Explosive 'New Yorker' piece sheds more light on Harvey Weinstein's payouts -- and his brother's involvement

A new New Yorker article provides a more detailed look at the legal gymnastics employed by Harvey Weinstein and Miramax to silence victims of Weinstein's alleged sexual assault and harassment. A former employee described her exhausting experience trying to accuse and persecute Weinstein for allegedly assaulting her assistant, a twisted ordeal that ended in a payoff from Bob Weinstein's personal bank account.

One of the most damning parts of the piece is that Bob Weinstein, who previously claimed to be unaware of his brother's history of sexual misconduct, paid off two women from his personal bank account as if to absolve Miramax of any involvement.

This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed.

Bob Weinstein confirmed to the New Yorker that he made the payments, but that he wasn't fully aware of the circumstances; he thought his brother was having affairs, consensual ones, but a Miramax executive said that isn't believable; the harassment allegations were reported to the company.

Where the recent deluge of public accusations have finally shattered Weinstein's professional persona, the years of accusations behind closed doors seemingly did nothing to curtail his behavior. On the contrary, paying off his victims made it possible for Weinstein to continue his awful behavior.

Weinstein's lawyers repeated his current statement: He never engaged in any non-consensual sexual behavior and that any such accusations are untrue (over 100 women have accused Weinstein of unwanted sexual advances).

“Repeat offenders are able to operate under a cloak of silence with the help of nondisclosure agreements,” NYU law professor Samuel Estreicher told the New Yorker. Weinstein's former assistant Zelda Perkins, one of the women paid by Bob Weinstein, said she spent years trying to curtail his advances and attempt to rectify his behavior.

"What I want to talk about at this point is not what Harvey did,” she said in the article. “It’s more about the system that protected him and that enabled him, because that’s the only thing that we can change. Money and power enabled, and the legal system has enabled. Ultimately, the reason Harvey Weinstein followed the route he did is because he was allowed to, and that’s our fault. As a culture, that’s our fault.”

Many of Weinstein's employees and victims were subject to lifetime nondisclosure agreements that prohibited them from literally ever speaking about what they had witnessed and worked with.

“People should not be made to live with that," said former employee Irwin Reiter. "He’s created so many victims that have been burdened for so many years, and it’s just not right.”

The New Yorker has previous reported on the complex and convoluted network Weinstein had in place to protect his sexual misconduct while racking up accolades and reputability for Miramax in the film industry. Many who were part of this have issued statements or resigned since Weinstein's public exposure.

Read the full New Yorker piece here.