The women who came forward against Harvey Weinstein reacted with fury after the disgraced media mogul’s rape and sexual assault convictions were overturned by a New York appeals court on Thursday.

Weinstein, 72, was found guilty in 2020 of raping and assaulting two women, and is serving his 23-year sentence at a prison in upstate New York.

In a 4-3 decision on Thursday, New York’s highest court ruled the original judge made “egregious errors” in the trial by allowing prosecutors to call witnesses whose allegations were not related to the charges at hand.

Weinstein was once one of Hollywood’s most well-connected and powerful producers who made a series of Oscar-winning films. But behind the glamourous facade, it was a different story. More than 80 women have accused him of abuse ranging from groping to rape. Even with his conviction overturned in New York, he remains convicted of rape in California.

The Weinstein revelations launched the #MeToo movement in 2017, which saw women from all corners of society come forward to talk about their experiences of sexual harassment and assault.

  • Grimy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Imo, something isn’t a myth just because it’s hard to prove definitely due to a near infinite amount of samples. By the same argument you could pretty much discredit most knowledge. Dna being unique or the speed of light because we haven’t tested all individual photons.

    Its healthy to always acknowledge the possibility but if there’s a mountain of evidence pointing one way, you kind of go with what you have.

    Obviously though, it’s insane we don’t have better standards. It sounds like most times, it boils down to a judgment call from an expert and that is clearly not okay.

    • baru@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Its healthy to always acknowledge the possibility but if there’s a mountain of evidence pointing one way

      You’re assuming the fingerprint is perfect. It might not be. In enough cases they do not have the full fingerprint. Then if there’s a match, was it actually a match or not?

      For above, this caused problems though times. Especially with huge fingerprint databases.

      Disagree with your statement that there’s loads of evidence pointing that fingerprint are unique. That’s not how they’re used. And there’s enough cases where it went wrong.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      That’s not how science works at all. You don’t need to test individual photons to know the speed of light. That involves mass and energy. There’s a famous equation that allows you to calculate it if you re-order the variables, E=mc².

      You do not present a hypothesis that has no evidence to back it up and pretend it’s true. That is not fact, that is folklore. Mythology.

      • Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        You don’t ignore all the evidence just because every single bit of possible data hasn’t been parsed.

        There has never been two individuals with the same fingerprint, out of all the fingerprints we have collected, they are all unique. This kind of points to all of them being unique and this will be true until we find one that isn’t.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          There has never been two individuals with the same fingerprint, out of all the fingerprints we have collected, they are all unique

          How many fingerprints have been collected versus how many humans have ever lived?

          This kind of points to all of them being unique and this will be true until we find one that isn’t.

          Again, that’s not how science works.

          • Grimy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            So dna isn’t unique as well? And I mean, we haven’t boiled every drop of water on the planet, how can we know all water boils at 100c at sea level.

            There isn’t much things we know that was tested to such an extent.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              You really do not understand how science works. You are arguing that the test for uniqueness is the same as the test for uniformity.

              If someone were to claim that every drop of water is unique, you would have a point. No one is claiming that. That is the claim about fingerprints and it is a claim which has never been tested to the satisfaction of anyone working in that field of science.

              • Grimy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                I’m not saying it’s proven beyond a doubt, my point is that something that has turned out true the millions of times we have checked can’t possibly be a myth.

                You can say there’s a possibility of it being wrong but shouldn’t lump it in with antiquity gods just for the sake of your argument.

                There’s a whole range between fantasy and certain beyond a doubt, you should stop assuming I’m an idiot and ask yourself why you are so adamant about defending the extreme in such an abrasive manner.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  my point is that something that has turned out true the millions of times we have checked can’t possibly be a myth.

                  Can’t possibly be a myth? So you know for a fact that, based on the supposed millions of times that we have checked (have we checked millions of times? do you know?) no two of the estimated 100 billion people that have lived over the course of the past 200,000 years had the same fingerprints, yes? And you can present empirical evidence to support that claim? Because I’m really not sure how you can claim that with any sort of certainty based on a sample size of what is likely less than 1% of that number over the course of less than two centuries.

                  Otherwise, I think it could possibly be a myth.

                  • Grimy@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    I believe it’s probably true. I don’t believe it can be classified anywhere near the word myth since that implies it’s almost certainly false.