NEW YORK — A grand jury voted on Wednesday to indict Harvey Weinstein on charges that he forced one woman to perform oral sex in his office and that he raped a second woman at a hotel, the Manhattan district attorney said.
The indictment, which was expected, was handed up less than a week after police arrested Weinstein. It followed several months of investigation by prosecutors and police into numerous sex-crime allegations against the movie producer.
“This indictment brings the defendant another step closer to accountability for the crimes of violence with which he is now charged,” the district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., said in a statement.
On Friday, Weinstein surrendered to the police and was charged, through a criminal complaint, with first-degree rape and other offenses. The district attorney was obligated to seek a grand jury indictment on those charges within six months, and prosecutors moved quickly after Weinstein indicated on Wednesday afternoon he would not testify in his own defense before the grand jury.
The indictment charges Weinstein with first-degree and third-degree rape as well as first-degree criminal sexual act. The top charges carry a penalty of five to 25 years in prison, if convicted. He was released Friday after turning in his passport and posting $1 million bail.
Once a Hollywood powerhouse known for making award-winning films, Weinstein has become a national symbol of sexual misconduct by powerful men and the catalyst for the global #MeToo movement.
Now he faces felony charges in state Supreme Court in Manhattan. The criminal sex act count stems from an encounter with Lucia Evans. She told The New Yorker, and then investigators from Vance’s office, that Weinstein forced her to perform oral sex during what she thought would be a casting meeting at the Miramax office in Tribeca in 2004.
The victim in the rape case has not been publicly identified. Prosecutors have said she was attacked March 18, 2013, inside a DoubleTree hotel at 569 Lexington Ave. “This defendant used his position, money and power to lure young women into situations where he was able to violate them sexually,” the lead prosecutor, Joan Illuzzi, said at Weinstein’s arraignment.
Weinstein’s lawyer, Benjamin Brafman, has said both of the encounters were consensual. He has said Evans did not report the incident to the police for nearly 14 years. The second woman, he said, had a 10-year-long romantic liaison with Weinstein that continued for years after the alleged attack.
Vance said the attempts by Weinstein and his legal team to undermine the legitimacy of his accusers fit with his past attempts to discredit women who complained about him. “The defendant’s recent assault on the integrity of the survivors and the legal process is predictable,” he said in the statement.
Brafman said his client would plead not guilty and “vigorously defend against these unsupported allegations that he strongly denies.”
“If this case actually proceeds to trial, we expect Mr. Weinstein to be acquitted,” he said.
When he was brought before a judge on Friday, Weinstein notified prosecutors that he might opt to give his version of events to the grand jury. Illuzzi said Weinstein had agreed to decide by Wednesday whether to testify.
But Wednesday morning, Brafman said the movie producer and his legal team had not had sufficient time to prepare testimony, having learned the details of the accusations and the identities of his accusers late Friday afternoon, just before Memorial Day weekend. He said the district attorney had denied a request to postpone the date.
Brafman also said that “regardless of how compelling Mr. Weinstein’s personal testimony might be, an indictment was inevitable due to the unfair political pressure being placed on Cy Vance to secure a conviction of Mr. Weinstein.”
Vance has faced criticism from women’s groups and the police for his decision not to prosecute Weinstein in 2015, when an Italian model accused him of groping her breasts during an interview at his office. He has defended that decision, saying his sex crimes prosecutors determined the case could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.