Too little and too late. Bloom’s feminist credentials lie in ruins. You can’t present yourself at the legal scourge of sexual predators except the ones who pay you. At least not with any degree of credibility.
Harvey Weinstein is becoming increasingly radioactive. And, at a time when one would think he’d prefer less media exposure, he launches a suit against the New York Times? His ego is really screwed up.
Perhaps Mr. Weinstein should realize that it’s time to give up and just throw himself at the mercy of the court. It doesn’t appear as though he has many friends left, not even ones he could buy.
That’s not fair. She took the case initially because everyone deserves to be represented by an attorney in the U.S. She dropped it after realizing she couldn’t stomach the case, but no lawyer deserves to be vilified for agreeing to represent anyone in this country.
As a valid comparison Weinstein produced popular films and donated to many political candidates.
While Rupert Murdoch and his media empire had far more of an effect, not always positive and quite harmful to our democracy. At least a number of board members at Weinstein Companies resigned, same can’t be said at Fox after the reign of groper Roger Ailes and loofa Bill O’Reilly.
She did the right thing, eventually.
This scumbag is dirty and has been for far too long.
I think that the women that he harassed, attacked or held back should all dance on his grave publically right now.
I mean, who does he think he is, Rupert Murdoch and Faux News?
How long before Mnuchin brings Weinstein aboard to run Dune Entertainment, his movie production company?
I wouldn’t vilify her, it’s not uncommon for successful high profile lawyers to represent what appears to be clients on opposite sides of issues. And I agree everyone deserves representation.
But …
she built a reputation on defending, specifically, women in one of the most challenging sensitive legal matters against powerful men just like Weinstein. This tarnishes that image. It’s not like he didn’t have a well established history of sexual harassment. If she didn’t know, she lacks competence. If she did know, it takes away what made her unique. Had she not made a formal public statement I’d feel differently but I imagine this could make some women think twice about going to her. Maybe not enough to not meet with her to decide but a little question mark will linger. It’s a shame really. I like her.
That’s not fair. She took the case initially because everyone deserves to be represented by an attorney in the U.S. She dropped it after realizing she couldn’t stomach the case, but no lawyer deserves to be vilified for agreeing to represent anyone in this country.
In making her announcement on Twitter, Ms. Bloom did not offer an explanation for her resignation. The tactics and tenor of her defense of Mr. Weinstein have varied, and there were often substantial differences in her public and private statements. The emails, viewed by The New York Times, reveal that at least two board members did not approve of her approach.
As the board convened an emergency phone meeting on Thursday evening to address the allegations, published in an investigation by The Times, Ms. Bloom sent an email to board members attacking the article. She outlined a plan that involved “more and different reporting,” including “photos of several of the accusers in very friendly poses with Harvey after his alleged misconduct.”
In one of the emails, Mr. Maerov scolded Ms. Bloom for “fanning the flames and compounding the problem” and asked that she step away from the company. He pointed to a business deal she had previously reached to have Mr. Weinstein turn a book she had written into a television series.
[emphasis mine]
Leaving aside the possible conflict of interest, I’m hard-pressed to think of a strategy more damning to the reputation of a “feminist” lawyer than slut-shaming [Edit] the victims.
I’ll wager no one will care by the end of the month.
Completely wrong nymuch. Dave48 is correct. Whether Weinstein is eventually guilty or not, he deserves representation.
I think she quit because she heard thousands of voices, on Twitter and other venues, arguing that if she were truly a feminist attorney, she should be representing the alleged victims and not the alleged perpetrator.
As far as I know, it’s not a violation of ethics for a lawyer to refuse to represent someone simply because she considers the accused, or the acts alleged, offensive. But it sure ought to be – just as much as it ought to be an offense for a baker to refuse to make a wedding cake for a gay couple, or for a company to refuse contraceptive coverage to its female employees. We can’t have it both ways.
Nobody’s denying Weinstein his right to representation of which I’m sure he’ll have all that money can buy. The question is what possessed Bloom – who’s made a name for herself representing victims of sexual harassment and abuse – to imagine she of all people would be able to make this particular case.
I’m not sure it would be a good idea to compel private attorneys to defend clients they’re not comfortable defending. It’s not like a wedding cake. if you’re a defendant, you want to know your lawyer put everything they had into defending you. If a lawyer tells you “I don’t think I can defend this case” they’re probably right and you should move on. Also, it’s in your best interest as a defendant to not bring attention to the fact that lawyers are saying “no” to you, so it’s best to just go quietly.
Forcing lawyers to take cases they don’t wish to take might also increase the number of mistrials since defendants might complain they didn’t get adequate representation, and they’d be right.