Voz media US Voz.us
Apple store Voz-media Play store Voz Media

Disney and CAA deny having covered up Harvey Weinstein's attacks on Julia Ormond

The companies are asking that the lawsuit filed by the British actress against them last October be dismissed since they were not aware of the former producer's sexual misconduct.

A la izquierda: la actriz británica Julia Ormond en una foto publicada en 2020. A la derecha: el ex productor Harvey Weinstein en una imagen publicada en 2015.

(Cordon Press)

Published by
Rosana Rábago Sainz

Walt Disney Corporation and Creative Artist Agency (CAA) denied having covered up Harvey Weinstein's attacks on Julia Ormond. This past October, the British actress sued both companies as well as Miramax, a company belonging to Walt Disney Corporation, because neither, according to the actress in the lawsuit filed against them, "did nothing to protect her":

The men at CAA who represented Ormond knew about Weinstein. So too did Weinstein’s employers at Miramax and Disney. Brazenly, none of these prominent companies warned Ormond that Weinstein had a history of assaulting women because he was too important, too powerful, and made them too much money.

However, both companies asked that the lawsuit against them be dismissed since they had no knowledge of the former American producer's sexual misconduct. They did so in two independent legal documents in which both acknowledge that they were unaware of the attacks that Weinstein had carried out. For this reason, they have asked the New York Supreme Court to dismiss the lawsuit that Ormond filed against them two months ago.

Walt Disney Corporation defended itself by claiming that they had acquired Weinstein's company, Miramax, in 1993. However, this was always a separate corporate entity and therefore, the mouse company did not have to supervise the behavior of the then American producer, especially if it was outside of working hours. This is what Disney lawyers argued in a document to which Variety obtained access:

If courts imposed a new duty on employers to supervise everything employees do in their private lives that has any connection to their careers, there could be no limit to liability for employers and no end to surveillance of employees.

"CAA did not have that knowledge about Weinstein"

The argument from ignorance is the same one that CAA uses. The company's lawyers assured that, at that time, they did not have "that knowledge about Weinstein" and for that reason, they went ahead and organized the business dinner between the former producer and the British actress, according to Breaking News:

It is now widely known that Harvey Weinstein committed multiple sexual assaults and that his deplorable conduct had a devastating impact on many women. But prior to Plaintiff’s alleged assault by Weinstein in December 1995, which is the only timeframe relevant to Plaintiff’s claims against Creative Artists Agency, CAA did not have that knowledge about Weinstein. CAA thus had no reason to believe there was any risk to Plaintiff in arranging a business dinner with Weinstein.

Harvey Weinstein is currently serving a 23-year sentence in a New York prison after being convicted of sexual assault. His sentence was extended last February in Los Angeles, when another 16 years in prison were added for another case of sexual assault.

It remains to be seen if Julia Ormond's lawsuit will go forward and if the New York Supreme Court will dismiss the accusations against Walt Disney Corporation and CAA. Both companies presented legal documents on Tuesday, claiming to have no prior knowledge of the former producer's inappropriate sexual conduct.

tracking