Let’s say this up front: I am second to NOBODY in finding Harvey Weinstein, his associates, or anyone who worked with him or covered up for him in complete contempt—of MY court of opinion because people who use their power to sexually and emotionally abuse others are, to employ a highly complex legal term, scum.
Harvey Weinstein at the 2010 Time 100 Gala. Photo Credit: David Shankbone, CC BY 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
I am also, for the record Your Honors, a dedicated believer in our judicial system and the rule of law, which is why, in spite of the above statement, I stand in agreement (and in good company in that) with the New York Court of Appeals verdict to overturn Weinstein’s conviction in 2020 for which he was serving a 16-year sentence in prison (this will NOT affect a similar verdict in California where, we expect, he will be transferred to serve THAT sentence, so this is not a “get out of jail free card” by any means.)
This now puts the ball in the “court” of New York District Attorney (none other than Trump tormentor Alvin Bragg) whether to try him again in absence of the violations the Court gave as their reasons for the decision or just plain give up knowing he’ll still be doing time in the Golden State.
But because he’s a symptom of a larger problem in the entertainment industry and because, based on your many questions and comments in our articles and videos, many of you are shocked and stunned and don’t fully understand the issues, we’re submitting this clarifying article so you, too, will understand.
Harvey Weinstein via FOX 13 Seattle YouTube
WHY did they kick the case out? Let’s refer to the words of media reporter John Nolte in Breitbart—a place you wouldn’t expect to endorse releasing a sexually abusive Hollywood bigshot and just like us in that respect:
“…the New York Court of Appeals ruled that the trial judge should not have allowed ‘prosecutors to call as witnesses a series of women who said Mr. Weinstein had assaulted them — but whose accusations were not part of the charges against him.’ The appeals court identified additional errors and decided that Weinstein had not received a fair trial— which is true. This should’ve been a 7-0 decision to overturn,” Nolte wrote.
“This whole fiasco strikes me as a classic case of framing a guilty man” explained Nolte. “It is beyond outrageous that the prosecutor was allowed to parade a series of women before the jury to make unproven claims of sexual misconduct against Weinstein. That goes beyond prejudicial and directly to rigging a trial. At the time, I was shocked the judge allowed this, but in the witch hunt fever of #MeToo, there was a lot more concern about appeasing the mob than honoring the U.S. Constitution or a basic sense of fairness.”
Harvey Weinstein via ABC News YouTube
The always-outspoken Nolte continued as follows, “Harvey Weinstein is a pig. No question. But even a pig deserves a fair trial, and the moment we stop giving pigs fair trials, the line between rigged trials and fair trials moves all that much closer to non-pigs like you and me.”
“First off, that ‘series of women’ who told the jury Weinstein had victimized them had never proven their allegations in court. That alone should have stopped the judge from allowing their testimony. Secondly, even if Weinstein had been convicted of assaulting those witnesses, the state must prove Weinstein is guilty of the charges in question and do so without prejudicing the jury with past acts.”
Nolte then explained his view (and mine, if you care) most succinctly in this way, “I don’t defend the likes of Harvey Weinstein, Alec Baldwin, Woody Allen, or Bill Maher because I like them. I don’t. I defend their rights as a means to defend myself. I want the worst people in the world (Weinstein, Baldwin) and the people I disagree with most (Allen, Maher) to enjoy the full expression of their God-given rights, both in a court of law and in the court of public opinion. Why? Because if their rights are safe, my rights are safe, and looking the other way or piling on while their rights are violated only hurts my rights, because then that line moves closer to me.”
Harvey Weinstein via CNN YouTube
Meanwhile, if Bragg retries him Harvey will still stay in jail until that new trial, and if he punts they’ll ship him to California’s prisons to serve that sentence. At age 71 he’s sure to spend most if not all of the rest of his life behind bars where it is clear he belongs.
But the rule of law is important for all of us—from Harvey Weinstein to, to mention somebody being attacked by the same lawyer who threatened Harvey’s other victims on his behalf with being “dragged through the mud by your hair,” Gina Carano and, for that matter, anyone found criminally or civilly guilty when the multitude of Reedy Creek violations go to trial
One nation, one rule of law, with liberty and justice for all. That was Walt’s America. That was Washington’s. That was Lincoln’s. And that is what WE, the people, can hope will be yours and your family’s and mine.
Harvey Weinstein via CNN YouTube
What do you make of Weinstein’s conviction in New York being overturned?
The comparison would fall on Bragg’s prosecution of Trump using equally suspect methods, and also Leticia James’ prosecution. We know how corrupt New York is. Unfortunately, the Appeals Court haven’t reversed Trump’s convictions on his civil trials. Justice takes a long time and seems to not work at the trial courts. The trial judges are clearly ramming through the cases instead of using more care to ensure true justice.