The Woman Defending Harvey Weinstein
31:58 | Feb 7th
aliceko recommended:Feb 8th
This is a (tough) exercise in learning how to understand and listen to 'the other side', despite how difficult is. Another example of excellent female journalists/reporters asking tough questions - and knowing when to press for more. Host Megan Twohey deserves kudos - this reminded me of Emily Maitl...Show More
dee.ngyn recommended:Feb 8th
Rare opportunity to explore the opposing side; it’s definitely hard to digest but necessary to listen to
mm recommended:Feb 7th
HOLY! Just wait until the end. You will scream in silence with the host, Megan Twohey, too. This is an interview with the lawyer who is defending Harvey Weinstein.
rmmiller364 recommended:Feb 7th
Wow, just wow. “Have you ever been sexually assaulted?” “No, I would never put myself in that position.” Wow
@mm @rmmiller364 do you scream like me when you hear that? And when she says that men and women are equally reponsible? And when she says that if she were a man she woul make every woman sign a consent??
@molinos @rmmiller364 I’m pressing play right now. Already feeling anxious! Brb and will let you know.
@rmmiller364 @molinos So much to unpack. At the beginning, I was like “Ok I can see why she’s the top lawyer for these types of cases.” There were moments where there were these awkward pauses from Megan and you can just hear her scream inside in silence. The part about Harvey and hotels. I did no...Show More
@mm Yes, exactly! When I first started listening, I felt like “Well, I’d course she’s going to defend him. That is literally her job as a defense lawyer.” But the last part was truly mind blowing. I then read an article in The Cut which had this interesting update: “In court on Friday, after the epi...Show More
@rmmiller364 Interesting. But to be honest, this feels like free advertisement that will get her further in career and dollars than this standalone case. Why would she do it otherwise given the circumstances? She feels like the winner here whether she wins or loses the case. Also, saw the NYTimes s...Show More
@mm @rmmiller364 @molinos Yes I was angry at the very end. I'm SO glad that Megan decided to extend the interview even after they had formally 'ended' things to ask if Donna had ever been sexually assaulted. If you Google 'Donna Rotunno' right now, you'll get a good sense of how the public has react...Show More
molinos recommended:Feb 7th
What an interview!! My head just blown up I finished it screaming as I was driving home from work. Donna Runno, Weinstein´s personal lawyer, talks about Metoo and the women who accused Weinstein of sexual assault. Although I believe she is right in one thing at the beginning of the interview then...Show More
I think what's so frustrating is exactly what successful lawyers do ie) change the conversation to some things you might agree with. Should we presume guilt? No Should we make sure both sides of the argument get a chance to be heard? Yes and even should people try to make sure they dont put themsel...Show More
@danny yeah I agree with the idea of bith sides being heard...but after thar she goes completely out of the rails with the "i have never been assault because I never put myself in that position" or saying that if men are women are equally responsible. I'm going to read the background reading. I ha...Show More
@danny @molinos We definitely have a system of 'innocent until proven guilty' in the Western world but you can see how Donna expertly avoid's Megan's questions about Weinstein's past 'allegations' and why they are not relevant to the case. I also thought she did a horrible job explaining 'sins' vs '...Show More
@aliceko after listening to the interview I'm sure she's gonna destroy the witness without any regret
@aliceko @molinos Whereas I thought the “sins” and “crimes” argument was a brilliant answer though also awful and twisted in this context. 😬
@mm @molinos @aliceko sorry, just catching up, but I thought "sins" vs "crimes" was the most lawyer distinction she could make. I'm sure other lawyers use it too. I guess it's also the simplified version of her defense for Wiestein's case.