The L.A. jury that on Monday convicted Harvey Weinstein of three out of seven felony counts in his rape trial on Tuesday resumed deliberations on aggravating factors that could lengthen the disgraced mogul’s prison sentence.
The jury is weighing whether Weinstein carried out the rape of a Russian model and actress dubbedJane Doe 1 with planning, sophistication or professionalism, and whether Jane Doe 1 was particularly vulnerable. Weinstein faces up to 18 years in prison, but that total rise to 24 years if the jury agrees that the aggravating factors have been met.
In the courthouse Tuesday, prosecutor Paul Thompson took 10 minutes to argue that was Jane Doe 1 was particularly vulnerable under California law because she suffered a “loss, injury or harm or any of those three things.”
He noted that it was “obvious” Jane Doe 1 was still terrified and emotional when testifying in the case; that she spoke about being emotionally distraught and sitting in the shower for hours following the rape. Thompson also homed in on the fact in the days, weeks and months following the rape she suffered guilt and shame and drank to self-medicate.
Jane Doe 1’s particular vulnerability was also clear, Thompson argued, because she was a resident of Italy who was in Los Angeles at the time of the assault. Further, he noted thatEnglish was not her first language and she did not speak English well back in 2013 (at the time of the rape) and her entire support system was back in Italy. He stated that her particularly vulnerability also came from the manner in which the crime was committed: it was a “surprise situation” and she “had to think on the fly… [Weinstein] knew what he was going to do. She didn’t.”
He also said that while Jane Doe 1 didn’t have a home here, the closest thing to home for her was her hotel bedroom. She was in her robe, and had taken off her makeup and had “let her guard down.” That, he said, made her particularly vulnerable.
Regarding the second aggravating factor, Thompson argued that Weinstein had planned the rape in hotel rooms in much the same way he had planned other assaults for which he has faced criminal charges.
Defense Attorney Mark Werksman argued that neither of the aggravating factors had been met. After stating that he was “disappointed in the verdict,” Werksman said the “particularly vulunerable” standard must be met at a “special or unusual degree.” He cited things such as being a minor or elderly or someone who is handicapped or mentally or cognitively impaired.
Werksman argued that Jane Doe 1 was none of those things. “She was 34 years old, physically fit, dynamic, well known as an actress and model… and was a regular at the LA Italia Film Festival,” he said, and she was in a place where she was “comfortable and familiar with.”
He also argued that the rape was “impulsive and spur of the moment,” and that Weinstein “left his jacket behind” after the assault. During the trial, the defense argued that Jane Doe 1 made up the entire incident and spent an inordinate amount of time questioning why there was no evidence of a jacket that Jane Doe 1 said she handed in to hotel staff.
On Monday, the panel of nine men and three women convicted Weinstein on three felony counts including forcible rape, forcible oral copulation and forcible penetration by a foreign object, but was hung on three other counts – including allegations brought by Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the wife of California Gov. Gavin Newsom — and found the disgraced movie mogul not guilty on a seventh charge.
Weinstein is already serving a 23-year sentence on criminal first-degree sexual assault and third-degree rape stemming from a trial in New York in 2020, a conviction he has been granted the right to appeal