Tag Archives: Sexual misconduct

Ghislaine Maxwell claims Prince Andrew photo with Virginia Giuffre is ‘fake’



CNN
 — 

Convicted child sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell has said a decades-old photograph of Prince Andrew with his sexual abuse accuser Virginia Giuffre is “fake,” in a series of interviews from prison.

The disgraced British socialite is currently serving a 20-year sentence in US federal prison for carrying out a years-long scheme with her longtime confidante Jeffrey Epstein to groom and sexually abuse underage girls.

Speaking from a Florida jail to UK broadcaster TalkTV, which aired a special program on Monday night, the 61-year-old – who also appears in the photograph – said she doesn’t “believe it happened.”

“I don’t believe it is real for a second, in fact, I’m sure it’s not. There has never been an original. I don’t believe it happened and certainly, the way it’s described would have been impossible. I don’t have any memory of going to Tramp [nightclub],” Maxwell said.

Prince Andrew, who is one of King Charles III’s younger brothers, has strenuously denied Giuffre’s allegation that he was introduced to her at London’s Tramp nightclub in 2001 with Maxwell, before then-17-year-old Giuffre was allegedly forced to perform sex acts with the British royal.

Giuffre filed a civil lawsuit in a US court in 2021 against Andrew, who is also known as the Duke of York, alleging sexual abuses while she was a minor on multiple occasions. Andrew later settled out of court for an undisclosed figure without admitting any wrongdoing and the case was dismissed. Still, the allegations against the senior royal severely tarnished his reputation. He stepped back from royal duties in late 2019 and was stripped of his military titles and royal patronages last year.

Maxwell appeared to show little remorse to Epstein’s victims and offered no apology in the interviews broadcast Monday. Instead, she said the victims should “take their disappointment and upset out on the authorities who allowed” the billionaire pedophile to die in prison.

Maxwell also told TalkTV that she believes Epstein was murdered – a conspiracy theory for which she offered no evidence. Authorities ruled Epstein died by suicide in 2019 while he was awaiting trial on federal charges accusing him of sexually abusing underage girls.

Regarding the victims, Maxwell said, “I hope they have some closure via the judicial process that took place.”

Maxwell acknowledged during her sentencing hearing last year that she had been convicted in the sex trafficking scheme but stopped short of taking responsibility. She did not testify in her defense during the trial in late 2021, which ended with her conviction on five counts, including sex trafficking of a minor.

Read original article here

David Carrick: London Metropolitan Police officer admits to dozens of offenses against women, including 24 cases of rape


London
CNN
 — 

A serving officer in London’s Metropolitan Police has admitted to 49 offenses, including 24 counts of rape over an 18-year period, reigniting calls for urgent reform in the United Kingdom’s largest police force.

David Carrick appeared at Southwark Crown Court in the British capital Monday to plead guilty to four counts of rape, false imprisonment and indecent assault relating to a 40-year-old woman in 2003, the UK’s PA Media news agency reported.

At the Old Bailey criminal court in London last month, Carrick admitted to 43 charges against 11 other women, including 20 counts of rape, between March 2004 and September 2020, according to PA.

A series of recent scandals has shed light on what the UK police watchdog called a culture of misogyny and racism in London’s police service.

In September 2021, Metropolitan Police officer Wayne Couzens was sentenced to life in prison without parole for the abduction, rape and murder of Sarah Everard, a case that horrified the nation and sparked debate about violence against women.

The Metropolitan Police Service Commissioner Cressida Dick resigned from her post in 2022, after a damning review by the Independent Office for Police Conduct issued 15 recommendations “to change policing practice” in the country.

London’s Metropolitan Police are now investigating as many as 1,000 sex offenses and domestic abuse claims involving approximately 800 of its officers, the force’s Commissioner Mark Rowley admitted Monday.

“That’s 1,000 cases to look at. Some of those will be things of no concern in the end when we look at them because it will be an argument overheard by neighbors where inquiries show there’s nothing to be concerned about,” Rowley said in an interview with UK media.

“But in there, I’m sad to say, there will be some cases where in the past we should have been more assertive and looked to throw officers out and we haven’t done.”

“We are going to turn all those stones over, we’re going to come to the right conclusions and we’ll be ruthless about rooting out those who corrupt our integrity. You have my absolute assurance on that,” he said.

The UK’s Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) called Carrick’s case one of the “most shocking” it’s ever seen.

“The scale of the degradation Carrick subjected his victims to is unlike anything I have encountered in my 34 years with the Crown Prosecution Service,” CPS Chief Crown Prosecutor Jaswant Narwal said.

“I commend every single woman who courageously shared their traumatic experience and enabled us to bring this case to court and see justice served,” Narwal continued while speaking outside Southwark Crown Court Monday.

The senior investigating officer in the case, Detective Chief Inspector Iain Moor, called Carrick’s crimes “truly shocking.”

“The police service is committed to tackling violence against women and girls in all its forms,” Moor said, adding “no one is above the law.”

Assistant Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police Barbara Gray also apologized on behalf of the police force to all the victims.

Gray said Monday that Carrick “should have been dismissed from the police service a long time ago.”

She later added: “We should have spotted his pattern of abusive behavior and because we didn’t, we missed opportunities to remove him from the organization. We are truly sorry that Carrick was able to continue to use his role as a police officer to prolong the suffering of his victims.”

“The duration and nature of Carrick’s offending is unprecedented in policing. But regrettably he is not the only Met officer to have been charged with serious sexual offences in the recent past,” she said.

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said: “Londoners will be rightly shocked that this man was able to work for the Met for so long and serious questions must be answered about how he was able to abuse his position as an officer in this horrendous manner.”

Khan commented that work to reform the culture and standards of the Met has already started following an interim review and that a new, anonymous police complaints hotline and anti-corruption team has recently been established by Metropolitan Police Commissioner Mark Rowley.

“But more can and must be done,” added Khan on Twitter. “It’s vital that all victims of crime have confidence in our police, and we simply must do more to raise standards and empower police leaders to rid the Met and all other police services of those officers who are clearly unfit to serve.”

Women’s rights organizations called for an inquiry into the Met following Carrick’s case.

UK domestic abuse charity Refuge called Carrick’s crimes “utterly abhorrent.”

“When a man who has been charged with 49 offences, including 24 charges of rape, is a serving police officer, how can women and girls possibly be – or feel – safe,” Refuge tweeted Monday.

UK organization End Violence Against Women also posted on Twitter: “This is an institution in crisis. That Carrick’s pattern of egregious behaviour was known to the Met and they failed to act speaks more loudly than their empty promises to women.”

“Solidarity with the victims & all who are feeling the weight of the traumatic details being reported,” it added.

The British Women’s Equality Party tweeted: “The Met knew about the allegations for TWENTY years. They did nothing as a serial rapist abused his power. They are complicit. Misogyny will never be stripped from the police without a nationwide, statutory inquiry.”

The Fawcett Society, which campaigns for gender equality and women’s rights, said on Twitter: “Any act of sexual violence is a disgrace. But it is particularly harmful when, yet again, these crimes have been perpetrated by a person who has additional responsibilities to keep the public safe.”

Read original article here

How WWE’s Vince McMahon ruthlessly got his job back despite allegations of sexual assault and misuse of company funds


Washington
CNN
 — 

Professional wrestling is known for its outlandish, dramatic stories that have captivated generations. It’s an athletic soap opera built on emotional drama with wrestlers sometimes scheming in the background for months only to make their move at the opportune moment, drawing crazed reactions from arenas packed with fans who have followed every beat.

But the real-life saga playing out in World Wrestling Entertainment’s corporate office over the last several weeks surpasses even what most of what those performers and their backstage colleagues could dream up.

Vince McMahon, the longtime force behind WWE at the corporate and creative levels, made a shocking return to the company on January 10, nearly six months after announcing his retirement. McMahon was alleged to have used company funds to pay millions to multiple women in order to cover up infidelity and allegations of sexual misconduct.

But over a series of just a few days last week, McMahon engineered his return to the company’s board of directors, reshaped it by forcing out some members, replaced them with his own allies, and used that new boardroom power to install himself in his old job as executive chairman. His own daughter – the heir apparent to the company who had appeared groomed to take the job for years – resigned.

The stunning and swift developments have the wrestling world reeling, with rumors of a sale burning up Wrestling Twitter and people inside and outside the company wondering what it all means for the future of WWE and professional wrestling itself.

In July, Vince McMahon – an ever-present force in WWE and professional wrestling, the man who remade the business in service of a vision that upended generations of tradition, creating his own hegemony – retired. Or he resigned, depending on who you ask.

It was a moment many wrestling fans and observers never thought would come. The longtime chairman and CEO of WWE was such an intense micromanager that he barely slept, rarely took vacations and almost never stopped putting his own spin on every single aspect of the company’s output. Many longtime followers of the company simply assumed he’d die in the role rather than retire.

But a series of revelations first reported in The Wall Street Journal about hush money payments to multiple women to cover up infidelity and allegations of sexual misconduct seemed to bring McMahon’s legendary run as the head of wrestling’s most important company to an end. Additional reporting came in December, with additional women accusing McMahon of sexual assault, seemed to cement his status as being permanently gone from WWE.

WWE has always been a family business – Vince McMahon, Sr., handed over the reins to his son in the 1980s – and it seemed set to continue that way. Vince McMahon’s daughter, Stephanie, who only weeks before had taken a leave of absence from the company, stepped into the role of co-CEO with Nick Khan, a longtime executive in the entertainment and media industry.

And Paul Levesque – Stephanie McMahon’s husband and a Hall of Fame professional wrestler himself and better known by his ring name, Hunter Hearst Helmsley, or Triple H – assumed the job as the head of creative, putting him in charge of WWE’s storylines and in-ring action, which his father-in-law had long managed.

That moment last summer signaled a sea change in the professional wrestling industry.

Vince McMahon was more akin to a king than a business executive in the world of WWE, his fingerprints on everything. Through his ruthless business practices, he had molded the industry in his image, running most of his competition out of business and turning his company into the destination for pro wrestling. For most of two decades, he had a monopoly on the business.

But his creative output cratered in recent years. Stars who left WWE described a frustrating creative process dominated by McMahon that stifled their visions and led to a homogenized product that felt miles away from the company’s peak in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

With the vast majority of company revenue coming from TV rights, instead of fans spending money on tickets or pay-per-view events, the need to give the people what they want was replaced by content production. Sometimes it seemed as if Vince McMahon’s creative decisions were meant to antagonize and annoy his audience, appearing to ram home his vision of “sports entertainment” whether they liked it or not.

A turning point for many was the 2015 Royal Rumble event. Fans were clamoring for their favorite Daniel Bryan, one of the most gifted wrestlers on the planet, to win the event’s namesake. To many fans, Bryan’s run symbolized hope that the company would promote their favorite wrestlers instead of McMahon’s chosen ones.

But Bryan was unceremoniously eliminated in the first half of the match. The crowd in Philadelphia booed throughout the second half, chanting Bryan’s name and refusing to celebrate when Roman Reigns – widely seen as McMahon’s choice to be the future of the company despite fan apathy – won.

Shrinking viewership numbers reflected that loss of hope. While TV ratings overall have dropped in the last several years, with some exceptions, WWE’s drop outpaced the general decline in overall viewership and in the key 18-49 demographic, according to Wrestlenomics, a website that tracks the business side of the industry.

Once considered a wrestling genius, critics have more recently come to consider Vince McMahon a creative liability. The elevation of Levesque and the Stephanie McMahon-Khan duo appeared to signal hope that a new era was dawning over the WWE and that its creative system would finally get the long-needed injection of new ideas, new faces and new energy.

In December, The Wall Street Journal reported McMahon was eying a comeback – the first rumblings that the new era might be on shaky ground.

According to the Journal’s reporting, McMahon was telling people around him that he had received bad advice to step aside after the paper reported he used company funds to pay more than $12 million in hush money settlements to women to cover up “allegations of sexual misconduct and infidelity.”

The WSJ also reported McMahon believed the controversy would have blown over if he had just stayed on as head of creative and chairman of the company’s board of directors.

Then, in early January, McMahon made his move.

As revealed in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, McMahon said he had to return to the company because negotiations over media rights and a “strategic alternatives review” required his “direct participation, leadership and support.” He told the SEC he was putting himself back on the company’s board of directors, along with two longtime allies – both of whom McMahon had fired from the company in 2020.

How could he do this, despite retiring in disgrace and ostensibly being away from the company for months? McMahon never sold his stock in the company and remained WWE’s controlling shareholder.

“The only way for WWE to fully capitalize on this opportunity is for me to return as Executive Chairman and support the management team in the negotiations for our media rights and to combine that with a review of strategic alternatives,” McMahon said in a news release. “My return will allow WWE, as well as any transaction counterparties, to engage in these processes knowing they will have the support of the controlling shareholder.”

Over the course of just a few days, he had gone from ostracized former wrestling executive to once again running the company that he had taken from a regional player to a global power. It just was the kind of swerve one might have expected from “Mr. McMahon,” Vince McMahon’s devious on-screen character, who served as wrestling’s greatest heel for years in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Just days after reinstalling himself on the company’s board, WWE’s board of directors unanimously returned him to his old job as executive chairman.

Not only that, his daughter, Stephanie McMahon – who had seemed groomed to take over the company for years and played prominent roles on screen and off – resigned as chairwoman and co-CEO of WWE, leaving it all together.

Nick Khan was left as the company’s lone CEO. But the corporate machinations over the last week showed that, once again, McMahon was the real power in WWE.

There are reports that McMahon is exploring selling the company, but it’s not clear if there’s any truth to them.

So far, all of McMahon’s statements about his intentions pertain to business negotiations. But Stephanie McMahon’s departure has cast a cloud over her husband’s future with the company.

As his father-in-law forced his way back into the company, Levesque was gearing up for his first major period in charge of WWE’s storytelling heading into its most important time of year. WrestleMania season kicks off with January 28’s Royal Rumble event and continues through the first weekend of April, when WWE runs a two-night WrestleMania event – its biggest shows of the year – at SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles. This was likely to be the first major test for Levesque’s creative vision for WWE and had been hotly anticipated by wrestling fans.

McMahon’s reemergence now leads to questions over how much influence the chairman will seek to exercise over the creative direction of the company, and how it might clash with Levesque’s own vision.

Upon taking control of creative, the WWE Hall of Famer re-signed scores of wrestlers who McMahon had released in recent years, including stars like Bray Wyatt and Braun Strowman, and given priority to other wrestlers who don’t fit McMahon’s typical vision of a professional wrestler – someone taller than 6-foot-3 inches, muscular, good looking and with actual wrestling ability considered optional.

The futures of those Levesque favorites now seem less certain than they did just a few weeks ago.

There are real questions over how fans will receive the news of McMahon’s return. A man once seen as a legend in the business is accused of sexually assaulting multiple women, then using the levers of corporate power to escape accountability. Fans have already tuned out from the company in droves in recent years and some may decide not to spend their money, time and attention on a product helmed by McMahon.

And then there’s the question of how McMahon’s return affects the pro wrestling industry as a whole.

All Elite Wrestling (AEW), an upstart promotion begun in 2019 by Tony Khan – the son of auto parts billionaire Shahid Khan and no relation to the WWE CEO – and several of independent wrestling’s biggest stars, has become the second-biggest wrestling company in the world by simply being what WWE is not.

Its focus on long-term storytelling, great matches, charismatic stars and less sanitized production has allowed AEW to break WWE’s monopoly on the wrestling industry and become a verified player in the business.

As such, it had become a home for some of the highest profile wrestlers in the industry who had been burnt out on WWE’s corporate culture and bending to McMahon’s whims. His departure back in July and Levesque’s ascension to the WWE creative throne led many observers to wonder if AEW stars would be looking to jump ship and head to WWE.

There were some hopes among WWE diehards that Levesque’s new regime might be successful enough to snuff out AEW’s rise. McMahon’s return may toss some doubt into the minds of AEW wrestlers who were thinking about moving to WWE in the future.

Read original article here

How WWE’s Vince McMahon ruthlessly got his job back despite allegations of sexual assault and misuse of company funds


Washington
CNN
 — 

Professional wrestling is known for its outlandish, dramatic stories that have captivated generations. It’s an athletic soap opera built on emotional drama with wrestlers sometimes scheming in the background for months only to make their move at the opportune moment, drawing crazed reactions from arenas packed with fans who have followed every beat.

But the real-life saga playing out in World Wrestling Entertainment’s corporate office over the last several weeks surpasses even what most of what those performers and their backstage colleagues could dream up.

Vince McMahon, the longtime force behind WWE at the corporate and creative levels, made a shocking return to the company on January 10, nearly six months after announcing his retirement. McMahon was alleged to have used company funds to pay millions to multiple women in order to cover up infidelity and allegations of sexual misconduct.

But over a series of just a few days last week, McMahon engineered his return to the company’s board of directors, reshaped it by forcing out some members, replaced them with his own allies, and used that new boardroom power to install himself in his old job as executive chairman. His own daughter – the heir apparent to the company who had appeared groomed to take the job for years – resigned.

The stunning and swift developments have the wrestling world reeling, with rumors of a sale burning up Wrestling Twitter and people inside and outside the company wondering what it all means for the future of WWE and professional wrestling itself.

In July, Vince McMahon – an ever-present force in WWE and professional wrestling, the man who remade the business in service of a vision that upended generations of tradition, creating his own hegemony – retired. Or he resigned, depending on who you ask.

It was a moment many wrestling fans and observers never thought would come. The longtime chairman and CEO of WWE was such an intense micromanager that he barely slept, rarely took vacations and almost never stopped putting his own spin on every single aspect of the company’s output. Many longtime followers of the company simply assumed he’d die in the role rather than retire.

But a series of revelations first reported in The Wall Street Journal about hush money payments to multiple women to cover up infidelity and allegations of sexual misconduct seemed to bring McMahon’s legendary run as the head of wrestling’s most important company to an end. Additional reporting came in December, with additional women accusing McMahon of sexual assault, seemed to cement his status as being permanently gone from WWE.

WWE has always been a family business – Vince McMahon, Sr., handed over the reins to his son in the 1980s – and it seemed set to continue that way. Vince McMahon’s daughter, Stephanie, who only weeks before had taken a leave of absence from the company, stepped into the role of co-CEO with Nick Khan, a longtime executive in the entertainment and media industry.

And Paul Levesque – Stephanie McMahon’s husband and a Hall of Fame professional wrestler himself and better known by his ring name, Hunter Hearst Helmsley, or Triple H – assumed the job as the head of creative, putting him in charge of WWE’s storylines and in-ring action, which his father-in-law had long managed.

That moment last summer signaled a sea change in the professional wrestling industry.

Vince McMahon was more akin to a king than a business executive in the world of WWE, his fingerprints on everything. Through his ruthless business practices, he had molded the industry in his image, running most of his competition out of business and turning his company into the destination for pro wrestling. For most of two decades, he had a monopoly on the business.

But his creative output cratered in recent years. Stars who left WWE described a frustrating creative process dominated by McMahon that stifled their visions and led to a homogenized product that felt miles away from the company’s peak in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

With the vast majority of company revenue coming from TV rights, instead of fans spending money on tickets or pay-per-view events, the need to give the people what they want was replaced by content production. Sometimes it seemed as if Vince McMahon’s creative decisions were meant to antagonize and annoy his audience, appearing to ram home his vision of “sports entertainment” whether they liked it or not.

A turning point for many was the 2015 Royal Rumble event. Fans were clamoring for their favorite Daniel Bryan, one of the most gifted wrestlers on the planet, to win the event’s namesake. To many fans, Bryan’s run symbolized hope that the company would promote their favorite wrestlers instead of McMahon’s chosen ones.

But Bryan was unceremoniously eliminated in the first half of the match. The crowd in Philadelphia booed throughout the second half, chanting Bryan’s name and refusing to celebrate when Roman Reigns – widely seen as McMahon’s choice to be the future of the company despite fan apathy – won.

Shrinking viewership numbers reflected that loss of hope. While TV ratings overall have dropped in the last several years, with some exceptions, WWE’s drop outpaced the general decline in overall viewership and in the key 18-49 demographic, according to Wrestlenomics, a website that tracks the business side of the industry.

Once considered a wrestling genius, critics have more recently come to consider Vince McMahon a creative liability. The elevation of Levesque and the Stephanie McMahon-Khan duo appeared to signal hope that a new era was dawning over the WWE and that its creative system would finally get the long-needed injection of new ideas, new faces and new energy.

In December, The Wall Street Journal reported McMahon was eying a comeback – the first rumblings that the new era might be on shaky ground.

According to the Journal’s reporting, McMahon was telling people around him that he had received bad advice to step aside after the paper reported he used company funds to pay more than $12 million in hush money settlements to women to cover up “allegations of sexual misconduct and infidelity.”

The WSJ also reported McMahon believed the controversy would have blown over if he had just stayed on as head of creative and chairman of the company’s board of directors.

Then, in early January, McMahon made his move.

As revealed in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, McMahon said he had to return to the company because negotiations over media rights and a “strategic alternatives review” required his “direct participation, leadership and support.” He told the SEC he was putting himself back on the company’s board of directors, along with two longtime allies – both of whom McMahon had fired from the company in 2020.

How could he do this, despite retiring in disgrace and ostensibly being away from the company for months? McMahon never sold his stock in the company and remained WWE’s controlling shareholder.

“The only way for WWE to fully capitalize on this opportunity is for me to return as Executive Chairman and support the management team in the negotiations for our media rights and to combine that with a review of strategic alternatives,” McMahon said in a news release. “My return will allow WWE, as well as any transaction counterparties, to engage in these processes knowing they will have the support of the controlling shareholder.”

Over the course of just a few days, he had gone from ostracized former wrestling executive to once again running the company that he had taken from a regional player to a global power. It just was the kind of swerve one might have expected from “Mr. McMahon,” Vince McMahon’s devious on-screen character, who served as wrestling’s greatest heel for years in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Just days after reinstalling himself on the company’s board, WWE’s board of directors unanimously returned him to his old job as executive chairman.

Not only that, his daughter, Stephanie McMahon – who had seemed groomed to take over the company for years and played prominent roles on screen and off – resigned as chairwoman and co-CEO of WWE, leaving it all together.

Nick Khan was left as the company’s lone CEO. But the corporate machinations over the last week showed that, once again, McMahon was the real power in WWE.

There are reports that McMahon is exploring selling the company, but it’s not clear if there’s any truth to them.

So far, all of McMahon’s statements about his intentions pertain to business negotiations. But Stephanie McMahon’s departure has cast a cloud over her husband’s future with the company.

As his father-in-law forced his way back into the company, Levesque was gearing up for his first major period in charge of WWE’s storytelling heading into its most important time of year. WrestleMania season kicks off with January 28’s Royal Rumble event and continues through the first weekend of April, when WWE runs a two-night WrestleMania event – its biggest shows of the year – at SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles. This was likely to be the first major test for Levesque’s creative vision for WWE and had been hotly anticipated by wrestling fans.

McMahon’s reemergence now leads to questions over how much influence the chairman will seek to exercise over the creative direction of the company, and how it might clash with Levesque’s own vision.

Upon taking control of creative, the WWE Hall of Famer re-signed scores of wrestlers who McMahon had released in recent years, including stars like Bray Wyatt and Braun Strowman, and given priority to other wrestlers who don’t fit McMahon’s typical vision of a professional wrestler – someone taller than 6-foot-3 inches, muscular, good looking and with actual wrestling ability considered optional.

The futures of those Levesque favorites now seem less certain than they did just a few weeks ago.

There are real questions over how fans will receive the news of McMahon’s return. A man once seen as a legend in the business is accused of sexually assaulting multiple women, then using the levers of corporate power to escape accountability. Fans have already tuned out from the company in droves in recent years and some may decide not to spend their money, time and attention on a product helmed by McMahon.

And then there’s the question of how McMahon’s return affects the pro wrestling industry as a whole.

All Elite Wrestling (AEW), an upstart promotion begun in 2019 by Tony Khan – the son of auto parts billionaire Shahid Khan and no relation to the WWE CEO – and several of independent wrestling’s biggest stars, has become the second-biggest wrestling company in the world by simply being what WWE is not.

Its focus on long-term storytelling, great matches, charismatic stars and less sanitized production has allowed AEW to break WWE’s monopoly on the wrestling industry and become a verified player in the business.

As such, it had become a home for some of the highest profile wrestlers in the industry who had been burnt out on WWE’s corporate culture and bending to McMahon’s whims. His departure back in July and Levesque’s ascension to the WWE creative throne led many observers to wonder if AEW stars would be looking to jump ship and head to WWE.

There were some hopes among WWE diehards that Levesque’s new regime might be successful enough to snuff out AEW’s rise. McMahon’s return may toss some doubt into the minds of AEW wrestlers who were thinking about moving to WWE in the future.

Read original article here

AP: WHO knew of past sex misconduct claim against doctor

LONDON (AP) — When a doctor tweeted that she was “sexually assaulted” by a World Health Organization staffer at a Berlin conference in October, the U.N. agency’s director-general assured her that WHO had “zero tolerance” for such misconduct.

WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus replied to her, saying he was “horrified” by the accusations of groping and unwelcome sexual advances. He offered his personal assistance, WHO suspended the staffer and the agency opened an investigation that is nearing its conclusion.

But internal documents obtained by The Associated Press show the same WHO staffer, Fijian physician Temo Waqanivalu, was previously accused by another woman of sexually harassing her several years ago. That claim was flagged to senior agency directors and others in 2018, before the accuser was informed that pursuing a formal investigation might not be in her best interests, according to the documents.

A former WHO ombudsman who helped assess the previous allegation against Waqanivalu noted the similarities between the two women’s accusations, several years apart, and suggested the agency had missed a chance to root out bad behavior.

“I felt extremely angry and guilty that the dysfunctional (WHO) justice system has led to another assault that could have been prevented,” said the staffer, who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity for fear of losing their job.

The previous allegation didn’t derail Waqanivalu’s career at WHO. As the new accusation surfaced, he was positioning himself for an exceptionally big promotion with a very public role: He was seeking to become WHO’s top official in the western Pacific, with support from Fiji’s prime minister, other Pacific islands and WHO colleagues, messages show.

The regional director would support countries fighting problems including dengue, malaria and heart disease, as well as coordinating the first global response to any new emerging outbreaks — as was the case when the coronavirus was first detected in China in late 2019.

Waqanivalu hung up when the AP contacted him for comment. He didn’t respond to several follow-up requests sent through email and two messaging apps.

Waqanivalu “categorically” denied that he had ever sexually assaulted anyone, including at the Berlin conference, according to correspondence between him and WHO investigators that the AP obtained. He said the accusations were “false” and could “irreparably damage” his career and reputation.

The physician said there may have been “a mutual misunderstanding” in Berlin and that his accuser was possibly “under the influence of alcohol.” He said he was “bewildered” and “confused” by the sexual misconduct allegation.

The U.N. health agency said in an email that it could not comment on individual cases for confidentiality and due process reasons, but that sexual misconduct by anyone working for the agency is “unacceptable.”

WHO said its investigation into the Berlin conference complaint “is in its final stage” and that a report, which will not be publicly released, would soon be submitted to Tedros.

“Perpetrators of sexual misconduct face grave consequences, including dismissal,” WHO said. It added that the names of perpetrators are entered into a U.N. screening database, to avoid their future employment.

In a speech posted to Twitter in December, Tedros said that “sexual misconduct is particularly grave when the perpetrators are our own personnel.” He called sexual misconduct by WHO staffers “a violation of the trust placed in WHO to serve public health.”

On Wednesday, hours after this story was published, WHO told staffers it was forming a committee on “formal complaints of abusive conduct,” according to an internal email. The committee is to include 15 staffers, most of them designated by the U.N. agency’s director-general.

The claims against Waqanivalu are the latest in a series of misconduct accusations against people working for WHO, which is mandated to lead the international response to acute crises including COVID-19 and Ebola.

In May 2021, the AP reported that senior WHO managers were informed of sex abuse allegations during a Congo Ebola outbreak but did little to stop it. A panel appointed by WHO later found that more than 80 workers under WHO’s direction sexually abused women. No senior WHO officials tied to the exploitation have been fired.

And WHO’s last regional director in the western Pacific — the person Waqanivalu was seeking to replace — was put on leave in August, after AP reported that numerous staffers had accused him of racist and abusive behavior that compromised the U.N. agency’s response to COVID-19.

In the coming weeks, the agency’s highest governing body is meeting to set public health priorities and to address critical administrative concerns, including sexual misconduct. The officials also may discuss how and when the election for the region’s next director might occur.

___

The earlier accusation against Waqanivalu came after a 2017 chronic diseases workshop in Japan, where a WHO employee said that Waqanivalu had harassed her at a post-work dinner and on other occasions. Her report was shared with senior WHO officials, according to documents obtained by the AP.

“Under the table, (Waqanivalu) took off his shoes, lifted one of his legs and toe(s) between my legs,” the woman wrote in the 2018 report. “It took me a while to process what was actually happening.”

She left the restaurant and said Waqanivalu followed her to a nearby train station. That’s where he grabbed her hand, asked if she was seeing anyone and questioned why she was not attracted to him, she reported.

After she said goodbye, Waqanivalu “proceeded to give me a hug, grabbing my buttocks with both of his hands and trying to kiss my lips,” the woman said. She said she turned her head to avoid him and moved his hands.

The woman is identified in the documents, but the AP does not typically name people who say they have been sexually harassed unless they come forward publicly. The AP contacted the woman, but she declined to comment.

According to WHO protocols, her complaint should have been investigated by the organization’s office of internal oversight, following guidance from ombudsmen, who help staff mediate personnel problems.

After submitting her confidential report to WHO’s “integrity hotline” in July 2018, the case was “tossed around in (Geneva) for months” among officials tasked with misconduct claims, an ombudsman wrote to the woman in an email obtained by the AP.

“It seems our internal process is not efficient enough to address such cases,” the ombudsman said.

Months after raising her concerns, the woman was informed by the WHO ombudman’s office that its director had decided to give Waqanivalu a general “informal warning” that didn’t reference the alleged misconduct. Following that discussion, the office of the ombudsman and ethics considered the case closed, the woman wrote in an email to a WHO official.

In a follow-up message to a WHO ombudsman, the woman said the agency’s ethics office told her it would be difficult to prove a sexual harassment case, saying it might “compromise” her name and that she likely lacked “hard evidence.” She said she was also warned that Waqanivalu could file his own complaint against her for “degrading/dishonouring” his name and was told that pressing for an investigation “may not be the best option for me.”

WHO’s human resources director at the time told colleagues in a November 2018 email that the director of the agency’s compliance, risk management and ethics department had been informed of the allegations against Waqanivalu.

“He is aware of the case … (and has) the matter in hand,” the human resources director said in an email obtained by AP.

It is unclear if any investigation was ever conducted.

___

In October, Waqanivalu sat on a panel at the World Health Summit in Berlin, a high-level conference with global heads of state.

In a hotel lobby one evening, numerous people were having drinks, including Waqanivalu and Dr. Rosie James, a young British-Canadian physician and former consultant for WHO.

“We were talking about his work at WHO and he just started putting his hand on my bottom and keeping it there,” James told the AP. She said she felt intimidated talking to a senior manager at the organization. “I felt this power dynamic and I was really uncomfortable,” she said, explaining that she moved away to join her friends, who told her Waqanivalu’s actions were inappropriate.

“Somehow I ended up talking to him again and he was literally holding my bum cheek,” she said. James said Waqanivalu “firmly held my buttock in his hand multiple times (and) pressed his groin” into her. Before Waqanivalu left, she says he cornered her and repeatedly asked for her hotel room number.

Later that night, she tweeted about the encounter, saying that she was “sexually assaulted” and that “this was not the first time in the global health sphere that this has occurred.” WHO chief Tedros replied, pledging to do “everything we can to help you.”

James was later interviewed by WHO’s investigators. She said WHO officials told her she would not be entitled to see its final investigation report. James also said Tedros never personally followed up directly but said the agency’s communications director contacted her and that the two had lunch during the Berlin conference. She said WHO also offered to reimburse her for any private therapy costs related to her encounter with Waqanivalu.

Waqanivalu told WHO investigators he greeted James that evening “by tapping her on her left upper arm” and did not believe that was inappropriate, according to a record of the discussion obtained by AP. He acknowledged asking for her hotel room number, saying he made the request “to connect, if need be.”

“I recall that we faced each other the whole time with about an arm’s length distance between us,” Waqanivalu told investigators, adding that the conversation lasted about five minutes. He said he believed people in the group, including James, “were under the influence of alcohol” and that he remembered the event as “a good evening mixing around with everyone.”

___

Waqanivalu is a unit head at WHO’s Geneva headquarters, overseeing a small team in the non-communicable diseases department. He has been featured in several WHO Facebook videos and also sits on the agency’s health, safety and wellbeing committee.

Last fall, he put himself forward as a candidate to be WHO’s next director for the western Pacific, a region that has a quarter of the world’s population.

“The experience and expertise I have gathered over the years … have given me the relevant credentials to lead the Western Pacific,” Waqanivalu wrote in a September letter addressed to Fiji’s then-Prime Minister Josaia Voreqe Bainimarama and other officials.

About a week after the Berlin conference, the chair of WHO’s top governing body in the region told Waqanivalu in a message seen by the AP that his name was mentioned “as a potential candidate” to be the next regional director. The chair messaged him to say that Pacific health ministers planned to push for a candidate from the region.

“That would be an opportunity for you, Dr. Temo,” Waqanivalu was told.

Correspondence obtained by the AP between Waqanivalu and a senior staffer in Bainimarama’s office also show Waqanivalu asked about formalizing his candidacy.

A memo from the prime minister’s office dated Oct. 17 and marked “approved,” confirmed “Fiji’s proposed candidacy” of Waqanivalu to the position. A handwritten note said officials should coordinate with the country’s ministry of health and inform all other Pacific nations of Waqanivalu’s candidacy. Bainimarama, who lost a December election in Fiji, did not respond to multiple requests for comment from the AP.

Waqanivalu’s candidacy also had supporters within WHO itself. A WHO-produced election-style campaign brochure created in September — before the Berlin conference — outlined his vision for the region and was aimed to garner votes from member countries in the region.

“Under my leadership, WHO will empower people to serve within their countries,” the document reads.

Paula Donovan is co-director of the Code Blue campaign, which seeks to hold U.N. personnel accountable for sexual offenses. She said the allegations regarding Waqanivalu were unsurprising but deeply worrying.

She said it was particularly concerning that an official accused of sexual harassment had been potentially in line for such a prominent leadership role and that WHO seemingly had failed to uphold its own “zero tolerance” policy for unprofessional behavior.

“It’s patently false that WHO does not condone sexual misconduct,” Donovan said, calling for its member countries to overhaul the agency’s internal structures so that its officials are held accountable. “When WHO keeps this kind of stuff under wraps, they are giving sexual predators carte blanche to do it again with impunity.”

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.



Read original article here

Los Angeles Dodgers officially cut ties with pitcher Trevor Bauer who served suspension for violating MLB policies



CNN
 — 

The Los Angeles Dodgers have officially cut ties with pitcher Trevor Bauer, the team announced Friday.

The former Cy Young award winner was previously suspended by Major League Baseball for violating the league’s joint domestic violence, sexual assault, and child abuse policy, but was reinstated last month when an arbitrator reduced his suspension from 324 games to 194, effective immediately.

Bauer has not played since June 2021, after a San Diego woman claimed he had sexually assaulted her. The pitcher, whom a prosecutor in Los Angeles declined to charge with a crime, has denied the sexual assault allegations and maintained his encounters with the woman were consensual.

“The Dodgers organization believes that allegations of sexual assault or domestic violence should be thoroughly investigated, with due process given to the accused,” the team said in a statement Friday. “From the beginning, we have fully cooperated with Major League Baseball’s investigation and strictly followed the process stipulated under MLB’s Joint Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Policy.

The team said “two extensive reviews of all the available evidence in the case,” performed by MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred and another by a neutral arbitrator, “concluded that Mr. Bauer’s actions warranted the longest ever active player suspension in our sport for violations of this policy. Now that this process has been completed, and after careful consideration, we have decided that he will no longer be part of our organization.”

Bauer said on Twitter on Friday that he talked to “Dodgers leadership” in Arizona on Thursday and he was told they wanted him to pitch there next season.

“While I am disappointed by the organization’s decision today, I appreciate the wealth of support I’ve received from the Dodgers clubhouse,” he wrote. “I wish the players all the best and look forward to competing elsewhere.”

CNN Sports has reached out to the Dodgers for further comment

Bauer was placed on administrative leave by the league in July 2021 and in April he was suspended for 324 games. But on December 22 an arbitrator reduced the suspension, making him eligible to play next season.

At the time his attorneys – Jon Fetterolf, Shawn Holley, and Rachel Luba, – said: “While we are pleased that Mr. Bauer has been reinstated immediately, we disagree that any discipline should have been imposed. That said, Mr. Bauer looks forward to his return to the field, where his goal remains to help his team win a World Series.”

According to league rules, the Dodgers had 14 days from reinstatement – until Friday – to decide whether to put Bauer back on the team’s 40-man roster.

According to the team website, Bauer was designated for assignment, which means a player can be traded or released within seven days. If Bauer was released, any of the other 29 teams can sign him.



Read original article here

Missouri carries out first known execution of an openly transgender person for 2003 murder



CNN
 — 

Missouri carried out the first known US execution of an openly transgender person Tuesday when Amber McLaughlin, who was convicted of a 2003 murder and unsuccessfully sought clemency from the governor, was put to death by lethal injection.

“McLaughlin was pronounced dead at 6:51 p.m.,” the Missouri Department of Corrections said in a written statement. A spokesperson did not say if McLaughlin had a final statement.

McLaughlin’s execution – the first in the US this year – is unusual: Executions of women in the United States are already rare. Prior to McLaughlin’s execution, just 17 had been put to death since 1976, when the US Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty after a brief suspension, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The non-profit organization confirmed McLaughlin is the first openly transgender person to be executed in the United States.

McLaughlin, 49, and her attorneys had petitioned Republican Gov. Mike Parson for clemency, asking him to commute her death sentence. Aside from the fact a jury could not agree on the death penalty, they say, McLaughlin has shown genuine remorse and has struggled with an intellectual disability, mental health issues and a history of childhood trauma.

But in a statement Tuesday, Parson’s office announced the execution would move forward as planned. The family and loved ones of her victim, Beverly Guenther, “deserve peace,” the statement said.

“The State of Missouri will carry out McLaughlin’s sentence according to the Court’s order,” Parson said, “and deliver justice.”

McLaughlin – listed in court documents as Scott McLaughlin – had not initiated a legal name change or transition and as a death-sentenced person, was kept at Potosi Correctional Center near St. Louis, which housed male inmates, McLaughlin’s federal public defender Larry Komp and the governor’s office have said.

McLaughlin was sentenced to death for Guenther’s November 2003 murder, according to court records.

The two were previously in a relationship, but they had separated by the time of the killing and Guenther had received an order of protection against McLaughlin after she was arrested for burglarizing Guenther’s home.

Several weeks later, while the order was in effect, McLaughlin waited for Guenther outside the victim’s workplace, court records say. McLaughlin repeatedly stabbed and raped Guenther, prosecutors argued at trial, pointing in part to blood spatters in the parking lot and in Guenther’s truck.

A jury convicted McLaughlin of first-degree murder, forcible rape and armed criminal action, court records show.

But when it came to a sentence, the jury was deadlocked.

Most US states with the death penalty require a jury to unanimously vote to recommend or impose the death penalty, but Missouri does not. According to state law, in cases where a jury is unable to agree on the death penalty, the judge decides between life imprisonment without parole or death. McLaughlin’s trial judge imposed the death penalty.

If Parson were to grant clemency, McLaughlin’s attorneys argued, he would not have subverted the will of the jury, since the jury could not agree on a capital sentence.

That, however, was just one of several grounds on which McLaughlin’s attorneys said Parson should grant her clemency, according to the petition submitted to the governor.

In addition to the issue of her deadlocked jury, McLaughlin’s attorneys pointed to her struggles with mental health, as well as a history of childhood trauma. McLaughlin has been “consistently diagnosed with borderline intellectual disability,” and “universally diagnosed with brain damage as well as fetal alcohol syndrome,” the petition said.

McLaughlin was “abandoned” by her mother and placed into the foster care system, and in one placement, had “feces thrust into her face,” according to the petition.

She later suffered more abuse and trauma, including being tased by her adoptive father, the petition said, and battled depression that led to “multiple suicide attempts.”

At trial, McLaughlin’s jury did not hear expert testimony about her mental state at the time of Guenther’s murder, the petition said. That testimony, her attorneys said, could have tipped the scales toward a life sentence by supporting the mitigating factors cited by the defense and rebutting the prosecution’s claim McLaughlin acted with depravity of mind – that her actions were particularly brutal or “wantonly vile” – the only aggravating factor the jury found.

A federal judge in 2016 vacated McLaughlin’s death sentence due to ineffective counsel, court records show, citing her trial attorneys’ failure to present that expert testimony. That ruling, however, was later overturned by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.

McLaughlin’s execution “would highlight all the flaws of the justice system and would be a great injustice on a number of levels,” Komp, her attorney, told CNN previously.

“It would continue the systemic failures that existed throughout Amber’s life where no interventions occurred to stop and intercede to protect her as a child and teen,” Komp said. “All that could go wrong did go wrong for her.”

Read original article here

Juilliard prof Robert Beaser on leave after sexual misconduct allegations

A massive sexual misconduct scandal is rocking the elite Juilliard School, as multiple instructors have been accused of discrimination and harassment — and one renowned professor has been put on leave after 500 people signed a letter decrying his “abuse of women and power.”

Composer Robert Beaser, 68, was sidelined for a pattern of mistreatment that included soliciting sex from students — much of which was detailed in a Dec. 12 exposé of the Upper West Side conservatory published in VAN magazine.

“Sexual discrimination and sexual harassment have no place in our school community. We take all such allegations extremely seriously,” Juilliard spokesperson Rosalie Contreras told The Post on Wednesday as news of Beaser being put on leave emerged.

In one case, Beaser allegedly offered to boost a now-former student’s career, before asking her for sex in return, the publication said.

“What will you do for me?” he allegedly said.

Beaser — who also frequently taught students in his private home — joined the Juilliard composition department in 1993, and was department chair from 1994 through 2018.

The school was reportedly made aware of allegations against him in the 1990s and again in 2017 and 2018.

Composer Robert Beaser (center) is on leave from his faculty position at Juilliard.
Getty Images

Though the 2018 report coincided with Beaser being replaced as chair by Melinda Wagner, Contreras told VAN the decisions were unrelated.

“Allegations that were previously reported … in the late 1990s and in 2017/18 were investigated at the time, based on information that was provided,” she explained to The Post. 

“However, in order to review new information and to better understand these past allegations, the school’s current administration launched an independent investigation on December 8.”

Juilliard is widely considered one of the best performing arts conservatories in the world.
Getty Images

Per the Daily Mail, provost Andy Meyer explained to faculty in a Dec. 16 email that Beaser “will step away from his teaching duties” while an investigation is conducted.

The decision to place Beaser on leave also coincided with the publication of an open letter signed by 500 musicians, composers and other music leaders decrying his “decades-long abuse of woman and power.”

Beaser did not immediately respond to The Post’s request for a comment, though he told VAN that he would be “cooperating” with the investigation.

The late Christopher Rouse (left) and Robert Beaser (right) are both accused of sexual misconduct toward female composition students.
Getty Images

In addition to Beaser, the VAN piece detailed alleged misconduct by late Pulitzer Prize-winning composer and faculty member Christopher Rouse, who composer Suzanne Farrin says tried to kiss her following a dinner to discuss her audition for the doctoral program in 2001.

After she “twirled out of his arms and … ran away,” Farrin told the magazine, her Juilliard application was rejected. When she called to report the incident, an administrator insisted Rouse was a “‘big supporter’” of her music.

“They were prepared for my call,” Farrin remembered.

Composer Suzanne Farrin says Christopher Rouse tried to kiss her following a dinner to discuss her audition for the doctoral program.
International Contemporary Ensem

The VAN article also includes a claim from eight female graduates that another faculty member, Oscar-winning composer John Corigliano, rarely accepted female students.

“It was said like a joke,” alumna Cristina Spinei told the outlet. “‘You couldn’t study with him’ or something.”

Although adjunct faculty member Samuel Adler confirmed that Corigliano did not take female students “in the beginning,” Corigliano denied the accusations.

Robert Beaser’s conduct was previously reported to Juilliard officials in the late 1990s and 2017/18.
AFP via Getty Images

“It was neither my preference nor my policy to exclude female composers from my Juilliard studio,” he told The Post via email Wednesday.

Corigliano refuted VAN’s claim that he had only one female student, saying that he taught two who had previously graduated, and another he was currently working with.

He also clarified that his work at Juilliard had been limited due to his full-time commitments to Lehman College, CUNY.

“It was when I retired from Lehman that I doubled my teaching load at Juilliard to 6 private students, of which 2 were female,” he explained.

Oscar winner John Corigliano is accused of not accepting female students.
WireImage

“Classical music has things about hierarchy but every field has that. It’s a field where people protect,” a Juilliard-trained violinist said Wednesday.

“I think it’s why people are upset. It goes back. [Juilliard] did know about it.”

Her sentiments echo those of the graduates quoted in the VAN article, many of whom believe the acknowledgment of Juilliard’s problematic culture was long overdue.

One alum called the sexual misconduct on campus an “open” issue.
AFP via Getty Images

“I wouldn’t even call it an open secret. I’d just call it open,” film composer and Juilliard graduate Laura Karpman said of the sexual predation on campus. “These women feel incredibly vulnerable. If they come forward they have no protection … They have no guarantees that anyone will listen.” 

Nora Kroll-Rosenbaum, another composition alum, corroborated Karpman’s sentiment, saying female students felt safe studying with “less than half” the faculty.

Founded in 1905, Juilliard is widely regarded as one of the most elite performing arts conservatories in the world. With an esteemed alumni community of award-winning actors, musicians and dancers, composer Sarah Kirkland Snider argued the school has “outsized responsibility.”

Corigliano denied the accusations against him.
Patrick McMullan via Getty Image

“When you pride yourself on being the best in the country or in the world, then people look to you for their standards and expectations,” said Snider, who never attended Juilliard. “Teachers at other schools knew about it, they made references to it. It became a joke, a constant punchline.”

In her statement to The Post, Contreras said the school remained “committed to providing a safe and supportive environment for all.”

“We cannot comment further as confidentiality is paramount to the integrity of the investigation, and discussing cases could discourage individuals from coming forward with their experiences,” she concluded.

Read original article here

Harvey Weinstein: Los Angeles jury deadlocks on factors that could have increased his sentence



CNN
 — 

After convicting former film producer Harvey Weinstein of rape and sexual assault, a Los Angeles jury could not reach a unanimous verdict Tuesday on alleged aggravating factors that could have increased his sentence.

The three charges Weinstein was convicted of – rape, sexual penetration by foreign object and forcible oral copulation – were all tied to one of his accusers, Jane Doe 1, a model and actress who testified the movie mogul assaulted her in a Beverly Hills hotel room in February 2013.

Jurors were asked to determine if Jane Doe 1 was harmed and particularly vulnerable, and if Weinstein committed the crimes with planning, professionalism, or sophistication.

Ten members of the jury found the aggravating factors had been met, but two jurors could not be swayed, one of the jurors told CNN.

“The jury has said they are not able to reach a unanimous verdict on these issues,” Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Lisa Lench said, according to a pool report. “I am going to declare a mistrial with respect to the allegations.”

Had the jury found Weinstein guilty of the aggravating factors, a new California law would have then allowed the judge to enact a harsher sentence.

Jurors had deliberated for several hours Tuesday. After the jury indicated further deliberations would not sway them, neither the prosecution or the defense pushed to have the jurors deliberate further.

When Lench asked prosecutor Paul Thompson if Weinstein will be retried on the deadlock counts, the pool report said he responded: “We need to consult the victims first and foremost.”

Weinstein’s sentencing was tentatively set for January 9, with Lench allowing only Jane Doe 1 to offer a victim impact statement. He is expected to serve 18 years.

“Harvey Weinstein forever destroyed a part of me that night in 2013. I will never get that back,” said Jane Doe 1 in a statement released through her attorney. “The criminal trial was brutal. Weinstein’s lawyers put me through hell on the witness stand. But I knew I had to see this through the end, and I did … I hope Harvey Weinstein never sees the outside of a prison cell during his lifetime.”

The disgraced movie mogul was found guilty Monday of three of seven charges against him in his second sexual assault trial. The jury acquitted Weinstein of one count of sexual battery by restraint against a massage therapist in a hotel room in 2010.

They were a hung jury on one count of sexual battery by restraint, one count of forcible oral copulation and one count of rape related to two other women – including Jennifer Siebel Newsom, a filmmaker and first partner to California Governor Gavin Newsom.

Weinstein had pleaded not guilty to all charges against him. His spokesman said he was “disappointed” with the outcome of the trial but “he is prepared to continue fighting for his innocence.”

The verdict was reached as jurors entered their third week of deliberations, meeting for a total of 41 hours over a period of 10 days following weeks of oftentimes emotional testimony.

Two jurors who spoke with CNN after they were dismissed from court Tuesday shared their thoughts on the trial, both saying politics played absolutely no role in their deliberations.

“Everyone realized the weight of this trial. There’s a lot riding on this for both sides,” said Michael, a 62-year-old juror who declined to share his last name.

Michael said the contact the accusers had with Weinstein following their alleged assaults was a key factor in deciding the verdict. That was specifically applied to Siebel Newsom, who, according to dozens of emails presented as evidence in the trial, maintained contact with Weinstein.

Michael said he found Jane Doe 1 to be the most convincing.

“We felt horrible for everybody,” but felt like the addition of uncharged witnesses became confusing for some jurors, said Jay, another juror who also declined to share his last name.

“Everybody seemed believable. It’s hard to prove all of them with time and memory,” Jay added.

Elizabeth Fegan, an attorney representing Siebel Newsom, who was identified in court as Jane Doe 4, said they were disappointed the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict on the charges related to her client.

“My client, Jane Doe 4, shared her story not with an expectation to testify but to support all the survivors who bravely came forward,” Fegan said in a statement to CNN. “While we are heartened that the jury found Weinstein guilty on some of the counts, we are disappointed that the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict on Jane Doe 4. She will continue to fight for all women and all survivors of abuse against a system that permits the victim to be shamed and re-traumatized in the name of justice.”

Weinstein is two years into a 23-year sentence for a 2020 New York conviction, which his attorneys have appealed, putting more attention on the outcome of the trial in Los Angeles.

The weekslong Los Angeles trial saw emotional testimony from Weinstein’s accusers – a model, a dancer, a massage therapist and Siebel Newsom – all of whom were asked to recount the details of their allegations against him, provide details of meetings with the producer from years ago, and explain their reactions to the alleged assaults.

Additionally, four women testified they were subjected to similar behavior by Weinstein in other jurisdictions.

Weinstein initially faced 11 charges, but four counts connected to an unnamed woman were dropped without explanation. She did not testify in the trial.

In closing arguments, Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Marlene Martinez called Weinstein a “titan” who used his power in Hollywood to prey on and silence women.

Meanwhile, Weinstein’s attorneys maintained the allegations are either fabricated or occurred consensually as part of a “transactional relationship” with the movie producer, repeatedly saying there is no evidence of assault.

Defense attorney Alan Jackson called the accusers “fame and fortune seekers.”

Jane Doe 2, who was identified as Lauren Young, told her attorney Gloria Allred by phone that she was happy Weinstein was convicted on some counts despite there being a mistrial on her count, Allred said in a news conference after the verdict.

“I am relieved that Harvey Weinstein has been convicted because he deserves to be punished for the crimes that he committed, and he can no longer use his power to intimidate and sexually assault more women,” Young said in a statement read by Allred.

Read original article here

Harvey Weinstein: Jury reaches verdict in sexual assault trial



CNN
 — 

[Breaking news update, published at 6:05 p.m. ET]

A Los Angeles jury reached a verdict Monday in the sexual assault trial of Harvey Weinstein, the former movie producer who is accused of using his Hollywood influence to lure women into private meetings and assault them. The verdict will be announced shortly.

Weinstein has pleaded not guilty to seven charges in all: two counts each of forcible rape, sexual battery by restraint and forcible oral copulation, and one count of sexual penetration by foreign object.

If found guilty, Weinstein could face 60 years to life in prison, plus an additional five years.

The verdict was reached as jurors entered their third week of deliberations, meeting for a total of 41 hours over a period of 10 days.

Weinstein was convicted of similar charges in New York in 2020 and was sentenced to 23 years in prison.

[Original story, published at 2:02 p.m. ET]

A Los Angeles jury resumed deliberations Monday in Harvey Weinstein’s second sexual assault trial, meeting for a tenth day to decide on a verdict after weeks of testimony.

The disgraced movie mogul, who is accused of using his Hollywood influence to lure women into private meetings and assault them, awaits a decision from behind bars.

Weinstein faces two counts of forcible rape and five counts of sexual assault related to accusations from four women, including Jennifer Siebel Newsom, a filmmaker and the wife of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who alleged Weinstein raped her in a hotel room in 2005.

Weinstein has pleaded not guilty to all seven charges against him. He initially faced 11 charges, but four counts connected to an unnamed woman were dropped after she did not testify.

The jury had already deliberated for about 37 total hours when they adjourned last Wednesday, without a verdict reached.

The former film producer is already serving a 23-year sentence for a New York sexual assault conviction. His attorneys have appealed that conviction, which has placed more attention on the outcome of the trial in Los Angeles.

If the jury in Los Angeles finds him guilty, Weinstein could face 60 years to life in prison, plus an additional five years.

The Los Angeles jury has deliberated longer than the New York jury in Weinstein’s first criminal trial, in which he was convicted of criminal sex act and third-degree rape after 26 hours of deliberations.

As deliberations went on in Los Angeles, the jury asked the court a question and at least twice asked for testimony to be read back. Los Angeles Superior Court officials have not provided specifics on those requests.

The weekslong Los Angeles trial saw emotional testimony from Weinstein’s accusers – a model, a dancer, a massage therapist and Siebel Newsom – all of whom were asked to recount the details of their allegations against him, provide details of meetings with the producer from years ago, and explain their reactions to the alleged assaults.

In closing arguments, Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Marlene Martinez called Weinstein a “titan” who used his power in Hollywood to prey on and silence women.

“Rapists rape. You can look at the pattern,” fellow prosecutor Paul Thompson told jurors.

“You have irrefutable, overwhelming evidence about the nature of this man and what he did to these women,” Thompson said.

Meanwhile, Weinstein’s attorneys have maintained the allegations are either fabricated or occurred consensually as part of a “transactional relationship” with the movie producer, repeatedly saying there is no evidence of assault.

Defense attorney Alan Jackson called the accusers “fame and fortune seekers.”

The trial in Los Angeles included testimony from the four accusers identified as Jane Does in court, and other witnesses, including experts, law enforcement, friends of accusers and former aides to Weinstein.

Additionally, four women testified they were subjected to similar behavior by Weinstein in other jurisdictions.

Each morning at trial, Weinstein was brought from a correctional facility and wheeled into the Los Angeles courtroom wearing a suit and tie and holding a composition notebook.

His accusers all began their oftentimes emotional testimonies by identifying him in the courtroom as he looked on.

“He’s wearing a suit, and a blue tie and he’s staring at me,” Siebel Newsom said last month, before what was one of the most emotional moments of the trial.

On Thursday of last week, defense attorney Jackson asked jurors if they could “accept what (the Jane Does) say as gospel,” arguing what they said was a lack of forensic evidence supporting their claim.

“Five words that sum up the entirety of the prosecution’s case: ‘Take my word for it,’” Jackson said. “‘Take my word for it that he showed up at my hotel room unannounced. Take my word for it that I showed up at his hotel room. Take my word for it that I didn’t consent. Take my word for it, that I said no.’ “

Siebel Newsom described an hourslong “cat-and-mouse period,” which preceded her alleged assault. She, like other accusers, described feeling “frozen” that day.

Attorneys for Weinstein do not deny the incident occurred, but said he believed it was consensual.

Jackson called the incident “consensual, transactional sex,” adding: “Regret is not the same thing as rape. And it’s important we make that distinction in this courtroom.”

Women’s rights lawyer Gloria Allred, who is representing Jane Doe 2 in the case, told CNN she hopes the jury sees her client “has no motive at all to do anything but tell the truth.”

“She never sought or received any compensation … She doesn’t live in California anymore. But she is testifying because she’s been asked to testify and I hope that they see her as the young woman that she was when she met Harvey Weinstein, and the woman that she is today approximately nine to 10 years later. Her life has changed,” Allred said.

“To be willing to subject yourself to what could be a very brutal cross-examination. That takes a very special person to do that. And she is a special person. I’m very proud,” Allred said.

In her closing arguments, Martinez also highlighted the women who testified chose to do so despite knowing they would face tough conditions in court.

“The truth is that, as you sit here, we know the despicable behavior the defendant engaged in. He thought he was so powerful that people would … excuse his behavior,” Martinez said. “That’s just Harvey being Harvey. That’s just Hollywood. And for so long that’s what everyone did. Everyone just turned their heads.”

Read original article here