Prosecutors once again cast Harvey Weinstein as a once-dominant Hollywood figure who allegedly wielded his influence to commit sexual assault, revisiting a familiar but contentious narrative as a rape retrial opened Tuesday—nearly eight years after the former movie mogul’s arrest.
“This case will come down to power, to control and to manipulation,” Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Candace White told jurors in her opening statement, with District Attorney Alvin Bragg present in the courtroom.
Weinstein’s attorney, Jacob Kaplan, pushed back, arguing the case “is about consent, about choice and about regret,” echoing the longtime defense that the accuser has reframed a consensual encounter as a crime.
Since becoming a central figure in the #MeToo movement nearly a decade ago, Weinstein has faced multiple trials across the United States, resulting in a mix of convictions, acquittals, and dismissed charges. The current retrial focuses on a rape allegation stemming from a 2013 encounter in a Manhattan hotel—an issue that has persisted following an overturned conviction and a previous jury deadlock.
What’s different this time
While the allegation itself is well known, the scope of the case has narrowed significantly. Unlike earlier proceedings that included multiple accusers and charges, this trial centers solely on what occurred between Weinstein and hairstylist-actor Jessica Mann in a hotel room. Jurors, however, will still hear extensive testimony about their relationship before and after the alleged incident.
Weinstein has also assembled a new legal team, potentially signaling a shift in defense strategy. His attorneys have indicated they may avoid some lines of questioning used previously, including those related to a compensation fund for women who accused him of misconduct.
Prosecutors are seeking to introduce at least one new witness—a close friend of Mann at the time—while also leaving open the possibility of calling a court officer over an alleged remark Weinstein made in 2020, should he choose to testify. The defense opposes both moves.
Presiding Judge Curtis Farber has revisited aspects of prior proceedings as well, limiting certain lines of questioning. For instance, jurors were told that Mann appeared on a list of Weinstein’s social contacts, but—unlike in earlier trials—they were not informed that the list consisted exclusively of women.
Weinstein has pleaded not guilty, maintaining that while he was unfaithful in his marriage and “acted wrongly,” he “never assaulted anyone.”
The accuser’s account
Mann, then 27, was aspiring to break into acting when she met Weinstein at a Los Angeles-area party in 2013. She has testified that although she initially sought a professional connection, their relationship became a complicated and at times consensual one.
According to her account, during a trip to New York later that year, Weinstein assaulted her in a hotel room after a planned breakfast meeting. She says he ignored her objections, physically restrained her, and that she ultimately complied out of fear, wanting only to leave the situation.
Prosecutors argue that Weinstein exploited his power and influence, both professionally and personally. The defense, however, points to Mann’s continued contact with Weinstein afterward—including messages and requests for career assistance—as evidence undermining her claims.
As Kaplan told jurors, the case is not simply about conflicting accounts, but “her word against her own word.”
Comments are closed.