Look who is “speak­ing his truth” about Har­vey Wein­stein. Note that Wein­stein pub­lished a book by a group of the­olo­gians dis­man­tling Gib­son’s movie Pas­sion of the Christ.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/15/mel-gibson-harvey-weinstein-los-angeles-trial

Mel Gib­son can tes­ti­fy about what he learned from one of Har­vey Weinstein’s accusers, a judge ruled on Fri­day in the rape and sex­u­al assault tri­al of the dis­graced movie mogul.
#MeToo is five years old. These tri­als show how far we’ve come
Jill Fil­ipovic
Jill Fil­ipovic
Read more

The 66-year-old actor and direc­tor was one of many wit­ness­es whose iden­ti­ties were revealed in Los Ange­les supe­ri­or court. The judge and attor­neys had tak­en a break from jury selec­tion for motions on what evi­dence will be allowed and who can tes­ti­fy. The wit­ness list is sealed.

The judge, Lisa B Lench, ruled that Gib­son can tes­ti­fy in sup­port of his masseuse and friend, who will be known as Jane Doe No 3.

Wein­stein, 70, is accused of com­mit­ting sex­u­al bat­tery by restraint against the woman, one of 11 rape and sex­u­al assault counts in the tri­al.

Pros­e­cu­tors say that after get­ting a mas­sage from the woman at a hotel in Bev­er­ly Hills in May 2010, a naked Wein­stein fol­lowed her into a bath­room and mas­tur­bat­ed.

Wein­stein has plead­ed not guilty and denied any non-con­sen­su­al sex­u­al activ­i­ty. His attor­neys argued against allow­ing Gib­son to tes­ti­fy, say­ing what he learned from the woman while get­ting a mas­sage does not con­sti­tute a “fresh com­plaint” under the law by which Gib­son would take the stand.

A “fresh com­plaint” under Cal­i­for­nia law allows the intro­duc­tion of evi­dence of sex­u­al assault or anoth­er crime if the vic­tim report­ed it to some­one else vol­un­tar­i­ly and rel­a­tive­ly prompt­ly.

Pros­e­cu­tors said that when Gib­son brought up Weinstein’s name, the woman had a trau­mat­ic response and Gib­son under­stood she had been sex­u­al­ly assault­ed. Gib­son did not remem­ber the tim­ing of the exchange but the pros­e­cu­tion will use anoth­er wit­ness, Alli­son Wein­er, who remem­bers speak­ing to Gib­son and the woman in 2015.

Judge Lench said Gibson’s tes­ti­mo­ny will depend on how the accuser describes the exchange when she takes the stand, and she may rule against it at that time.

A Wein­stein attor­ney, Mark Werks­man, argued that the defense should be allowed to cross-exam­ine Gib­son about wide­ly pub­li­cized anti­se­mit­ic remarks dur­ing an arrest in 2006, and about racist state­ments pub­li­cized in 2010.

Lench said dis­cus­sion of Gibson’s racism was not rel­e­vant to the tri­al but she would allow ques­tion­ing of whether he had a per­son­al bias and ani­mus toward Wein­stein.
Adver­tise­ment

Werks­man argued that Gib­son had such a bias both because Wein­stein is Jew­ish and because Wein­stein pub­lished a book that crit­i­cized the depic­tion of Jews in Gibson’s 2004 film The Pas­sion of the Christ.

“Any evi­dence of Mr Gibson’s racism or anti­semitism would give rise to a bias against my client, who chal­lenged him,“ Werks­man said.

The lawyer mis­tak­en­ly said the movie won a best pic­ture Oscar. Wein­stein, whose films once dom­i­nat­ed the Oscars, shook his head at the defense table.

“Sor­ry, my client would know bet­ter than I would,“ Werks­man said. “But it was an award-win­ning movie.”

The defense also argued Gib­son was try­ing to white­wash his image by focus­ing on Wein­stein and assert­ing him­self as a cham­pi­on of the #MeToo move­ment.

The pros­e­cu­tion argued that Gib­son had made no such sug­ges­tions, and that at the time of the con­ver­sa­tion with his masseuse was dis­cussing get­ting into a busi­ness deal with Wein­stein, show­ing there was no bias.

Mar­lene Mar­tinez, a deputy dis­trict attor­ney, called Gibson’s past com­ments “despi­ca­ble” but said they had no rel­e­vance for why he would be called to the stand.
Adver­tise­ment

Gibson’s tes­ti­mo­ny rais­es the prospect of two men, once among the most pow­er­ful in Hol­ly­wood but who have under­gone pub­lic down­falls, fac­ing each oth­er in court.

An email seek­ing com­ment from a rep­re­sen­ta­tive for Gib­son was not returned.
She Said review – a stir­ring dra­ma about the fall of Har­vey Wein­stein
Read more

Lench also found that the Mel­rose Place actor Daphne Zuni­ga could tes­ti­fy in a sim­i­lar capac­i­ty for a woman known at tri­al as Jane Doe No 4, whom Wein­stein is accused of rap­ing in 2004 or 2005.

Wein­stein is serv­ing a 23-year sen­tence for a 2020 con­vic­tion for rape and sex­u­al assault in New York. That state’s high­est court has agreed to hear his appeal. He was brought to Los Ange­les for the tri­al that began Mon­day, five years after women’s sto­ries about him gave momen­tum to the #MeToo move­ment.

Friday’s argu­ments came a day after the pre­miere of the film She Said, which tells the sto­ry of the two New York Times reporters whose sto­ries brought Wein­stein down. Weinstein’s attor­neys sought to have the LA tri­al delayed because pub­lic­i­ty from the film might taint the jury pool. The judge denied their motion.

The tri­al is expect­ed to last eight weeks. The judge and attor­neys will return to jury selec­tion on Mon­day. Open­ing state­ments are expect­ed on 24 Octo­ber.