Prosecutors of Manhattan pushed back Wednesday against the allegations of accused sexual predator Harvey Weinstein that they held exculpatory evidence of a grand jury.
The unseemly film magnate is facing accusations in Manhattan for alleged non-consensual sexual encounters with three women, including a prosecutor who has not been publicly identified.
Prosecutors' new notifications come in response to the motions submitted on 3 August by the lawyers of Weinstein, in which they plead for dismissal, arguing that exculpatory e-mails were withheld from great jurors.
The lawyers of Weinstein have argued that messages that have been exchanged with an alleged victim over the course of a four-year period clash with her accusation that he raped her in March 2013.
"For example on 8 February 2017, [the accuser] e-mailed Mr. Weinstein say, "I love you, always do, but I hate to feel like an outside visit. :), & # 39;" his lawyers had claimed that the woman wrote.
"These e-mails, we confirm, confirm the very relevant fact that the relationship between [the accuser] and Mr. Weinstein was both consensual and intimate; More importantly, certain e-mails sent to Mr. Weinstein by [the accuser] can reasonably be understood as a reflection [her] the intention that she wanted the relationship to go deeper ", they kept in their file last month.
The Manhattan District Attorney & # 39; s Office argues that if the court revised the minutes of the grand jury, it would be clear that "the grand jury had been properly instructed on the law and that the integrity of the proceedings was unaffected, and the people all accusations deny the opposite … "
"The defendant's first argument to dismiss is his claim that the Prosecution had the obligation to present to the Grand Jury various e-mail exchanges between the defendant and the victim of certain accusations," wrote prosecutors in judicial documents. "The defendant does not claim, because he can not, that one of the e-mails contains a denial of the loaded rape."
"Instead, the defendant claims that at most the e-mails could indicate a state of mind that does not match what the defendant thinks should be a victim of rape," state prosecutors continue. "The most important thing is that an overview of the minutes of the big jury in this case will reveal that the people have presented honest evidence and in a way that was not misleading by giving a full and honest account of the relationship between the suspect and the victim both before and after the loaded rape. "
"The motion of the defendant to dismiss this ground is without legal or factual support and must be refused," they argued.
Weinstein's lawyers also challenged whether prosecutors presented enough evidence to the jury regarding his alleged victims: Mimi Haleyi, Lucia Evans and the unidentified third woman.
Prosecutors said in their submission that if the court were to review the minutes of the grand jury, the documentation "will show that the presented evidence amply supports the allegations in question and that the defendant's motion must be refused accordingly."
Weinstein was initially accused in May of rape in the first and third grade and criminal sexual acts in the first degree, in connection with alleged forced encounters in 2013 and 2014.
The District Attorney of the District of Manhattan then announced on July 2 that Weinstein was hit by a grand jury with yet another count of criminal sexual acts in the first degree in relation to a third prosecutor, in addition to two counts of rapacious sexual assault.
Weinstein, who has been on bail of $ 1 million, maintains his innocence.
The prosecutions of prosecutors come a few hours after Sky News released a video claiming that Weinstein flirted and touched a businesswoman who threw him a proposal in 2011. Hours after the meeting, Melissa Thompson said that Weinstein had raped her in a nearby hotel. Thompson is not involved in the criminal case against him.
Benjamin Brafman, who defends Weinstein, said of the footage "the video, viewed in its entirety, in context and not in selected fragments, shows that there is nothing powerful, but unconstrained – if not uncomfortable – of both parties. Something shortcomings are meant to make Mr. Weinstein seem inappropriate and even exploitative. & # 39;