A private investigator was called to testify on January 24, 2020, a Friday afternoon during the Harvey Weistein trial.
An investigator for the company Guidepost Solutions, was called in as a witness by the state. The private investigator said he was approached directly by Weinstein to investigate people he believed were talking to journalists about his sexual conduct with women.
Questioned by Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Joan Illuzzi, the investigator said he received a call directly from Weinstein a few years ago and during that 20-minute call, Weinstein sounded “agitated,” “stressed” and “not happy.” Following that call, the investigator said he had a conversation with an attorney for Weinstein, and also received an email directly from Weinstein regarding specific actions he wanted him to take.
Ultimately, the investigator did not conduct the investigation. He said he was unaware if anyone else conducted the investigation.
The investigator explained that he received an email from Weinstein with an attachment that was referred to as the “red flag list,” which was a document with names and information about those people. Weinstein typed in the email to the investigator, “The red flags are the first to call.
Among the many names on the list and highlighted in red was actress Annabella Sciorra who testified Thursday that Weinstein raped her. (Weinstein’s defense team says Sciorra’s story is not true, and Weinstein has always maintained that all of his sexual relationships were consensual.)
Asked by Illuzzi if Weinstein asked him to investigate certain people, The investigator responded, “Yes.” Asked if the subject matter of the investigation was Weinstein’s sexual conduct toward women, the investigator replied, “Generally, yes.”
The investigator explained that Weinstein believed journalists were working on stories that “discussed his sexual conduct in a negative way,” which was the cause of Weinstein’s concern.
One of Weinstein’s attorneys, Arthur Aidala, said Weinstein had approached the investigator to investigate because he believed people on the list were going to extort him. When Aidala questioned the investigator, he said he had a clear recollection of Weinstein saying he was being extorted.
“He said he was worried someone would be extorting him,” the investigator said on the stand.
“Was it Annabella?” Illuzzi asked. “No,” he replied.
“Did he say who it was?” Illuzzi followed up. “He did,” the investigator replied.
“Who?” Illuzzi asked. The investigator responded, “A woman named Rose McGowan.”
Wrapping up the conversation, Illuzzi’s final question was, “When you spoke to Mr. Weinstein himself, was his concern that people were talking to journalists about his sexual conduct against women?” The investigator replied, “Yes, among other things.”
Why would this investigator give such a revealing leading answers such as this one, amongst all the other responses, to the prosecutor? Was he looking to sensationalize his replies for media attention later on?
As investigators, the objective is always to protect the client, without embellishing or sensationalizing the facts. Stating you are the # 1 Private Investigative Firm on the stand, yet displaying imcompetence as testimony, is NOT doing the right thing nor placing you as an investigator in that category!…
With over 65 years of former Federal, State & Local Investigative combined service experience, not one of our private investigators would of testified in this manner. Maybe, its the difference between REAL New York Private Investigators and investigators from other parts of our country.
So the reason for this blog, is to ensure our future clients, as well as other possible future clients seeking a Criminal Defense Investigator, to due your own due diligence on the private investigator you plan to hire. Just because they claim to be the BEST doesn’t always make it so.
If you have a criminal or personal matter you need to discuss, we offer a FREE confidential consultation by phone 24/7….
@ Copyright 2021