Harvey Weinstein back in court as jury is set to begin deliberations

A jury’s verdict in Harvey Weinstein’s rape trial may well hang on the testimony of three women who accusations were not part of the underlying criminal case. 

Jury deliberations are expected to begin on Tuesday in the disgraced Hollywood producer’s trial after often-emotional testimony from multiple women who accused him of sexual assault.

The panel of five women and seven men will begin to weigh the evidence that Weinstein raped onetime aspiring actress Jessica Mann in a Manhattan hotel room in 2013 and forcibly performed oral sex on film production assistant Mimi Haleyi in 2006.

Weinstein, 67, has pleaded not guilty and maintains any sexual conduct was consensual.  

Sopranos actress Annabella Sciorra also testified she was allegedly raped by Weinstein in 1993 or 1994 in her Manhattan apartment. 

Weinstein is not charged with attacking Sciorra but she was brought in to testify so prosecutors could make the argument Weinstein had a habit of preying on women. Her accusation is too old to be the basis for criminal charges on its own. 

During the six-week trial, the three other women – costume designer Dawn Dunning, model Tarale Wulff and actress Lauren Young – testified they were enticed into meeting Weinstein for professional reasons and then groped or raped. 

They testified about encounters separate from the crimes Weinstein was accused of committing. 

Prosecutors called the women as witnesses to try to establish Weinstein’s motive and a signature pattern of behavior that legal experts described as potentially powerful evidence that might bolster the claims of Haleyi and Mann. 

New York law customarily prevents prosecutors from presenting testimony of ‘prior bad acts’ because it is generally considered prejudicial to a defendant.  

An exception to the law allowed prosecutors to call Dunning, Wulff and Young to show Weinstein ‘had a particular intention’ or exhibited a ‘signature’ pattern of behavior when he invited women to meet and discuss professional opportunities.

Under New York state law, such witnesses are known as ‘Molineux’ witnesses.

A lawyer for Weinstein, Arthur Aidala, said it was ‘extraordinary to have three Molineux witnesses testify when there are only two complaining witnesses.’

‘It is often difficult for prosecutors to convince a judge to allow one Molineux witness,’ he said in an email.

Dunning testified that the producer groped her in 2004 and offered her movie roles in exchange for three-way sex with him and his assistant, which she refused.

Young, a model and actress, testified that the film producer trapped her in a hotel bathroom in 2013, masturbated in front of her while groping her breasts, and told her: ‘This is what all the actresses do to make it.’

On cross-examination, the defense challenged the women’s credibility. 

In Dunning’s case, Weinstein’s lawyers pressed her about her decision to meet with Weinstein weeks after the alleged assault and the fact that she did not tell anyone about the encounter until years later. 

Prosecutor Joan Illuzzi-Orbon said in her closing argument last week that Weinstein treated the women who accused him like ‘complete disposables’ and made them feel ashamed even though he was the one who was at fault.

‘What he wants to do is he wants to get them in a situation where they feel stupid. If you feel stupid and belittled, belittled, stupid people do not complain,’ the prosecutor told jurors.

But defense lawyer Donna Rotunno said in her closing that the prosecutors had ‘created a universe that strips adult women of common sense, autonomy and responsibility’.

Rotunno suggested that, according to prosecutors, Weinstein’s accusers ‘are not even responsible for sitting at their computers sending emails to someone across the country’.