Harvey Weinstein arrives at the First Precinct in lower Manhattan, May 25, 2018. Photo: David Handschuh/NYLJ)

Fighting to maintain its sexual assault case against former movie producer Harvey Weinstein, the Manhattan District Attorney’s office argues in papers filed on Monday that while one of six counts against fallen Hollywood titan has been dismissed, the evidence supporting the remaining counts is strong.

The Manhattan DA’s filing is a response to Weinstein’s latest motion to dismiss, in which Weinstein argues that alleged police misconduct has tainted the grand jury proceedings in the case. Weinstein still faces two counts of predatory sexual assault, which carries a maximum penalty of life in prison.

Last month, the Manhattan DA’s office moved to dismiss one count of first-degree criminal sexual act when it was revealed that New York City Police Det. Nicholas DiGaudio, who led the investigation against Weinstein, did not tell prosecutors that a witness had provided him with an account that contradicted that of Lucia Evans, who claimed that Weinstein forced her to give him oral sex in 2004.

The dismissal of the criminal sexual act charge removed Evans as one of the accusers in the criminal case against Weinstein, leaving Mimi Haleyi, a production assistant who says the producer forced himself on her in 2006 and an accuser who is unnamed in court filings who says that Weinstein assaulted her in 2013.

Prosecutors later disclosed that DiGaudio told the 2013 accuser to delete files from cellphones that she was handing over as evidence in the case.

Weinstein argues that prosecutors should have presented grand jurors with communiques between Weinstein and the unnamed accuser from after the alleged assault that he says shows that the two had a consensual romantic relationship. He also says that, because the testimony undergirding the dismissed count was allegedly based on false testimony, that the whole case should get thrown out.

In response, Assistant District Attorney Kevin Wilson argued in court filings that the disclosures about alleged misconduct by DiGaudio do not show that the testimony supporting the criminal sexual act count was false and that it had no bearing on the strength of the remaining five counts.

Wilson said his office is not required to show exculpatory evidence to the grand jury, citing a 1986 ruling by the Court of Appeals in which the court said that a defendant can present exculpatory evidence to a grand jury through his or her own testimony.

Weinstein did not testify before the grand jury in the case, saying he was not given adequate notice to prepare for testimony.

With respect to a request from Weinstein for a hearing on issues raised in his motion to dismiss, Wilson said that Weinstein wants a hearing to put on a “public circus that will further the public relations campaign the defendant has been waging from the outset of this case.”

In response to the new filing from the prosecution, Benjamin Brafman of Brafman & Associates, lead counsel for Weinstein, said nothing in the new filing gives him additional confidence in the integrity of the grand jury proceedings.

“As for the hearing that the People fear will become a ‘circus,’ it is a circus that they created with the DA and the NYPD calling each other liars,” Brafman said.

Read more:

Harvey Weinstein Moves to Dismiss Remaining Sexual Assault Charges

Challenges Mounting for Manhattan DA in Harvey Weinstein Prosecution

Court Tosses Charge Against Harvey Weinstein as Brafman Faults NYPD Handling of an Accuser's Account