Gareth Cattermole/Getty Images
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has filed a
polite rights lawsuit against former Hollywood noble Harvey
Weinstein and The Weinstein Company.
The fit targets Harvey Weinstein for allegations of
passionate bungle and also alleges there was “routine injustice of
corporate resources for wrong ends” from 2005 through
According to the lawsuit, Weinstein told several
employees “I will kill you” or “I will kill your family” and
forced womanlike employees to promote his sexual
The fit also alleges that Harvey’s brother,
Robert Weinstein, and several other house members at The
Weinstein Company knew about Harvey’s actions and paid
employees for ongoing acts of harassment.
In all, some-more than 60 women have accused Weinstein of
varying degrees of passionate misconduct.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has filed a civil
rights lawsuit against former Hollywood noble Harvey Weinstein
and The Weinstein Company.
According to justice documents, the lawsuit seeks to “remedy a
years-long gender-based antagonistic work environment.” It targets
Harvey Weinstein for allegations of passionate misconduct, as good as
the executives and house of The Weinstein Company for unwell to
strengthen employees from Weinstein.
Charges were filed in the New York Supreme Court and embody new
and “extensive” allegations against Weinstein.
According to the suit, despite many complaints to the company’s
human resources dialect and widespread believe of misconduct
allegations, the company unsuccessful to take “meaningful” stairs to
strengthen its employees.
The fit also alleges there was “routine injustice of corporate
resources for wrong ends” from 2005 by Oct 2017.
Earlier this month, it was reported that The Weinstein Company is
reportedly in the
routine of being sole for up to $500 million.
of The Weinstein Company must safeguard that
victims will be compensated, employees will be stable going
forward, and that conjunction perpetrators nor enablers will be
unjustly enriched,” Schneiderman pronounced in a
statement. “Every New Yorker has a right to a
workplace free of passionate harassment, intimidation, and
The fit comes after a four-month review by the Attorney
General’s bureau into ascent allegations against Weinstein and
The Weinstein Company.
In Nov 2017, it was reported Manhattan District Attorney
Cyprus Vance designed to
pursue rape charges against Weinstein.
At the time, New York Police Department investigators pronounced they
were entertainment “credible” justification of rape by Weinstein, and
designed to find an detain warrant.
The New York Times first reported on the claims against Weinstein
in October, and The New Yorker followed up with several new
minute allegations shortly after. In all,
some-more than 60 women have accused Weinstein of varying degrees
of passionate misconduct.
Weinstein told employees “I will kill you”
Albert Ortega /
New sum from the lawsuit give larger discernment into
Weinstein’s sovereignty and how he masterminded years of alleged
passionate bungle and abuse.
According to the lawsuit, Weinstein told several employees
“I will kill you” or “I will kill your family.” He also told
employees “you don’t know what we can do” and mostly touted his
tie to absolute domestic total and reported contacts
within the Secret Service that could “take caring of
The fit also describes how Weinstein manipulated and
intimidated groups of womanlike employees.
The Weinstein Company allegedly employed a organisation of female
employees whose primary pursuit was to accompany Weinstein to major
Hollywood events and promote his sexual
According to the suit, witnesses described the women as
Harvey’s “wing-women” or “roster.”
One of Harvey’s “wing-women” was allegedly flown from
London to New York to learn his personal assistants how to “dress
and smell some-more attractive” to Weinstein, the lawsuit said.
A second organisation of womanlike employees allegedly served as
Weinstein’s assistants. His assistants were allegedly tasked with
scheduling his “regular passionate activity,” by
contacting a list of women, referred to as “Friends of
Harvey,” who were impending passionate partners.
The “Friends” list reportedly enclosed the names of 63
women formed around the world, and their locations,
Vanity Fair reported progressing this month.
The fit alleges a third organisation of primarily womanlike executives
were forced to promote Weinstein’s passionate escapades, by
following by on Weinstein’s promises of “employment
opportunities” to women Weinstein favored.
“This compelled service demeaned and flustered them,” the
fit said, and contributed to the “hostile work
One womanlike executive allegedly told human resources:
“Female TWC employees are radically used to facilitate
his passionate conquests of exposed women who wish he will get
According to the suit, The Weinstein Company took no
actions to examine the claims or forestall such
Robert Weinstein and other company house members covered
The lawsuit also alleges Harvey’s hermit Robert Weinstein,
and several other high-ranking house members at The Weinstein
Company knew about passionate bungle by Harvey and actively
overlooked or attempted to compensate victims for claims.
According to the suit, Robert Weinstein, co-owner, co-chairman,
and co-CEO of The Weinstein Company, was obliged for
progressing workplace safety, and did little to make concrete
measures to forestall Harvey’s continued bungle at the
Robert also allegedly recieved emails and was sensitive in late
2014 and 2015 of steady and persistant cases of sexual
harrasment by Harvey. However, the fit alleges he did not use
his change to serve examine claims, cancel Harvey’s
employment, or shorten Harvey from supervising women or having
hit with women seeking to do business with their company.
The lawsuit alleges that independant board
members sought to obtain entrance to Harvey’s personnel
file so that warn representing the Board could use the
information to establish either the Board would
recommend renewal of Harvey’s contract.
Harvey allegedly resisted the independant house member’s
efforts and tried to forestall entrance to his own file to equivocate the
find of the sum surrounding his bungle claims. A
infancy of house members at The Weinstein Company refused to
back the independant board’s exploration into Harvey’s crew file
and as a result, no movement was taken.
Additionally, Harvey’s agreement was extended, and allegedly
enclosed a sustenance to compensate victims if they had experienced
passionate bungle at Harvey’s hand.
According to the suit, the agreement settled that The
Weinstein Company had to “make a remuneration to prove a claim
that you [i.e., Harvey Weinstein] have treated someone improperly
in defilement of the Company’s Code of Conduct.”
The agreement settled that Harvey would face escalating
financial penalties that would be paid to victims of Harvey’s
bungle — $250,000 for the first such instance, “$500,000, for
the second such instance, $750,000 for the third such instance,
and $1,000,000 for any such additional instance.”
The fit alleges that the agreement contained no provision
for any penalties if Harvey privately paid to prove claims of
misconduct, and supposing no additional practice consequences in
the eventuality that sharpening payments had to be done by The
Weinstein Company or Harvey himself.
According to the lawsuit, this effectively allowed Harvey
to continue enchanting in passionate harrasment “with impunity” so long
as payments to victims were done and he avoided avowal of
incidents that competence risk “serious mistreat to the