Weinstein attorney: He’s a sinner, but not ‘a rapist’ | TribLIVE.com
Movies/TV

Weinstein attorney: He’s a sinner, but not ‘a rapist’

Associated Press
1684830_web1_1684830-688575a3bc4e407ab6ed8164829fbaa8
AP Photo/Mark Lennihan
In this Aug. 26, 2019, photo, Harvey Weinstein arrives in court in New York.

An attorney for Harvey Weinstein said on Tuesday that her client is not without sin — but he’s also not “a rapist.”

Donna Rotunno, speaking on “CBS This Morning,” said she feels strongly that the evidence will exonerate the movie mogul of any criminal wrongdoing.

Weinstein is scheduled to go to trial in January on charges alleging he raped an unidentified woman in his Manhattan hotel room in 2013 and performed a forcible sex act on a different woman in 2006. He denies all accusations of non-consensual sex.

The trial will occur amid the backdrop of the #MeToo movement, which was fueled by dozens of allegations of sexual misconduct against Weinstein.

“I’m not here to say he was not guilty of committing sins,” she said. However, “I don’t think he’s a rapist.”

“I think in many ways there are good things about #MeToo,” the lawyer said. However, the empowerment movement “allows the court of public opinion to take over the narrative” in a way that can’t be corrected or challenged, which can result in the accused being “stripped of your rights.”

“It’s really about making sure those issues don’t cloud our ability to pick a fair jury,” she said.

No matter happens at trial, she said, Weinstein “will pay the biggest price there is,” because his life is ruined.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.