NOW. HEY MARTHA.
HEY MARTHA. >> Martha: HEY THERE SHANNON,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
HARVEY WEINSTEIN’S DEFENSE TEAM,
THEIR CLIENT TONIGHT IS IN
RIKERS ISLAND FACING UP TO 25
YEARS IN PRISON.
AFTER HIS CONVICTION ON TWO OF
THE FIVE COUNTS THAT HE WAS
CHARGED WITH OF SEXUAL ASSAULT.
THEY SAY THAT HE TOOK IT LIKE A
MAN AND THAT THIS IS NOT OVER.
ACCORDING TO HIS ATTORNEY, THE
MAN WHO RULED HOLLYWOOD FOR
NEARLY 30 YEARS AND WON 81
OSCARS SAID THIS UPON HEARING
THE VERDICT.
THE VERDICT. I AM INNOCENT, HOW COULD THIS
HAPPEN IN AMERICA?
WEINSTEIN WAS ACQUITTED ON THE
MOST SERIOUS CHARGES THAT WERE
AGAINST HIM, BUT AFTER WEEKS OF
EXCRUCIATING TESTIMONY FROM
THESE WOMEN THE JURY FOUND HIM
GUILTY ON ONE COUNT OF CRIMINAL
ACT AND ONE COUNT OF RATE IN THE
THIRD DEGREE.
THIRD DEGREE. A VERDICT THAT WOULD BE
REMEMBERED AS A WATERSHED MOMENT
FOR THE ME TOO MOVEMENT.
>> THESE ARE EIGHT WOMEN PULLED
OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM INTO THE
21ST CENTURY.
21ST CENTURY. SEXUAL ASSAULT IS SEXUAL ASSAULT
SEXUAL ASSAULT, NO MATTER WHAT.
>> FOR THE PROSECUTION TODAY, TO
MEMBERS OF A WEINSTEIN’S DEFENSE
TEAM DONNA ROTUNNO AND DAMON
CHERONIS.
CHERONIS. GREAT TO HAVE BOTH OF YOU HERE,
WELCOME BACK.
WELCOME BACK. DONNA, WERE YOU SURPRISED?
>> I WAS, I WAS.
I THINK THE EVIDENCE JUST DIDN’T
SUPPORT A GUILTY FINDING ON ANY
COUNTS, I THINK THAT THE JURY
WAS IN A POSITION WHERE THEY
LOOKED AT A VERDICT SHEET OF
FIVE COUNTS AND FELT THAT THEY
COULDN’T WALK OUT OF THERE AND
CONVICT HIM OF NOTHING.
>> Shannon: DAMON, AS YOU
LOOKED INTO THE QUESTIONS FROM
THE JURY, HOW DID YOU READ WHAT
THEY WANTED TO LOOK AT AGAIN?
EVERYBODY OF COURSE READ THE TEA
LEAVES, I THINK THE FEELING WAS
THAT HE WAS GOING TO GET OFF.
>> QUESTIONS ARE ALWAYS THE
WORST PART OF THE LIBERATION,
YOU WANT THE JURY TO COME BACK
AND HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT.
WHEN THEY CAME BACK WITH THE
QUESTION REGARDING THE POTENTIAL
DEADLOCK, WE WERE A LITTLE
CONFUSED BECAUSE OF HOW THE JURY
INSTRUCTIONS WERE WRITTEN.
THERE WAS A RAY TO READ IT
POORLY FOR US, AND A WAY TO HAVE
HOPE.
HOPE. WE WERE STUCK IN THE MIDDLE, THE
INSTRUCTIONS WERE A LITTLE
COMPLICATED.
COMPLICATED. >> Shannon: WAS HARVEY ANGRY
WITH YOU?
WITH YOU? >> NO, HE HAS NEVER BEEN ANGRY
WITH US AT ALL.
HE SAW HOW HARD WE WORKED, HE
WAS GRATEFUL.
WAS GRATEFUL. HE EXPRESSED GRATITUDE TO US,
AND HE WASN’T STRONG.
HE WAS SHOCKED, HE WAS SHOCKED.
HE KNOWS HE DIDN’T, HE WAS
SHOCKED AND WE DON’T BELIEVE
THAT THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT HE
DID.
DID. >> Shannon: DID YOU ARGUE FOR
HIM TO BE ALLOWED TO GO HOME AND
AWAIT HIS MARCH 11TH SENTENCE IN
THERE?
THERE? WHY DID THE JUDGE TURN THAT
DOWN?
DOWN? >> THEY RAISED THE NUMBER OF HIS
MEDICAL CONDITIONS AS A REASON
WHY COME OUT THE JUDGE DIDN’T
GIVE A REASON AS TO WHY HE WAS
DENYING IT HE SAID HE AGREED
WITH US THAT MR. WEINSTEIN HAD
SOME SERIOUS HEALTH CONDITIONS
AND THAT HE REMANDED HIM TO
CUSTODY.
CUSTODY. HE DID NOT EXPLAIN THE
REASONING, BUT HE DENIED OUR
REQUEST.
REQUEST. SPEAK>> WILL HE HAVE ANY MEDICAL
CARE?
CARE? >> HE WILL, WE MADE A REQUEST
AND WE HAVE ALREADY HEARD THAT
THAT IS BEING HONORED.
HE WAS BEING MOVED TO AN
INFIRMARY AREA OF RIKERS ISLAND,
BUT NOW WE JUST HEARD BEFORE
COMING ON THAT HE WAS
EXPERIENCING SOME HIGH BLOOD
PRESSURE AND SOME HEART
PALPITATIONS.
PALPITATIONS. >> Shannon: THAT IS NOT
SURPRISING.
SURPRISING. WHAT I HEARD EARLIER TODAY FROM
JOSEPH NAPOLITANO, THEY SAID
THAT THIS JUDGE IS VERY TOUGH.
HE HAS A HEAVY SENTENCE OR PEER
>> I KNOW EXPERIENCE WITH THAT,
BUT I HAVE HEARD THAT THAT HE
DOES HAVE HEAVY SENTENCING
TENDENCIES.
TENDENCIES. MR. WEINSTEIN HAS NO CRIMINAL
HISTORY, WE ARE HOPING HE TAKES
A LOT OF THE MITIGATION THAT WE
ARE GOING TO PUT FORWARD INTO
ACCOUNT.
ACCOUNT. REALIZING THAT THERE IS GOING TO
BE OTHER JUDGES LOOKING AT THIS
AS WELL.
AS WELL. >> Martha: YOU DID A
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THESE, HOW
MUCH DATA EMOTION PLAY INTO THIS
FOR THE JURY?
THERE WERE SOME VERY EMOTIONAL
MOMENTS UP THERE, ONE OF THE
WITNESSES BROKE DOWN AND
EVERYTHING HAD TO BE HALTED.
HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK THAT
IMPACTED THE JURY?
>> I AM SURE IT DID, THAT WAS
ONE OF THE THINGS WE WERE HOPING
WE COULD DEAL WITH IN JURY
SELECTION.
SELECTION. WE KNOW THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE
EMOTIONAL AND WE KNOW THEY WILL
BE ASK HARD QUESTIONS, CAN YOU
SET THAT ASIDE AND LOOK AT THE
EVIDENCE?
EVIDENCE? IT IS A TOUGH ASK.
>> YOU HAVE BEEN CRITICIZED BY A
LOT OF WOMEN AND PEOPLE OUT
THERE.
THERE. HERE ARE SOME OF THE HEADLINES
THAT HAVE BEEN LEVEL THAT YOU
THROUGH THE COURSE OF THIS
PROCESS.
PROCESS. THAT YOU ARE THE MOST DANGEROUS
THING TO COME OUT OF ME TOO,
WHAT KIND OF WOMAN DEFENSE
HARVEY WEINSTEIN, THERE IS A
SPECIAL PLACE IN FOR HARVEY
WEINSTEIN LAWYER.
WEINSTEIN LAWYER. WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THAT DONNA?
>> THOSE HEADLINES SAY MORE
ABOUT THOSE WRITING THEM THEN
THEY SAY ABOUT ME, THOSE
HEADLINES DO NOT TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT WHEN YOU
ARE CHARGED WITH A CRIME YOU
HAVE A RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS, YOU
HAVE A RIGHT TO SAY EVIDENCE
SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE LOOK
AT IN TERMS OF DETERMINING
WHETHER OR NOT SOMEONE HAS BEEN
GUILTY, TO ATTACK ME I THINK NOT
ONLY ATTACKS THE JUSTICE SYSTEM,
I WAS PREPARED FOR THE ATTACKS
BUT I WAS NOT PREPARED FOR THE
ATTACKS ON THE SYSTEM ITSELF.
SO WHEN PEOPLE COME OUT WRITER
SAID THAT MY DEFENSE IS WRETCHED
AND MY QUESTIONS, DID YOU THINK
WE WERE GOING TO WALK INTO A
COURTROOM AND PEOPLE WILL MAKE
CLAIMS AND I WOULD NOT ASK ANY
QUESTIONS OF A WITNESS?
OF COURSE THAT IS NOT GOING TO
HAPPEN.
HAPPEN. I WAS MORE SURPRISED ABOUT THE
ATTACK ON OUR SYSTEM OF JUSTICE
AND I REALLY AM ABOUT THE
ATTACKS ON ME.
>> Martha: WHEN I INTERVIEWED
YOU PRIOR TO THIS, YOU SAID THAT
YOU BELIEVED HE IS INNOCENT.
THAT GOES BEYOND JUST SAYING
EVERYONE DESERVES DEFENSE, WHICH
I THINK EVERYONE CAN UNDERSTAND.
WHEN PEOPLE HEAR SOME OF THE
STORIES, SOME OF THEM ARE
SURPRISED THAT YOU SAY THAT YOU
BELIEVE THAT HARVEY WEINSTEIN
WHO 80 WOMEN HAVE ACCUSED OF ALL
VARIETIES OF ASSAULT ALL THE WAY
UP TO RAPE IS INNOCENT, DO YOU
STILL BELIEVE THAT?
>> I BELIEVE HE IS INNOCENT OF
THE CRIMES WE WERE DEALING WITH
IN OUR CASE ITSELF, TWO
DIFFERENT WOMEN MAKING CLAIMS
AND OUR CASE, OF COURSE THERE
WERE OTHERS.
WERE OTHERS. IN TERMS OF WHAT THE JURY WAS
ASKED TO FIND, I BELIEVE HE IS
INNOCENT OF THOSE CHARGES BASED
ON THE EVIDENCE THAT I WAS ABLE
TO REVIEW AND DEAL WITH AND LIVE
WITH FOR THE LAST NINE MONTHS.
>> Martha: DAMON, HE CAME OUT
AND SAID THIS PROVES THAT RAPE
IS A RAPE WHETHER IT HAPPENS IN
A DARK ALLEY OR IN A
RELATIONSHIP, IT DOESN’T TAKE
AWAY THE POSSIBILITY THAT IN
THAT MOMENT THAT WAS A
NONCONSENSUAL EVENT AND IT WAS A
RAPE.
RAPE. >> I DON’T THINK THIS CASE
CHANGES ANYTHING IN THAT REGARD,
I THINK EVERY CASE HAS TO BE
LOOKED ON ON ITS OWN MERITS.
THE FACT THAT INDIVIDUALS STAY
IN CONTACT OR SEND EMAILS, OUR
PROBLEM WAS THE TYPE OF CONTACT,
THE TYPE OF LOVING RESPONSES
THAT JUST TO US DID NOT ADD UP
TO A NONCONSENSUAL ENCOUNTER.
I DON’T THINK IT WILL BE A
SEA CHANGE AND HOW THESE CASES
ARE TRIED.
ARE TRIED. >> Martha: DO YOU THINK, WHAT
ARE THE GROUNDS FOR APPEAL?
>> THERE ARE MULTIPLE, OBVIOUSLY
THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH ONE OF
THE DRIVERS AND THE INFORMATION
THAT SHE HAD PRIOR TO COMING
INTO THE CASE AND WHETHER OR NOT
WE BELIEVE SHE COULD BE FAIR AND
IMPARTIAL.
IMPARTIAL. WE WERE MADE AWARE, AND THEN WE
MADE INQUIRIES ABOUT IT.
IT DIDN’T REMOVE HER, OUR
QUESTIONS DIDN’T REMOVE HER BUT
WE DEFINITELY THINK THAT COULD
BE A POTENTIAL ISSUE.
THERE WERE ISSUES WITH REGARD TO
EVIDENTIARY MATTERS, ISSUES WITH
REGARD TO A NUMBER OF WITNESSES,
THERE ARE MULTIPLE ISSUES.
>> Martha: WE WILL BE
FOLLOWING IT, YOU ARE NOT SURE
WHETHER OR NOT YOU WILL HANDLE
THE L.A. CASE, IS THAT TRUE?
>> CORRECT.
>> CORRECT. >> Martha: KEEP US POSTED, BIG
DAY OBVIOUSLY AFTER A LOT OF
WORK FROM BOTH OF YOU.
ONE THAT COULD LEAVE HARVEY