Debra L Rothenberg
Former Scientologist Leah Remini is anticipated to testify on Monday at director Paul Haggis’ rape trial after a decide allowed his protection staff to name her as a last-minute witness.
The actress, podcast host, and creator of Troublemaker: Surviving Hollywood and Scientology, is anticipated to deal with the court docket on Monday by way of a reside steam.
“That’s what I’m anticipating,” Haggis’ lawyer Seth Zuckerman advised The Day by day Beast. “I can’t make any guarantees. Nothing’s particular.”
Shortly earlier than 11 a.m. Friday, Decide Sabrina Kraus dismissed the jury to debate the potential of Remini testifying.
Haggis, a former Scientologist, who publicly defected from the faith in 2009 after 35 years as a church member, has argued the controversial faith conjured the civil rape case in opposition to him as a part of a coordinated vendetta to defame him over his whistleblowing efforts.
In September, Kraus dominated Haggis may argue that the Church of Scientology had invented the sexual assault case.
“Leah Remini would testify principally about two subjects,” Haggis’ lawyer Priya Chaudhry advised Kraus. “She is, if not primary and quantity two, enemies of Scientology and issues they’ve carried out to her and the best way that Scientology has carried out these items—her private expertise with the varied ways used to destroy her.”
Actress Leah Remini indicators copies of her new ebook Troublemaker: Surviving Hollywood and Scientology.
Paul Archuleta
Chaudhry additionally indicated Remini would function a personality witness.
“She was born into Scientology and likewise form of born into Hollywood, and in each of these communities she may be very aware of Mr. Haggis’ repute relating to any aggression or violence in the direction of girls,” Chaudhry defined.
Breest’s counsel Zoe Salzman, nonetheless, interjected, echoing the decide’s issues that Remini’s testimony could possibly be repetitive.
“I don’t assume Ms. Remini’s private expertise is any extra related to this case than Mr. Rinder’s, or Melissa Haggis’ or Mr. Haggis,” Salzman argued. “None of those witnesses are drawing any connection to Scientology and this case and due to this fact it's cumulative. We’ve heard again and again that this can be a horrible group that does horrible issues.”
Salzman blasted the protection staff’s Scientology protection as “scandalous,” referring to the likelihood Remini may testify as “duplicate testimony” on the “eleventh hour.”
Kraus, nonetheless, sided with Haggis’ authorized staff, indicating she would permit Remini to testify.
Ex-Scientology spokesperson and high-ranking govt Mike Rinder testified final week on Haggis’ behalf, telling a jury that Remini, Haggis, and himself have been amongst Scientology’s top-three public enemies.
Rinder and Remini, who hosted the A&E Emmy-winning collection Leah Remini: Scientology and the Aftermath, beforehand launched a joint assertion additionally accusing the Church of Scientology of producing the case.
“We count on the following ‘revelations’ about Paul Haggis on this marketing campaign to destroy him to be based mostly on data culled from his Scientology recordsdata within the type of extra ‘nameless’ accusers, hiding behind a lawyer who won't ever must disclose who's paying their invoice,” their earlier assertion learn.
TV character Mike Rinder (L) and actress Leah Remini (R) attend the Emmy Awards in 2018.
Paul Archuleta
Haggis was grilled for a second straight day Friday by protection legal professionals representing a former publicist who accused the Crash director of raping her at his penthouse suite in 2013.
Legal professional Ilann Maazel opened his second day of cross-examination by tersely quizzing the Hollywood producer in regards to the hours main as much as the alleged sexual assault of Haleigh Breest, a former publicist who accused him of raping her at his SoHo loft after a Manhattan movie premiere afterparty in 2013.
Minutes into cross-examination, Maazel confirmed a photograph of actress Catherine Zeta-Jones hugging Haggis on the afterparty for the premiere of 2013 thriller Aspect Results, hours earlier than the alleged sexual assault occurred.
“You didn’t assume Catherine Zeta-Jones was romantically excited about you probably did you?” Maazel requested.
“No,” Haggis replied.
“She was simply being pleasant in your opinion?” Maazel responded.
“We’re shut pals,” Haggis stated.
The soirée in query had been attended by numerous A-list celebrities together with Michael Douglas and Jude Regulation. Breest, who on the time labored as a publicist for Cinema Society, the group internet hosting the occasion, which repeatedly catered pink carpet occasions with a rotating solid of Hollywood fixtures, was 26 on the time.
Paul Haggis referred to Catherine Zeta-Jones as a detailed pal in court docket.
Craig Barritt
Haggis testified he first noticed Breest when arriving on the after-party the place the pair shared a fast hug. Haggis stated the pair had exchanged “flirtatious” work-related emails for numerous months prior.
“We met and hugged however not on the door,” Haggis stated.
“And shortly after that, you went to talk with Jude Regulation?” Maazel requested.
“Someday three or 4 minutes after that, sure,” Haggis stated.
Maazel additionally sparred with Haggis over his sexual habits, whether or not he used lubricant, stored condoms in his house, his vasectomy, and his interpretation of consent—and notably the that means of the phrase ‘no.’
“When you have been making an attempt to drag off Ms. Breest’s tights, Ms. Breest stated the phrase ‘no,’ appropriate?:
“Sure, she used the phrase,” Haggis said.
“She stated ‘no’ two or 3 times, appropriate?” Maazel countered.
“As part of a sentence, sure,” Haggis testified.
“In accordance with you, she didn't say ‘no’ in the best way that one means ‘no,’ appropriate?” Maazel requested.
“She didn't say ‘no, cease’, that’s appropriate,” Haggis stated.
“‘No’ doesn't at all times imply ‘no’ to you, is that truthful?” Maazel stated sharply, to which Haggis’ lawyer Priya Chaudhry promptly objected, earlier than Decide Sabrina Kraus sustained.
Haggis and Breest’s lawyer then clashed over whether or not the filmmaker had vaginally penetrated Breest along with his penis, seizing on a 2019 deposition assertion the place the screenwriter stated he had “no reminiscence” of it, regardless of definitively denying on the stand Thursday he’d ever had sexual activity along with her.
“And also you advised Ms. Breest you had a vasectomy earlier than you penetrated her vagina along with your penis? Maazel requested him.
“I can’t reply that ‘sure’ or ‘no,’” Haggis answered. “I've no recollection of penetrating her with my penis. I may need.”
“You don’t know whether or not or not you stated to Ms. Breest, ‘you’re good and tight’”?
“I don’t assume I ever stated that,” Haggis replied.
In court docket on Thursday, Haggis had testified that Breest appeared to look “bashful” and “cartoony” through the alleged tryst, evaluating her demeanor to the cartoon Betty Boop and Roger Rabbit character Jessica Rabbit. At one level, Breest’s protection staff displayed pictures of each cartoon characters for the jury, which is made up of six girls and three males.
“Are you conscious Betty Boop is taken into account to be a sexist and degrading cartoon character?” Maazel requested as a black and white picture of the animated character posed suggestively in a brief black costume flashed throughout courtroom screens.
Chaudhry objected to Maazel’s inquiry on basis of rumour, which Decide Sabrina Kraus sustained.
A second, suggestive picture of Jessica Rabbit in a pink costume, pink heels, and arm-length purple gloves with legs crossed was additionally displayed for jurors.
4 different girls have additionally come ahead alleging Haggis raped or tried to sexually assault them between 1996 and 2015. On Thursday, the Canadian screenwriter instantly denied the allegations on the stand.
“I don’t know why girls—or anybody—would lie about issues like this, make up or twist the reality,” Haggis stated in court docket Thursday.
Haggis once more instantly addressed accusations throughout his cross-examination Friday.
Haggis’ members of the family, together with his son, three daughters, and his ex-wife Dallas actress Deborah Rennard, in addition to different supporters of the Million Greenback Child author, packed two courtroom gallery benches and stoically listened to the Canadian screenwriter’s third straight day of testimony.
Paul Haggis and former spouse, actress Deborah Rennard in 2010.
Charles Eshelman
Earlier than court docket adjourned for the day, Haggis’ attorneys referred to as the week’s ultimate character witness, a California novelist who labored as Haggis’ assistant for 23 years, to take the stand.
Gian Schwehr, 48, testified that the Quantum of Solace author’s alleged conduct within the case was inconsistent along with her longtime private relationship with him and information of his conduct. She testified that she’d by no means seen Haggis act violently or inappropriately in the direction of girls.
“On this case, Ms. Breest claims that Mr. Haggis violently raped her,” Zuckerman requested Schwehr. “Is that constant of your information with Mr. Haggis?”
“No,” Schwehr, who remains to be employed by Haggis, stated.
“Does that change your opinion of him?” Zuckerman requested her.
“No,” she replied.
“Why?” Zuckerman stated.
“That doesn’t match,” Schwehr added.
Haggis declined to touch upon his three days of testimony.
Breest’s attorneys, nonetheless, characterised Haggis’ testimony in his protection as “damning.”
“He’s one of many least credible witnesses I’ve seen in 25 years of observe,” Maazel advised The Day by day Beast exterior court docket. “He appears to haven't any reminiscence of a very powerful information within the case.”
“We nearly didn’t must cross-examine him,” Salzman added.
Closing arguments are anticipated to get underway Wednesday.
After 13 days of trial proceedings, nonetheless, Haggis’ legal professionals have struggled to instantly join the sexual assault allegations involving Breest to the “excessive” faith’s “soiled tips.”
Breest’s legal professionals, in the meantime, have labeled Haggis’ Scientology protection as a smokescreen designed to distract jurors.
“[It’s] pathetic, absurd, ridiculous, embarrassing,” Breest’s lawyer Ilann Maazel advised The Day by day Beast exterior court docket in October. “This complete Scientology concept is an effort to distract the jury from the precise case, the precise proof. This isn't a case about Scientology. This can be a case about what Paul Haggis did to Haleigh Breest.”
The Church of Scientology has additionally firmly refuted Haggis’ accusations involving the non secular group's alleged ties to the sexual assault case—or having any affiliation with any of the case’s victims. Karin Pouw, a Scientology spokesperson, as a substitute accused Haggis of “penning false tales in regards to the Church for a decade” to “cowl up” his “unhealthy deeds.”
“The Church has nothing to do with the claims in opposition to Haggis nor does it have any relation to the attorneys behind the case of the accusers,” Karin Pouw, a Scientology spokesperson beforehand advised The Day by day Beast in a press release. “The Church has nothing to do with the claims in opposition to Haggis nor does it have any relation to his accusers.”