NEW YORK – New York’s highest court on Thursday overturned Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 rape conviction, finding that the judge in the landmark #MeToo trial prejudged the former movie mogul with “egregious” inappropriate rulings, including a decision of allowing women to testify about allegations that were not part of the case.

“We conclude that the trial court erroneously admitted testimony of alleged prior uncharged sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes,” the court’s 4-3 decision said. “The remedy for these egregious errors is a new trial.”

The ruling by the state Court of Appeals reopens a painful chapter in the United States’ examination of sexual misconduct by powerful figures, an era that began in 2017 with a flood of accusations against Weinstein. His accusers could once again be forced to retell their stories on the witness stand.

The court’s majority said that “it is an abuse of judicial discretion to allow unproven allegations of nothing more than bad behavior that destroys a defendant’s character but does not shed light on his credibility in relation to the criminal charges brought against him.”

In a harsh dissent, Judge Madeline Singas wrote that the majority was “whitewashing the facts to fit a he-said/she-said narrative,” and said the Court of Appeals continued a “disturbing trend of overturning guilty verdicts.” of juries in cases of sexual violence.”

“The majority’s determination perpetuates outdated notions of sexual violence and allows predators to escape accountability,” Singas wrote.

Weinstein, 72, has been serving a 23-year sentence in a New York prison following his conviction on criminal sexual act charges for forcibly performing oral sex on a film and television production assistant in 2006 and rape in third degree for an attack on an aspiring actress in 2013.

He will remain imprisoned because he was convicted in Los Angeles in 2022 for another rape and sentenced to 16 years in prison. Weinstein was acquitted in Los Angeles of charges involving one of the women who testified in New York.

Weinstein’s attorney, Arthur Aidala, said immediately after the ruling came out: “We all worked very hard and this is a tremendous victory for all criminal defendants in the state of New York.”

Attorney Douglas H. Wigdor, who has represented eight of Harvey Weinstein’s accusers, including two witnesses, in the New York criminal trial, called the ruling “an important step backwards toward holding accountable those responsible for acts of sexual violence.”

“Courts routinely admit evidence of other uncharged acts that helps juries understand issues relating to the defendant’s modus operandi or plan. “The jury was instructed on the relevance of this testimony and overturning the verdict is tragic because it will require the victims to endure another trial,” Wigdor said in a statement.

Weinstein’s lawyers argued that Judge James Burke’s rulings in favor of the prosecution turned the trial into “1-800-GET-HARVEY.”

The overturning of Weinstein’s conviction is the second major #MeToo setback in the past two years, after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of a Pennsylvania court decision throwing out his assault conviction. Bill Cosby’s sex.

Weinstein’s conviction stood for more than four years, heralded by activists and advocates as a historic achievement but just as quickly scrutinized by his lawyers and, later, by the Court of Appeals when it heard arguments on the matter in February. .

The accusations against Weinstein, the once powerful and feared studio boss behind Oscar-winning films like “Pulp Fiction” and “Shakespeare in Love,” marked the beginning of the #MeToo movement. Dozens of women came forward to accuse Weinstein, including famous actresses like Ashley Judd and Uma Thurman. His trial in New York generated intense publicity, with protesters chanting “rapist” outside the courthouse.

Weinstein is imprisoned in New York at the Mohawk Correctional Facility, about 100 miles (160 kilometers) northwest of Albany.

He maintains his innocence. He maintains that any sexual activity was consensual.

Aidala argued before the appeals court in February that Burke influenced the trial by allowing three women to testify about allegations that were not part of the case and by giving prosecutors permission to confront Weinstein, if he had testified, about his long history of brutal behavior. .

Aidala argued that the additional testimony went beyond the details normally allowed about motive, opportunity, intent or a common plan or plan, and essentially put Weinstein on trial for crimes he was not charged with.

Weinstein wanted to testify but opted not to because Burke’s ruling would have meant answering questions about more than two dozen alleged acts of misconduct dating back four decades, Aidala said. They included fighting with his film producer brother, flipping over a table in anger and yelling at waiters and his assistants.

“We had a defendant who was begging to tell his side of the story. It’s a case of he said, she said, and he says ‘that’s not how it happened.’ Let me tell you how I did it,’” Aidala argued. Instead, jurors heard evidence of Weinstein’s prior bad behavior that “had nothing to do with truth and truthfulness. It was all ‘he’s a bad guy.’”

Aidala also took issue with Burke’s refusal to dismiss a juror who had written a novel about predatory older men, a topic the defense attorney said sounded too similar to the themes in the Weinstein case.

An attorney for the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which prosecuted the case, argued that the judge’s rulings were correct and that the additional evidence and testimony he allowed were important in providing jurors with context about Weinstein’s behavior and the way he interacted with women.

“The defendant’s argument was that they had a loving and consensual relationship both before and after the charged incidents,” appeals chief Steven Wu argued, referring to one of the women Weinstein was accused of assaulting. The additional testimony “just refuted that characterization completely.”

Wu said Weinstein’s acquittal of the most serious charges – two counts of predatory sexual assault and one count of first-degree rape involving actress Annabella Sciorra’s allegations of a rape in the mid-1990s – showed that the Jurors were paying attention and were not confused or overwhelmed by the additional accusations. testimony.

The Associated Press generally does not identify people who allege sexual assault unless they consent to be identified; Sciorra has spoken publicly about her accusations.

The Court of Appeals agreed last year to take up Weinstein’s case after an intermediate appeals court upheld his conviction. Before his ruling, lower appeals court judges had raised questions about Burke’s conduct during oral arguments. One noted that Burke had let prosecutors continue to present “incredibly damaging testimony” from additional witnesses.

Burke’s term expired at the end of 2022. He was not re-elected and is no longer a judge.

Upon appeal, Weinstein’s lawyers requested a new trial, but only on the criminal sexual act charge. They argued that the rape charge could not be retried because it involves alleged conduct outside the statute of limitations.

Associated Press writer Dave Collins reported from Hartford, Connecticut.