In the Weinstein case, Brafman has already said that he will file a motion to dismiss, and has said that the case is legally and factually deficient. The defense is also likely to argue that Vance was under political pressure to prosecute Weinstein.
“That’s more an argument for the court of public opinion,” said Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School.
In other high-profile prosecutions, a defense attorney might be expected to seek a change of venue, arguing that pre-trial publicity had tainted the jury pool. But it will be hard to find anyone, anywhere, who hasn’t heard of this case.
“There’s no venue to hide in,” said Daniel Hochheiser, a criminal defense attorney in New York. “Hopefully you can come up with 12 people who say, ‘I’ve heard about it, but I’m not going to let that prejudice my analysis in the courtroom.’”