In a 4-to-3 decision on Thursday, New York’s highest court overturned Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 conviction on felony sex crime charges, a reversal that horrified and dismayed many of the women whose decision to speak out against Mr. Weinstein, a prominent Hollywood producer, accelerated the #MeToo movement.
周四，纽约州最高法院以四票对三票的结果推翻了2020年对哈维·韦恩斯坦做出的性犯罪重罪判决，这一决定令许多挺身而出指证韦恩斯坦的女性深感惊骇与沮丧，对这位知名好莱坞制片人的相关指控加速了“#我也是”(#MeToo)运动的进程。

The New York Court of Appeals agreed with Mr. Weinstein’s defense team that the trial judge who presided over the sex crimes case in Manhattan, Justice James Burke, made a critical error when he let prosecutors call as witnesses several women who testified that Mr. Weinstein had assaulted them, even though none of those allegations had led to charges.
纽约州上诉庭认同韦恩斯特辩护团队的主张，即该性犯罪案在曼哈顿的主审法官詹姆斯·伯克犯下了一个关键错误，他允许检方传召多位女性出庭作证，称韦恩斯坦袭击了她们，尽管这些说法全都没有提起正式的指控。

The women became known as Molineux witnesses, a term that refers to trial witnesses who are allowed to testify about criminal acts that the defendant has not been charged with committing. In writing for the majority, Judge Jenny Rivera said permitting such testimony in Mr. Weinstein’s case had served to wrongly “diminish defendant’s character before the jury.”
这些女性于是就成了“莫里诺证人”，指的是在法庭允许下就一些被告人尚未被指控的刑事罪行出庭作证。在多数意见书中，珍妮·里维拉法官说，在韦恩斯坦一案中允许这样的证词，意味着错误地“在陪审团面前贬低被告人的人格”。

The ruling, four years after Mr. Weinstein was convicted of forcibly performing oral sex on a production assistant and of raping an actress, did not surprise many legal analysts who had questioned whether prosecutors had taken too big a risk in their efforts to win over the jury.
在韦恩斯坦被判强迫一名制片助理进行口交和强奸一名女演员的罪名成立四年后，这次的裁决在许多法律分析人士的意料之内，他们此前就在质疑，检方在寻求赢得陪审团支持的过程中是否太过冒险。

In its decision, the court came to the conclusion that prosecutors had done just that and, along with Justice Burke, had violated a central tenet of criminal trials: Defendants should be judged only on the charges against them.
此次裁决中，法庭正是得出了检方冒进的结论，他们和伯克大法官都违背了刑事审判的一项核心原则：对被告人的裁量应该仅限于他所受到的指控。

Here are five takeaways from the court’s ruling:
以下是法庭裁决的五个要点：

The court cited “egregious errors.”
法庭援引了“显著错误”

The court said the trial’s fairness had been compromised by two key prosecution strategies: the use of Molineux witnesses and the prosecutors’ disclosure that if Mr. Weinstein took the stand in his own defense, they would ask him about dozens of allegations of other crimes and boorish, frightening behavior.
法庭称，检方的两个关键策略破坏了审判的公正性：一是对莫里诺证人的使用，二是检方公开表示，如果韦恩斯坦出庭为自己辩护，他们会就他的其它数十项罪行指控和粗野、骇人的行径向他提问。

Before the trial, during what is known as a Sandoval hearing, Justice Burke said he would let prosecutors question Mr. Weinstein about 28 allegations that included physically attacking his brother, threatening to cut off a colleague’s genitals with gardening shears, throwing a table of food, and screaming and cursing at hotel restaurant staff after they told him the kitchen was closed.
在庭审前的一次所谓“桑多瓦尔听证”中，伯克大法官说他会允许检方就28项指控向韦恩斯特提问，其中包括对其弟的肢体袭击，威胁要用一把园艺剪剪掉一名同事的生殖器，在酒店餐馆工作人员告知厨房已经下班后，掀翻了一桌子的食物并对工作人员恶语相向。

That threat made it impossible for Mr. Weinstein to take the stand even though he was “begging” to testify in his own defense, his lawyer, Arthur Aidala, said during oral arguments before the Court of Appeals in February.
韦恩斯特的律师阿瑟·阿依达拉在2月的上诉庭口头辩论中说，这样的威胁导致韦恩斯特不可能出庭，尽管他“乞求”能有个为自己辩护的机会。

In its majority opinion, the court agreed.
法庭在多数意见书中认同了这一主张。

“The threat of a cross-examination highlighting these untested allegations undermined defendant’s right to testify,” Judge Rivera wrote. “The remedy for these egregious errors is a new trial.”
“威胁通过质证强调这些未经验证的陈词，损害了被告人出庭作证的权利，”里维拉写道。“对这些显著错误的纠正应该是一场新的审判。”

The three dissenting judges slammed the majority.
三位异议法官猛烈批评了多数意见。

Three judges — Madeline Singas, Anthony Cannataro and Michael J. Garcia — dissented in a pair of scathing opinions that accused the majority of continuing “a disturbing trend of overturning juries’ guilty verdicts in cases involving sexual violence.”
这三位法官——麦德琳·辛加斯、安瑟尼·坎纳塔罗和迈克尔·J·加西亚——用两份措辞严厉的意见书表达了异议，指责多数意见方延续了“在涉性暴力的案件中推翻陪审团有罪裁断的恼人趋势”。

The judges said the court had ignored evidence that the Molineux witnesses had established: that Mr. Weinstein had displayed a pattern of coercion and manipulation.
他们说法庭无视了莫里诺证人所确立的证据；且可以看到韦恩斯特存在胁迫和操控的行为模式。

Judge Singas said the ruling would make it harder to use such witnesses in future sexual assault cases.
辛加斯说，此次的裁决将导致今后的性侵案件更加难以使用此类证人。

“Men who serially sexually exploit their power over women — especially the most vulnerable groups in society — will reap the benefit of today’s decision,” she wrote.
“那些屡屡利用对女性——尤其是在社会最弱势群体中的女性——的权力进行性剥削的男性，会从今天的裁决中受益，”她写道。

Judge Cannataro said the additional witnesses the prosecution had presented had helped upend the still-pervasive notion that a sexual assault must involve “the stereotypical stranger in a dark alley who isolates his victim or waits for her to be alone before launching a violent assault.”
坎纳塔罗说，检方提呈的额外证词有助于推翻一种至今仍普遍存在的观念，即性侵必须包含“黑暗小巷里的陌生人这种刻板元素，要等受害人孤身一人时实施性侵”。

The case clearly caused tension among the court, evident in a series of back-and-forth statements between the judges, with the majority defending itself against the dissenters’ claims that the ruling weakened the ability of accusers to push their cases through the criminal court system.
本案显然在法庭内造成了紧张的对立，这从法官陈词中的针锋相对就能看出来，多数意见方反驳了异议方的说法，认为该裁决并不会削弱提告者在刑事法庭系统内进行诉讼的能力。

“We do not ‘shut eyes to the enduring effect of rape culture on notions of consent, and intent,’” Judge Rivera wrote, referring to part of Judge Singas’s dissent. “On the contrary, consistent with our judicial role, our analysis is grounded on bedrock principles of evidence and the defendant’s constitutional right to the presumption of innocence and a fair trial.”
“我们并没有‘对强奸文化给合意和动机的观念造成的持久影响视而不见’，”里维拉在评价辛加斯的部分异议时写道。“恰恰相反，本着我们的司法职能，我们的分析是建立在证据的基础原则和被告人无罪推定与公平审判的宪法权利之上的。”

Victims and activists are devastated but remain determined.
裁决令受害者和活动人士深感痛苦，但没有动摇他们的意志。

Dawn Dunning, one of the Molineux witnesses who testified against Mr. Weinstein, said she was asked after the ruling if she regretted testifying.
指证韦恩斯坦的“莫里诺证人”之一道恩·邓宁说，裁决后有人问她是否后悔出庭作证。

“My answer is a resounding ‘no,’” she said in a statement. “I am a stronger person for having done so, and I know that other women found strength and courage because I and other Weinstein survivors confronted him publicly. The culture has changed, and I am confident that there is no going back.”
“我的回答是绝对没有，”她在声明中说。“这段经历让我更坚强，我知道别的女性从我和其他与韦恩斯坦公开对质的受害者这里得到了力量与勇气。文化已经被改变，我相信不会再回到老样子。”

She and others encouraged Alvin L. Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, to retry the case. The 2020 case was tried under Cyrus R. Vance Jr., Mr. Bragg’s predecessor. Through a spokeswoman, Mr. Bragg said that he would retry the case.
她和其他人鼓励曼哈顿地区检察官阿尔文·L·布拉格将本案送入复审。这宗2020年案件是在布拉格的前任小塞拉斯·R·凡斯任内审理的。布拉格通过一名发言人表示，他会促成此案的重审。

Ashley Judd, the first actress to come forward with allegations against Mr. Weinstein, called the news “unfair to survivors.”
第一位站出来指控韦恩斯坦的女演员阿什莉·贾德称这个消息“对幸存者不公平”。

“We still live in our truth,” she said. “And we know what happened.”
“我们仍然生活在我们的真相之中，”她说。“我们知道发生了什么。”

Ms. Judd appeared with several other sexual assault survivors and activists on Thursday at a hastily arranged news conference on the 29th floor of the Millennium Hilton in Midtown.
周四在纽约中城千禧希尔顿酒店29层，贾德与其他几名性袭击幸存者和活动人士仓促举行了一场新闻发布会。

Tarana Burke, the founder of #MeToo, said one of the overarching goals of the movement — to get the court system to take sexual assault cases more seriously — is “long, strategic and thoughtful.”
“#我也是”运动创始人塔拉娜·伯克说，该运动的其中一个贯穿始终的目标——让法庭系统更严肃地对待性侵案件——是“长期的、战略性的和经过深思熟虑的”。

“The bad thing about survivors is there are so many of us,” she said. “But the good thing about survivors is that there are so many of us.”
“对于幸存者而言，不利之处在于我们这样的人实在太多了，”她说。“但有利之处在于——我们这样的人实在太多了。”

Mr. Weinstein’s conviction in California still stands.
韦恩斯坦在加州的定罪仍然成立。

Mr. Weinstein, who had been serving a 23-year sentence at Mohawk Correctional Facility in upstate New York, learned about the decision after someone at the prison showed him a news report about the ruling, according to his lawyer, Mr. Aidala.
据韦恩斯特的律师阿依达拉说，在纽约州北部的莫霍克惩戒中心，有人向正在那里服23年徒刑的韦恩斯特展示了相关新闻报道，他因此得知了这项裁决。

He talked to Mr. Aidala just after 10 a.m., about an hour after the ruling came down.
他在上午10点刚过的时候与阿依达拉有过通话，也就是法庭做出裁决大概一小时后。

Mr. Aidala said Mr. Weinstein “wasn’t emotional, like crying,” but he was “very gracious, very grateful.”
阿依达拉说韦恩斯特“没有哭泣之类强烈的情绪反应”，但是他“充满感激与感恩”。

Even with the conviction overturned, Mr. Weinstein is not a free man. He is still facing a 16-year sentence in California, where a jury convicted him in 2022 of raping a woman in a Beverly Hills hotel. He was to serve that term after his New York sentence. Now, he could be transferred to California, but he will most likely be transferred from state prison to Rikers Island, the jail complex in New York City, as he waits for Mr. Bragg to decide whether to push for another trial.
即使判决被推翻，韦恩斯坦也无法获得自由。陪审团于2022年判定他在比佛利山庄一家酒店强奸一名妇女，因此他在加州仍面临16年监禁。他将在纽约州服刑期满后继续服刑。目前他存在被转往加州的可能性，但最大的可能是从州立监狱转到纽约市的莱克斯岛监狱综合体，等待布拉格决定是否要求再次审判。

… But he will soon appeal it.
……但他很快就会上诉。

After Thursday’s decision came down, Mr. Weinstein’s lawyer in California, Jennifer Bonjean, said she expected the ruling to help him when he appeals his California conviction on May 20.
周四的判决公布后，韦恩斯坦在加州的律师珍妮佛·邦吉恩说，她希望这一裁决能在他5月20日上诉加州判决时对他有所帮助。

A jury in Los Angeles Superior Court deadlocked on charges of sexual battery by restraint, forcible oral copulation and forcible rape in December 2022. Those charges were related to accusations brought by Jennifer Siebel Newsom, a documentary filmmaker and the wife of Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, and Lauren Young, a model and screenwriter.
2022年12月，洛杉矶高等法院的陪审团在通过限制人身进行性攻击、强迫口交和暴力强奸指控上陷入僵局。这些指控与纪录片编导、加州州长加文·纽森的妻子詹妮弗·希贝尔·纽森和模特兼编剧劳伦·杨提出的指控有关。

But the jury found Mr. Weinstein guilty on three other counts — rape, forcible oral sex and sexual penetration — involving an Italian actress who testified that he attacked her in a hotel room in 2013. The jury acquitted Mr. Weinstein of one count of sexual battery involving a massage therapist.
但陪审团认定韦恩斯坦另外三项强奸、强迫口交和性侵罪名成立，这些罪名涉及一名意大利女演员，她作证称韦恩斯坦于2013年在一家酒店房间里性侵了她。陪审团宣判韦恩斯坦对一名按摩治疗师的性攻击罪名不成立。

In that case, as in New York, prosecutors were allowed to use witnesses who accused Mr. Weinstein of sex crimes that he had not been charged with. However, the laws around such witnesses are different in California.
和在纽约一样，在那起案件中，检察官获准使用没有正式指控的性犯罪相关的证词。然而，在加州，关于这类证人的法律是不同的。

Jurors in the California trial were “overwhelmed with this bad character evidence that was not legitimate, that tainted the whole trial in California from our perspective,” Ms. Bonjean said.
邦吉恩说，加州庭审的陪审员“被这些不合法的不良品行证据搞得不知所措，从我们的角度来看，这些证据玷污了加州的整个庭审”。
本新闻网址：https://www.geilien.cn/news/2024/nyweinstein.html

Jodi Kantor、Jan Ransom、Chelsia Rose Marcius和Hurubie Meko对本文有报道贡献。

Maria Cramer是时报记者，报道纽约警察部门和纽约市及其周边地区的犯罪新闻。点击查看更多关于她的信息。

翻译：纽约时报中文网