The German newspaper FAZ reports:

Die Ankläger erreichte eine schriftliche Stellungnahme der früheren Nachwuchsschauspielerin Lucia Evans. Darin beschrieb Evans den Oralsex mit Weinstein in dessen Büro im New Yorker Viertel Tribeca als einvernehmlich.
my translation: The prosecution has received written testimony from the former actress Lucia Evans. In it Evans describes the oral sex with Weinstein in his office in Tribeca, New York as consensual.

Vox on the other hand reports:

Evans maintains that she is telling the truth. “The decision to throw away my client’s sexual assault charges says nothing about Weinstein’s guilt or innocence. Nor does it reflect on Lucia’s consistent allegation that she was sexually assaulted with force by Harvey Weinstein,” said her attorney Carrie Goldberg in a statement. [...]

And ABC News reports:

Prosecutors said in a Sept. 12 letter to the defense unsealed last week that they discovered an account after Weinstein's arrest that could suggest the encounter was consensual.
"According to the Witness...the Complainant [Evans] told the Witness that...the Complainant had gone to the defendant's office, where the Defendant told her, in substance, that he would arrange for the Complainant to receive an acting job if she agreed to perform oral sex upon him," the letter said. "According to the Witness, the Complainant told her that she thereupon performed oral sex on the defendant."

So according to Vox, Evans still says that the originally told the truth. According to ABC News, the prosecution send a letter to the defense, saying that an unnamed witness claimed to have heard that Evens said that it was consensual. According to FAZ, Evens wrote a letter saying that it was consensual. Did the FAZ misunderstand the issue, did Vox wrongly report on this, or are both stories true (ie they refer to two distinct letters)?

  • The second half of your second quote is not contained in the link you provided. -- I think you're confusing letters here. The FAZ report is about a letter received by the prosecutors, your (unsourced) quote talks about a letter sent by the prosecutors to the defense.
    – DevSolar
    Commented Oct 23, 2018 at 9:41
  • 2
    It's worth noting that even if she consented Weinstein still broke the law by conditioning an offer of employment on the performance of a sexual act.
    – phoog
    Commented Oct 23, 2018 at 16:23
  • 1
    It's also worth noting that settlements may require victims to issue false statements about the original accusations. Bill O'Reilly is an example: "Ms. Mackris was required to disclaim the materials 'as counterfeit and forgeries' if they ever became public."
    – ceejayoz
    Commented Oct 24, 2018 at 2:27
  • 1
    @ceejayoz AFaik there wasn't a settlement in this case. But if this case is true (which I don't believe as I was still unable to find a confirming source), cofounding factors such as that should be included in a good answer.
    – tim
    Commented Oct 24, 2018 at 6:40
  • 1
    @ceejayoz Yes, I definitely agree with you on that and think it's important to point this out, so thanks for your comment!
    – tim
    Commented Oct 24, 2018 at 12:39


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .