Proposed $30 Million Settlement Might Not Be the Answer to the Harvey Weinstein Case

As the case against Harvey Weinstein gears up for trial, a settlement has been introduced by the defendant’s lawyers in the civil litigation. Variety reports that the accusers, their lawyers, and trade creditors for Weinstein Co. would get $30 million, with $14 million going to Weinstein Co. board members who were defendants in several of the cases. Weinstein was accused of sexual assault and harassment, and the case has yet to make it to trial.

Attorneys Douglas Wigdor and Kevin Mintzer, who represent Wedil David, released this statement, also reported, via Variety,

Contrary to false media reports, there is no deal to resolve all of the Harvey Weinstein rape and sexual assault cases. Our client has steadfastly rejected the proposed deal. Sadly, rather than adequately compensate the rape and sexual assault victims of Harvey Weinstein who have pursued viable legal claims that have been brought within the statute of limitations, the proposed deal would provide millions of dollars to the ultra-wealthy directors of the Weinstein Company, such as James Dolan, and their big firm lawyers. It would also allow Harvey Weinstein and the men who enabled him, including his brother, Robert Weinstein, to escape liability and accountability without, apparently, contributing a dime of their own money. Our client does not begrudge any victim who accepts a settlement that she finds acceptable. But she will not participate in a process that is fundamentally flawed and unfair.

Both Ashley Judd and Rose McGowan have also expressed no interest in the settlement, though Judd was never involved in the original negotiations. Both announced their lack of involvement via Twitter.

Ashley Judd’s case against Harvey Weinstein is ongoing and we intend to bring it to trial. She is not a party of any settlement.

— ashley judd (@AshleyJudd) May 24, 2019

I’m not part of this either. Ashley Judd says she’s not part of Harvey Weinstein’s $44 million settlement – CNN https://t.co/SD1oJOcfzk

— rose mcgowan (@rosemcgowan) May 25, 2019

Not all of the plaintiffs have expressed a dislike of the deal.

“I believe we have to achieve a global peace,” attorney Aaron Filler, who represents Paz de la Huerta, said in a statement. “If a case such as Wedil David’s withdraws from the group after many months of being with the rest of the victims, there is a substantial risk that this will cause the settlement to fail. It should be well known to Wedil David, as she makes her choice, that if the settlement fails because of her withdrawal, other victims will be deprived of this measure of justice and forced into prolonged litigation that they have just chosen to forego in exchange for this settlement.”

It is not my place to say what the plaintiffs in the case should or should not do. Personally, I would not take the settlement, but if some want this ordeal over, we cannot fault them for that. This a terrible situation involving a terrible crime, and it is easy to judge from the outside. As long as the plaintiffs get some sort of justice, that is what matters. As an outsider, I won’t sit in judgement of any of them and their decisions with regards to their case. It’s easy to make snap decisions when it isn’t your own life and trauma being discussed.

This case is still developing, and we’ll keep you updated on whether the plaintiffs take the settlement, or the developments that ensue should the case go to court. Ultimately, we hope the victims will receive justice in some form or another.

(via Variety, image: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

(image: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!

—The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—