End with argument and split judgment – Diepresse.com
The 73-year-old ex-Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein was previously found to be guilty in another indictment point. A court date on July 2 should clarify further procedure.
In the newly rolled-up trial against the former Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, a jury was unable to agree on a rape centering point. This was informed of the twelve -member body on Thursday to the court in New York. On Wednesday, after several days of consultation, the jury had informed their decisions in two other charges.
They saw it as proven that the 73-year-old once committed serious sexual crimes on a woman. In another indictment of the severe sexual crimes against a second woman, the jury was not guilty. In the third indictment point of the rape, the judge first asked the jury to advise further advice – but then declared their explanation that they could not agree.
Jury dispute behind the scenes
Previously, the jury leader had refused to advise further – it was only screamed and he felt threatened by the other jury, he had told the judge. In the past few days there had always been reports on discrepancies and disagreements within the jury.
« Sometimes jury consultations are heated, » said judge Curtis Farber. « As I understand it, these consultations were even more heated than others. That is a shame. » The process is now ended. As usual, the sentence should be announced at a later date. The public prosecutor’s office was willing to reopen the indictment of the rape, the defense wants it to be dropped. Judge Farber set a court appointment on July 2, where you should advise.
Regardless of the outcome of the procedure in New York, the health -stricken wine stone remains in custody. In 2023 he was sentenced to 16 more years in California in a separate criminal proceedings. The indictment also accused him of sexual attacks there. His defense has also appealed against this judgment.
The guilty verdict of 2020 was collected
An appellate court in the state of New York surprisingly collected the original guilty verdict against Weinstein from 2020 due to rape and criminal sexual acts and the prison sentence of 23 years in the past year – due to considerable procedural errors.
The central point of criticism was the approval of several testimonies that were not the subject of the formal charges and thus illegally influenced the judgment of the jury. The process was then re -rolled up and again took up the central charges. The indictment was based on the statements of three women in the process of about six weeks. Two of the women had already testified in the first trial, and this time there was a third main witness. (APA)
