it had reached with Weinstein’s accusers.

May 25, 2018: Weinstein surrenders to police

The former Hollywood producer arrived at the New York Police Department’s 1st Precinct in Lower Manhattan, where he submitted to arrest with droves of journalists looking on. It was Harvey Weinstein’s first arrest in connection with the sexual assault allegations.

The same day, then-Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. submitted Weinstein’s initial slate of charges: “The defendant is charged with Rape in the First and Third Degrees, as well as Criminal Sexual Act in the First Degree, for forcible sexual acts against two women in 2013 and 2004, respectively.”

About a week and a half later, Weinstein plead not guilty to the charges, which changed significantly as new information came to light.

Advertisement

July 2, 2018: Additional charges against Weinstein announced

Manhattan District Attorney Vance announced the filing of a superseding grand jury indictment, which added charges connected with a third incident in 2006. The new slate included one count of criminal sexual act in the first degree and two counts of predatory sexual assault, the most serious charges levied against Weinstein by Manhattan prosecutors.

Miriam “Mimi” Haley, who was involved in the alleged 2006 incident, had come forward with her story more than half a year earlier, saying that during her time working at The Weinstein Company, Harvey Weinstein orally forced himself on her inside his New York City home.

Weinstein plead not guilty to the new charges a week after they were announced.

Oct. 11, 2018: One charge against Weinstein is dismissed

Advertisement

Justice James Burke, the judge overseeing the Manhattan trial, dismissed one of the charges against Weinstein after it became clear that investigators didn’t properly present certain information to the grand jury.

Lucia Evans told the grand jury — and The New Yorker — that Weinstein forced her to perform oral sex on him. But an unidentified friend of hers had contradicted that account in an interview with a detective, saying Evans called it a consensual act in exchange for the promise of acting work.

Prosecutors acknowledged later that the detective “failed to inform” them of “important details” of the interview prior to Evans’ grand jury testimony. Weinstein’s legal team pushed to have the criminal sexual act charge dismissed as a result, and prosecutors did not object.

Harvey Weinstein arrives at court for jury selection on Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2020, in New York.

Harvey Weinstein arrives at court for jury selection on Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2020, in New York.

Mark Lennihan/AP


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Mark Lennihan/AP

Jan. 6, 2020: Trial in New York City begins

Advertisement

Weinstein’s trial formally opened in Manhattan, with more than two weeks devoted to selecting a jury. After roughly a year and a half of pretrial wrangling, the charges Weinstein faced are as follows:

  • Two counts of predatory sexual assault
  • One count of rape in the first degree (connected to the 2013 incident)
  • One count of rape in the third degree (2013 incident)
  • One count of criminal sexual act in the first degree (2006 incident)

Jan. 6, 2020: Los Angeles prosecutors announce charges of their own

The same day that his trial opened in Manhattan, Weinstein was hit with new legal woes from the other side of the U.S.: four felony counts of sexual assault, filed by Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey. The charges are connected with incidents that allegedly happened at local hotels over two nights in February 2013.

“We believe the evidence will show that the defendant used his power and influence to gain access to his victims,” Lacey says, “and then commit violent crimes against them.”

Feb. 24, 2020: Manhattan jury finds Weinstein guilty in mixed verdict

After about five days of deliberations, jurors convicted the former producer of two of the five counts he faced — third-degree rape and a first-degree criminal sexual act — but acquitted him of the most serious charges.

Advertisement

He did not visibly react as the verdict was read but, according to defense lawyer Arthur Aidala, repeatedly told his attorneys afterward: “I’m innocent. … I didn’t rape anyone.”

Of the two counts that stuck, the criminal sexual act is the more serious, carrying a sentence of at least five years in prison and a maximum of more than two decades.

After the hearing, Weinstein’s path to the Rikers Island, where he was to await his sentencing, was rerouted to a nearby hospital after he experienced chest pains and high blood pressure.

March 11, 2020: Weinstein receives 23-year prison sentence in New York 

The sentence handed down in a Manhattan courtroom included 20 years for first-degree criminal sexual act and three years for third-degree rape — nearly the maximum allowed under New York state law.

Advertisement

Weinstein’s victims “refused to be silent, and they were heard,” Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. said in a statement after the sentencing hearing. “Their words took down a predator and put him behind bars, and gave hope to survivors of sexual violence all across the world.”

Weinstein’s legal team vowed to appeal.

October 2022: Trial in Los Angeles begins 

The former movie mogul faced rape and sexual assault charges in front of a jury of nine men and three women at a Los Angeles court house. The former movie mogul was charged with raping and sexually assaulting four women between 2004 to 2013.

December 2022: Weinstein found guilty in mixed verdict in Los Angeles trial 

Advertisement

Weinstein was found guilty of rape, forced oral copulation and sexual misconduct – three of seven charges – in his Los Angeles trial.

“It is time for the kingmaker to be brought to justice,” LA County Deputy District Attorney Marlene Martinez said during closing arguments of the trial.

Weinstein’s convictions hinged on allegations from one of four accusers. (The jury ruled Weinstein was not guilty on one of the remaining charges, and couldn’t reach a decision on three others.) Four additional charges were dismissed.

February 23, 2023: Weinstein sentenced in California 

Weinstein was sentenced to 16 years behind bars by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Lisa Lench, to be served consecutively after his 23-year sentence in New York.

Advertisement

April 25, 2024: New York conviction is overturned 

Weinstein’s 2020 sex crime conviction was overturned while serving a 23-year sentence in New York. In a 4-3 decision, the New York State Court of Appeals ruled that Weinstein did not receive a fair trial because the proceedings included testimony from women whose allegations were not part of the case. These are otherwise known as Molineux witnesses.

Judge Jenny Rivera wrote: “We conclude that the trial court erroneously admitted testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes because that testimony served no material non-propensity purpose … The only evidence against defendant [Weinstein] was the complainants’ testimony, and the result of the court’s rulings … was to bolster their credibility and diminish defendant’s character before the jury.”

April 28, 2024: Weinstein in and out of the hospital 

Weinstein was hospitalized at Bellevue Hospital in Manhattan upon his return to New York. After his 2020 conviction was vacated, Weinstein was turned over to the city’s Department of Correction. According to a state spokesperson Weinstein remains in custody because of his Los Angeles conviction and sentence.

Advertisement

May 1, 2024: Prosecutors plan for a new trial 

During a hearing in a New York courtroom, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg confirmed his office was putting together a new trial — first planned for the fall of 2024, and later delayed to the following spring.

May 29, 2024: New York prosecutors signal potential for new indictment

Manhattan prosecutors informed Judge Curtis Farber that they may seek a new indictment ahead of Weinstein’s upcoming trial. During a court hearing, Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Nicole Blumberg confirmed that additional survivors had come forward with assault claims and may be willing to testify.

June 7, 2024: Weinstein’s lawyers appeal California conviction 

Advertisement

Weinstein’s lawyers appealed his California conviction, arguing that evidence was excluded from his trial there, which ended in 2022.

September 12, 2024: Another New York indictment is announced

New York prosecutors announced in a hearing that Weinstein was indicted on additional sex crimes charges. Weinstein is not present in court, after being rushed into emergency heart surgery the weekend prior.

September 18, 2024: Weinstein pleads not guilty to new charge in New York

Prosecutors unsealed the indictment, detailing allegations of sexual assault against Weinstein in 2006. In a New York courtroom, Weinstein plead not guilty.

Advertisement

April 15, 2025: Jury selection begins in Weinstein’s trial in New York

In Harvey Weinstein’s third trial in just over five years, the disgraced film producer is facing assault allegations from three different women, including one whose identity has not yet been revealed.

Ilya Marritz and Clare Lombardo contributed to this timeline.

News

California Candidates to Appear in First Major Debate After Swalwell

Published

on

California Candidates to Appear in First Major Debate After Swalwell

Candidates in California’s volatile race for governor will meet Wednesday night for the first televised debate since Eric Swalwell dropped out, each looking to seize momentum in the tight contest.

The debate, being held at the television studio of KRON4 in San Francisco, will include four Democrats and two Republicans who are tightly bunched in recent polls, with many voters still undecided less than six weeks before the June 2 primary.

Mr. Swalwell, a Democrat, had just begun to emerge as a Democratic front-runner when his campaign swiftly collapsed after he was accused of sexual assault in news reports on April 10.

Candidates have taken relatively few risks so far in debates around the state, but every candidate is now eyeing a chance to jump to the front of the pack.

“Even though we have seen some movement in the last couple of weeks, it continues to be a fairly crowded, fractured field,” said Sara Sadhwani, an assistant professor of politics at Pomona College. “So candidates need to be able to grab attention in a debate like this.”

Advertisement

The debate comes as Xavier Becerra, a Democrat and former California attorney general, has enjoyed a surge of support in polls since Mr. Swalwell dropped out of the race.

Mr. Becerra and Matt Mahan, the mayor of San Jose, did not originally meet the threshold to participate in Wednesday’s debate when Mr. Swalwell was running. But they both qualified after receiving enough support in a follow-up poll that debate organizers commissioned once Mr. Swalwell had dropped out.

The other Democrats scheduled to participate are Tom Steyer, a former hedge fund manager, and Katie Porter, a former congresswoman, each of whom have been polling near the top of the Democratic field for several weeks. The Republicans in the debate are Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host who has been endorsed by President Trump, and Chad Bianco, the sheriff of Riverside County.

All candidates run on the same ballot in California’s nonpartisan primary, with the two who receive the most votes advancing to the general election, regardless of their party affiliation. The large number of Democratic candidates has created fear among state party leaders that their voters could splinter, potentially allowing two Republicans to sweep the primary in this heavily Democratic state.

The odds of that happening have decreased since Mr. Swalwell dropped out and another Democrat, Betty Yee, withdrew on Monday. But Rusty Hicks, the chairman of the California Democratic Party, still believes there are too many Democrats in the race and has urged those lagging in polls to end their campaigns. (The actual ballot will include 61 candidates for governor, most of whom are completely unknown to voters.)

Advertisement

The messy race to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom, who cannot run for re-election because of term limits, has played out as the most unpredictable contest California has seen in a generation. It has attracted a sprawling field but no one with the star power of former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger or the political might of Mr. Newsom or former Gov. Jerry Brown.

Much of California’s Democratic establishment is still figuring out whom to back in the turbulent race.

Mr. Newsom has not endorsed anyone, saying he trusts voters to elect someone “who reflects the values and direction Californians believe in.” Representative Nancy Pelosi, the influential former House speaker from San Francisco, and Senator Alex Padilla also have not announced their favorites. Senator Adam Schiff endorsed Mr. Swalwell earlier this year but quickly withdrew his support after the accusations against him were published.

On Tuesday, Ms. Yee endorsed Mr. Steyer, praising his work to fight climate change and engage young voters. Mr. Steyer has swamped his competitors with a raft of advertising by pouring $134 million from his personal fortune into his campaign.

Also on Tuesday, Mr. Becerra, whose campaign had appeared to be flailing until Mr. Swalwell dropped out, received the endorsement of Robert Rivas, the Democratic speaker of the California State Assembly. Mr. Rivas said he had encouraged Mr. Becerra to run for governor because he was impressed by his work as California’s attorney general during President Trump’s first term.

Advertisement

“He understands both the policy and the politics,” Mr. Rivas said in an interview. “And he has a track record, in my opinion, of delivering results under pressure.”

The 90-minute debate on Wednesday begins at 7 p.m. PT and will be broadcast and streamed by KRON and other California stations.

Continue Reading

News

Here’s What the New Virginia House Map Looks Like

Published

on

Here’s What the New Virginia House Map Looks Like

Virginians approved a new congressional map on Tuesday that would aggressively gerrymander the state in the Democrats’ favor, giving the party as many as four more U.S. House seats.

The new map draws eight safely Democratic districts and two competitive districts that lean Democratic, according to a New York Times analysis of 2024 presidential results. It leaves just one safe Republican seat, compared with the five seats the G.O.P. holds on the current map.

The proposed map was drawn by Democratic state legislators and approved by Gov. Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat. It eliminates three Republican-held seats in part by slicing the densely populated suburbs in Arlington and Fairfax Counties and reallocating their overwhelmingly Democratic voters into five congressional districts, some stretching more than a hundred miles into Republican areas.

Perhaps the most extreme new district is the Seventh, which begins at the Potomac River and stretches to the west and south in a manner that resembles a pair of lobster claws. Several well-known Virginia Democrats have already announced their candidacies and begun campaigning in the district.

Reid J. Epstein contributed reporting.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Southern Poverty Law Center indicted on federal fraud charges

Published

on

Southern Poverty Law Center indicted on federal fraud charges

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche speaks as FBI Director Kash Patel listens during a news conference at the Justice Department on Tuesday in Washington.

Jacquelyn Martin/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jacquelyn Martin/AP

WASHINGTON — The Southern Poverty Law Center was indicted Tuesday on federal fraud charges alleging it improperly raised millions of dollars to pay informants to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan and other extremist groups, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said.

The Justice Department alleges the civil rights group defrauded donors by using their money to fund the very extremism it claimed to be fighting, with payments of at least $3 million between 2014 and 2023 to people affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan, the United Klans of America, the National Socialist Party of America and other extremist groups.

“The SPLC was not dismantling these groups. It was instead manufacturing the extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred,” Blanche said.

Advertisement

The civil rights group faces charges including wire fraud, bank fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering in the case brought by the Justice Department in Alabama, where the organization is based.

The indictment came shortly after SPLC revealed the existence of a criminal investigation into its program to pay informants to infiltrate extremist groups and gather information on their activities. The group said the program was used to monitor threats of violence and the information was often shared with local and federal law enforcement.

SPLC CEO Bryan Fair said the organization “will vigorously defend ourselves, our staff, and our work.”

Blanche said the money was passed from the center through two different bank accounts before being loaded onto prepaid cards to give to the members of the extremist groups, which also included the National Socialist Movement and the Aryan Nations-affiliated Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club. The group never disclosed to donors details of the informant program, he said.

“They’re required to under the laws associated with a nonprofit to have certain transparency and honesty in what they’re telling donors they’re going to spend money on and what their mission statement is and what they’re raising money doing,” he said.

Advertisement

The indictment includes details on at least nine unnamed informants were paid by the SPLC through a secret program that prosecutors say began in the 1980s. Within the SPLC, they were known as field sources or “the Fs,” according to the indictment. One informant was paid more than $1 million between 2014 and 2023 while affiliated with the neo-Nazi National Alliance, the indictment said. Another was the Imperial Wizard of the United Klans of America.

The SPLC said the program was kept quiet to protect the safety of informants.

“When we began working with informants, we were living in the shadow of the height of the Civil Rights Movement, which had seen bombings at churches, state-sponsored violence against demonstrators, and the murders of activists that went unanswered by the justice system,” Fair said. “There is no question that what we learned from informants saved lives.”

The center has been targeted by Republicans

The SPLC, which is based in Montgomery, Alabama, was founded in 1971 and used civil litigation to fight white supremacist groups. The nonprofit has become a popular target among Republicans who see it as overly leftist and partisan.

The investigation could add to concerns that Trump’s Republican administration is using the Justice Department to go after conservative opponents and his critics. It follows a number of other investigations into Trump foes that have raised questions about whether the law enforcement agency has been turned into a political weapon.

Advertisement

The SPLC has faced intense criticism from conservatives, who have accused it of unfairly maligning right-wing organizations as extremist groups because of their viewpoints. The center regularly condemns Trump’s rhetoric and policies around voting rights, immigration and other issues.

The center came under fresh scrutiny after the assassination last year of conservative activist Charlie Kirk brought renewed attention to its characterization of the group that Kirk founded and led. The center included a section on that group, Turning Point USA, in a report titled “The Year in Hate and Extremism 2024” that described the group as “A Case Study of the Hard Right in 2024.”

FBI Director Kash Patel said last year that the agency was severing its relationship with the center, which had long provided law enforcement with research on hate crime and domestic extremism. Patel said the center had been turned into a “partisan smear machine,” and he accused it of defaming “mainstream Americans” with its “hate map” that documents alleged anti-government and hate groups inside the United States.

House Republicans hosted a hearing centered on the SPLC in December, saying it coordinated efforts with President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration “to target Christian and conservative Americans and deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech and free association.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending