Left-leaning criminal justice groups are pushing for a last-minute update to New York’s rules of evidence that needs attention after the Court of Appeals threw out the conviction of disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein last month. They are asking the City of Albany not to proceed.
Hoping to limit the damage caused by the ruling, leading Democratic lawmakers have proposed legislation to close the loophole.
But the New York Legal Aid Society and groups representing public defenders and defense attorneys call the bill a “reflexive and dangerous approach.”
“Harvey Weinstein was a wealthy movie mogul with unlimited resources, influence, and power,” the groups wrote in a memo of opposition sent to lawmakers.
“But the rules this bill proposes would apply to black and brown people in low-income communities who have little of those resources, influence, or power.”
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Amy Paulin (D-Westchester) and Senate Deputy Majority Leader Michael Gianaris (D-Queens), would allow judges to review past convictions even if they have not been charged in connection with a sex crime. It would make it clear that testimony about alleged sex crimes can be admitted. to those acts.
Prosecutors in Mr. Weinstein’s case have cited three other women who detailed excruciating details of being assaulted by Mr. Weinstein to show that Mr. Weinstein had a history of nonconsensual sexual acts. Includes testimony.
Defense attorneys argue that the high court correctly interpreted existing New York law and that the new law would give prosecutors more leeway to admit all kinds of testimony to influence jurors. are doing.
“This overbroad proposal would destroy fundamental protections against wrongful convictions and wrongful imprisonment,” Amanda Jacques, policy director at the Legal Aid Society, said in a statement.
State Sen. Julia Salazar (D-Brooklyn), who says she is a sexual assault survivor, opposes the bill because she believes it would cause more damage than following the current law. .
“While I understand the sponsors’ intentions, there is a serious risk that if we pass a bill like this, we will see an increase in wrongful convictions,” Salazar told the Post on Monday.
“I believe the current statute is appropriate. I also believe that if Harvey Weinstein were to be tried again, he would be convicted,” she added.
Mr Gianaris said he had taken into account the concerns raised by legal aid when introducing the bill, but ultimately said sexual offenses are unique and the law should specifically reflect that. He says he believes it.
“I believe that sex crimes pose a unique problem because many of them are words committed by one person against another, which makes sure that the rules that the federal government has in place are not justified. Because it’s going to change,” he told the Post on Monday.
The law is nearly identical to the federally recommended rules of evidence, which are also on file in 16 other states.
Gov. Kathy Hochul has been hesitant to express full support for the bill, but told reporters on Friday that she was hopeful it would pass and that the final law would make its way through the courts. He said he wants to be able to overcome the objections of the government.
“My values are to make sure that women have their day in court and that we have all the evidence we need to make sure those who abuse women are stopped. That’s clear,” Hochul said. he said in response to questions from the Post.
Lawmakers aim to pass the bill by the end of the session on June 6th.
