Harvey Weinstein says he will invoke the Fifth Amendment if he has to be questioned in Ashley Judd‘s civil lawsuit against him and is demanding a judge put the case on hold until the outcome of his criminal case.
According to court documents obtained by The Blast, the disgraced movie mogul’s lawyer writes, “Weinstein should not be forced to decide between being prejudiced in this civil litigation, if he asserts his Fifth Amendment privilege, or being prejudiced in criminal litigation, if he waives that privilege in this case.”
They continue, “Accordingly, this action should be stayed as Weinstein is presently under criminal indictment for sexual assault and sexual misconduct, and is the subject and/or target of other ongoing criminal investigations arising from alleged conduct similar to that underlying this action.”
Harvey Weinstein’s lawyer attempts to argue his case by saying, “It is well-settled that a civil action should be stayed pending a related criminal action involving similar conduct where the defendant risks incrimination. Here, given the overlap between the criminal and civil matters, a stay is warranted as Weinstein is unable to respond to the factual allegations of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, respond to or participate in the discovery process, or otherwise litigate this matter, without invocation of his constitutional rights against self-incrimination.”
Last year, Ashley Judd sued Harvey Weinstein accusing him of torpedoing her career after she turned down his sexual advances.
Judd claimed she met with Peter Jackson in or around 1998 to discuss playing one of two different major roles in the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy. She said Jackson expressed to Miramax at the time that they wanted to cast her, but Weinstein intervened.
She said Weinstein “torpedoed Ms. Judd’s incredible professional opportunity when he told Mr. Jackson and Ms. Walsh that the studio had had a ‘bad experience’ with Ms. Judd, and that Ms. Judd was a ‘nightmare’ to work with and should be avoided ‘at all costs.'”
Judd said he succeeded in blacklisting Ms. Judd and destroying her ability to work “on what became a multi-billion-dollar franchise with 17 Academy Award wins and many more nominations.”
She said the “baseless smears” were simply retaliation for “against Ms. Judd for rejecting his sexual demands approximately one year earlier, when he cornered her in a hotel room under the guise of discussing business.”
The actress sued for sexual harassment and defamation and sought unspecified damages.
Weinstein demanded the lawsuit be dismissed claiming Judd filed way past the statute of limitations.
Weinstein also pointed out that Judd is suing over one specific incident, saying, “Weinstein’s alleged unwanted sexual advances occurred on a single day and consisted of him asking to give Plaintiff a massage, asking her to help him pick out clothes, and asking her to watch him shower. These allegations fall far short of meeting the ‘pervasive or severe’ required element.”