A judge on a New York appeals court strongly disagreed with the majority's decision to overturn Harvey Weinstein's 2020 rape conviction. The judge argued that the court did not fully understand the complexities of the sexual assault case and stated that women in New York deserve better.
New York’s top court overturned Weinsten’s 2020 conviction 2020 conviction The 2020 conviction on felony sex crime charges against Harvey Weinstein was overturned on Thursday by the New York State Court of Appeals. The court found that the trial judge made a mistake by allowing testimony about uncharged previous sexual acts, which unfairly influenced the jury.
In her dissent, Judge Madeline Singas stated that the majority's opinion showed a fundamental misunderstanding of sexual violence committed by powerful men against women.
Judge Madeline Singas criticized the majority for ignoring evidence of the defendant’s manipulation and premeditation and failing to recognize the jury's right to consider the defendant’s previous assaults. She expressed concern that the court is setting a troubling trend of overturning guilty verdicts in sexual violence cases.
Judge Singas wrote a separate dissent to emphasize how the majority's decision perpetuates outdated views of sexual violence and allows predators to avoid responsibility. She agreed with Judge Cannataro's dissent from the majority opinion to overturn the conviction.
The New York Judge strongly criticized the court's ruling that evidence of Weinstein’s previous sexual assaults was “irrelevant to this case.”
Judge Singas argued that the majority's decision lacks awareness of the complexity of proving lack of consent in sexual assault cases and deprives juries of necessary context to do their work.
Judge Singas stated that the majority's conclusion overlooks the legal and practical challenges of proving lack of consent in sexual assault cases, ignoring the complexities of how sexual violence is perpetrated and perceived.
Judge Singas concluded by saying, “Because New York’s women deserve better, I dissent.”
