No one in the world believed that Harvey Weinstein’s attorneys would treat any of the legions of women who have accused him of rape with kindness or even the modicum of respect. These men, as expected, used the kind of slut-shaming, victim-blaming, good old-fashioned misogynist arguments that are characteristic of representing a convicted rapist. However, their scathing enthusiasm for ravaging an accuser in particular is a bit odd.
Weinstein’s Second trial for sexual abuse has proved an exceptionally torturous eight weeks for filmmakers, First Lady of Californiaand Jane Doe #4 Jennifer Siebel Newsom, thanks to vicious allegations and unnecessarily cruel comments from his defense attorneys, Alan Jackson and Mark Werksman. Her scourging of Siebel Newsom began in opening remarks if they described her as “just another bimbo who slept with Harvey Weinstein to get ahead in Hollywood,” and carried on through weeks of testimony, cross-examination, and these weeks closing arguments.
“Jane Doe #4 can’t imagine having a successful, well-educated, well-mannered, sophisticated woman who had consensual sex with Harvey Weinstein in exchange for opportunity and access,” Jackson said told the court.
“She may regret transactional sex, but regret is a far cry from rape,” he continued. “She decided to get into a relationship with Harvey, and she’s benefited from it… That’s the definition of transactional sex, and she hates it.”
The attorneys not only implied that Siebel lied to Newsom, they also compared them emotional testimony to a production. “It was a theatrical, overly dramatized performance,” Jackson said. “What you saw was a spectacle. A pretty good act, but it had no basis in truth.”
Throughout the trial, Weinstein’s defense went to great lengths to refute Siebel Newsom’s allegations against her client, even going so far as to ask her to describe and demonstrate an orgasm, which she said she faked in order to to escape him. “I could tell he just needed it, he was so determined, just so scary, just about him and his pleasure, his need for satisfaction, so I just did it to make it stop,” she told the court about the alleged attack.
Siebel Newsom met the powerful producer at the 2005 Toronto Film Festival while she was working as an actress. Weinstein, as described by numerous other accusers, invited them to a hotel meeting to discuss their film projects. When she arrived, Siebel Newsom said he dragged her into the bedroom and raped her. “He stood his ground and tried to tell me that he — he mentioned several actresses’ names — he was trying to tell me that this was the industry and was threatening me in a way,” she testified. When asked by a prosecutor why she stayed in the suite and didn’t immediately attempt to escape, she replied, “Because you don’t say no to Harvey Weinstein. He could make or ruin your career. I thought I would discuss my projects.”
Once under cross-examination, she gave in under the defense’s relentless questions—especially when asked specifically how She “showed her pleasure” during Weinstein’s attack: “It’s not that When Harry met Sally. I don’t.” Her protracted back-and-forth — aided by folders of email correspondence between Siebel Newsom and Weinstein — only intensified, often interrupted by her sobs. “I feel like you’re jumping around,” she once said. Werksman replied, “Well, I feel like I’m asking you questions and you’re not answering.” , are you too tired to testify?” Then she broke down and said, “Sir, what you are doing today is exactly what he did to me.”
Jackson repeated the latter exchange during the closing statements: “How dare you say such a thinghe said. “She dares to equate this with violent rape. There are women out there who have been violently raped. She invented this whole performance to portray herself as a victim of her choices.”
He also referenced their continued correspondence after the alleged attack. Siebel Newsom argued that this was purely for professional development and that she “boxed” the more traumatic memories of the attack. Meanwhile, attorneys claimed she simply capitalized on an association with Weinstein to become a filmmaker, further her husband’s political career and now a figure in the Me to movement.
“She kept seeking his company,” Jackson told the court. “She changes details if it looks bad on her or says she doesn’t remember. All [regarding her memory] is still ‘in a box’. I don’t know where that box is, but maybe she’ll find the truth there!”
While the attorneys certainly targeted any women who testified at the trial – whether as Jane Doe or a previous witness to a bad act – and argued so All of her experiences with Weinstein were consensual, Siebel Newsom undoubtedly bearing the brunt of it Attacks. This is probably because she is one of the most prominent prosecutors in this trial. However, as a survivor being similarly slandered, it was just as harrowing to watch as I’m sure it was to endure.
Jury deliberations are to begin the sentence on Friday.
https://jezebel.com/harvey-weinsteins-attorneys-have-been-especially-viciou-1849846791 Harvey Weinstein’s attorneys were particularly vicious towards Jennifer Siebel Newsom