At first the allegations against Harvey Weinstein seemed to focus primarily on sexual harassment.
However it is now clear, that that was only the tip of the iceberg and there are also allegations of first degree rape.
TURLEY: “I think a position of the prosecutors was that first of all the New York police didn’t bring them into the loop. Which is a bit odd that they didn’t consult with prosecutors to try and build a case from bottom up. But there certainly correct in saying the tape doesn’t have a clear confession or admission to sexual assault. It does strongly suggest, however, a sexual assault occurred. It’s very circumstantial. It’s a bit odd is that the office man dropped it. They looked at this as a misdemeanor sexual assault case. That’s what strikes me as rather odd. It appears that many people were familiar with the reputation of Mr. Weinstein. If these women’s accounts are true he would be a serial. What these women are describing what would constitute rape. A misdemeanor sexual assault in New York is only a two year statute of limitations but a class B felony, something like first-degree rape, which could apply here for some of these women, that does not have a statute of limitations. When you go to California the statute of limitations earlier it was ten years and then they got rid of it but that’s not applied retroactively. If you have a 10-year limit there. The point is — I find it strange that even if they didn’t think that the tape alone constituted a misdemeanor, it seemed to me that there’s plenty there to investigate for a possible felony.”
MacCALLUM: “It sounds in terms of what you’re saying that it’s not too late and some of these cases for him to be charged potentially with rape.”
TURLEY: “That’s right. I’m surprised the people are saying anything would be barred by statute of limitations, that’s not my reading of New York law. It seems to me, it depends on what the class of assault you’re dealing with. Some of these women are describing what would meet the definition of first-degree rape. That would obviously be subject to investigation but it is by no means a stretch based on their statement so far.”
Watch the video: