One year has passed since the Los Angeles jury’s failure to reach a unanimous verdict. The allegations involve sexual assault by Harvey Weinstein in a Beverly Hills hotel room in 2013. The person making the accusations is identified as Jane Doe No. 2 in Weinstein’s California criminal trial. She has recently filed a lawsuit against the disgraced former movie mogul.
In October, the accuser filed a lawsuit. The legal action targeted Disney, the then-owner of Weinstein’s company, and CAA, her agency at the time. The accusation stated that they failed to warn her about Weinstein’s history of sexual assault.
The claim argued that their reluctance stemmed from Weinstein’s perceived importance and power, along with the substantial profits he generated. Now, both parties are fighting back the allegations.
What The Accuser Claimed Against Harvey Weinstein?
The woman, who testified at Harvey Weinstein’s criminal trial in New York, filed a 14-page lawsuit on Tuesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The lawsuit names Weinstein and The Weinstein Company as defendants, encompassing claims of sexual assault and battery, vicarious liability, and negligence.
In her legal filing, the plaintiff reiterates the allegations she previously presented to jurors on both coasts. She asserts that she encountered Weinstein through Claudia Salinas and accompanied him to the Montage Hotel on Feb. 19, 2013, for discussions about a script she was writing and potential acting opportunities.
According to the lawsuit, Weinstein lured her to a private suite with Salinas, and in a bathroom, he “trapped” her. Despite her repeated objections, including saying “No” and “No, please don’t touch me,” Weinstein allegedly persisted in his attack without stopping.
The lawsuit claims that Weinstein had forcefully groped the plaintiff’s breast until he ejaculated onto a towel on the floor. Weinstein’s lawyer, Alan Jackson, chose not to comment on the recent filing.
CAA and Disney Also Involved
Julia Ormond, the accuser, alleges that CAA and Disney served as enablers for Harvey Weinstein and neglected to safeguard her from sexual assault. In October, she initiated legal action, alleging that Disney (which owned Weinstein’s company at the time) and CAA (her agency back then) neglected to caution her about Weinstein’s track record of sexual assault due to his perceived significance, power, and profitability for them.
CAA and Disney Fights Back
On Tuesday, the companies filed motions seeking the dismissal of Ormond’s lawsuit, contending that they were unaware of Weinstein’s sexual misconduct prior to the mentioned meeting.
Ormond’s legal complaint asserts that Weinstein’s history of misconduct was already widely recognized within the industry, particularly at CAA, by the time of her meeting.
The lawsuit cites a 2017 New York Times article titled “Weinstein’s Complicity Machine,” which recounted actor Mia Kirshner’s rejection of Weinstein’s advance in a hotel room in 1994 and her subsequent disclosure to her CAA agents. However, in its motion for dismissal, CAA argues that Kirshner’s experience is not comparable to Ormond’s claim of sexual assault.
CAA argues there’s no evidence Kirshner’s agents informed Ormond’s or anyone at CAA about the 1994 incident. Disney, which acquired Miramax in 1993, contends it’s not responsible for supervising Weinstein’s off-hours behavior at Miramax.
Ormond claims she informed her agents about the assault, but they discouraged reporting, leading to a decline in opportunities. CAA denies these allegations, stating it actively supported Ormond until her departure to join Michael Ovitz’s management company.
Also read: Lori Vallow Daybell Murder Trial: What To Expect?