Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](,dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); }

Harvey Weinstein arrives at court, in New York, on Jan. 9, 2020.

Stephanie Keith/Getty Images

The judge in Harvey Weinstein’s rape trial declined the defence’s request that he step aside as jury selection dipped into a third day Thursday.

Judge James Burke announced his decision Thursday, a day after Mr. Weinstein’s lawyers sent him a letter asking that he remove himself from the case. They objected to comments Justice Burke made when he asked Mr. Weinstein if he was willing to got to jail “for life” if he kept ignoring a court order that bars texting in the courtroom.

The lawyers blasted the judge’s comments as “prejudicial and inflammatory,” and raised questions about his impartiality.

Story continues below advertisement

There was nothing improper about “scolding a recalcitrant defendant” over violating the cellphone ban, Justice Burke said Thursday, adding that he was merely trying to scare Mr. Weinstein. “I never meant that I was going to put your client in jail for life,” he told defence attorneys.

Judges seldom step aside from cases over such requests, but Mr. Weinstein’s lawyers could be also making a play to make an issue of Justice Burke’s comments and rulings for a possible appeal.

The defence had further argued that the judge failed to adequately safeguard Mr. Weinstein’s right to a fair and impartial jury, in part by rejecting a request to halt jury selection for a “cooling off” period after prosecutors in Los Angeles filed new sex crimes charges against him Monday.

“There is no time like the present,” Justice Burke said Thursday. “All sides are ready.”

Mr. Weinstein is charged in New York with raping a woman in a Manhattan hotel room in 2013 and sexually assaulting another woman, Mimi Haleyi, in 2006. If convicted, he could be sentenced to life in prison. The 67-year-old ex-studio boss has pleaded not guilty and maintains that any sexual activity was consensual.

So far, 66 prospective jurors have advanced to the next stage of jury selection in what is expected to be a lengthy selection process aimed at finding people who can keep an open mind about the disgraced movie mogul.

That challenge was demonstrated Thursday when Justice Burke detected a stir after breaking the news to a new batch of prospective jurors that they were there for the Weinstein case.

Story continues below advertisement

“I heard a gasp from my left over here,” the judge said. “So I have to tell you that having heard of Harvey Weinstein or even being familiar with the allegations made against him in the press or elsewhere are not by themselves disqualifying and does not mean that you’re not permitted to sit as a juror in this case. “

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.

Related topics

Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to
Comments are closed

We have closed comments on this story for legal reasons or for abuse. For more information on our commenting policies and how our community-based moderation works, please read our Community Guidelines and our Terms and Conditions.

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies