Harvey Weinstein's lawyer accuses witnesses of 'lying' about nature of their relationships to grand jury

FP Staff

Dec 13, 2018 15:20:42 IST

Harvey Weinstein's attorney slammed the the Manhattan District Attorney's office and prosecutors alleging they had handled the case hastily due to mounting public pressure. Aiming to have five remaining charges of sexual assault and harassment against the disgraced movie mogul dismissed, Ben Brafman sent a letter to Judge James Burke. In his letter, he accused the witnesses of being untruthful and responded to prosecutor Assistant DA Kevin Wilson's comment.

FILE - In this May 25, 2018 file photo, Harvey Weinstein listens during a court proceeding in New York. Weinstein won't testify before the New York grand jury that's weighing whether to indict him on rape and other sex charges. A statement issued through a spokesman Wednesday, May 30, says Weinstein's lawyers decided there wasn't enough time to prepare him to testify. They say he learned the specific charges and the accusers' identities only after turning himself in Friday, with a deadline set for Wednesday afternoon to testify or not. (Steven Hirsch/New York Post via AP, Pool)

Harvey Weinstein. Image from AP/Steven Hirsch

Last week, Wilson had accused Brafman of having "a misguided and antiquated view of how a rape victim should react after being assaulted." To that, Brafman said: "If ever a defendant or his counsel had a right to publicly respond to this adverse publicity, it is on behalf of Mr. Weinstein." He accused the New York Police department of using the media to subject Weinstein to a perp walk after he was arrested.

Brafman also released a couple of email exchanges between Weinstein and two women whose charges are being pursued in court. He alleged that the women continued to have cordial relations with the producer even years after alleged sexual assaults. He referred to more such emails between his client and other accusers who could be summoned to testify against Weinstein to confirm his alleged acts. "At the time they made their presentment to the Grand Jury in this case, the prosecution (1) failed to present witness statements which revealed material untruths told by the complaining witnesses and (2) willfully chose not to present documentary evidence which reflected immediate and then continuing contact with the alleged rapist-beginning just hours after the alleged rape and continuing on for several years thereafter," read the letter.

Updated Date: Dec 13, 2018 15:20:42 IST