Paz de la Huerta’s therapy sessions are being used against her in her rape case

2015 Tribeca Film Festival premiere - 'Bare'

In the middle of the Predator Storm, Paz de la Huerta shared her story. Paz told Vanity Fair that Harvey Weinstein had raped her twice in her own apartment in 2010 – the acts of rape were months apart, but in the same calendar year. Paz’s story garnered a lot of sympathy and interest for many reasons, one of which is that her story was one of the most recent chronologically in the decades of Harvey Weinstein’s predations. Paz went to the New York police to give a statement, and it was said the NYPD were investigating her story. It was said that the cops were hopeful that Paz’s case would be the most prosecutable, because 2010 doesn’t fall outside of the statute of limitations on sex crimes. But because this is Peak 2017 and every woman has to go through a mountain of bullsh-t, sources now tell TMZ that cops are no longer hopeful that charges will ever be brought against Weinstein in Paz’s case.

Harvey Weinstein is under investigation for allegedly raping Paz de la Huerta on 2 occasions, but law enforcement sources tell TMZ a prosecution is highly unlikely. De la Huerta says in November 2010, Weinstein went to her apartment, pushed her on the bed, lifted her skirt and raped her. She says in late December, Weinstein showed up again in her hotel lobby, she asked him to leave but he ended up in her apartment and he raped her again.

Law enforcement sources tell us there are problems with the case. The fact that it’s more than 7 years old creates issues, including memory of events. Our sources say the case is made even more difficult by the fact that the actress had repeated interactions with Weinstein between the first and second alleged rape.

De la Huerta has said she told her therapist about the rapes, but our law enforcement sources say it’s not as clear as that. Law enforcement is aware of a correspondence in which the therapist recollects the 2010 session this way: “I recall you reporting to me a sexual encounter with Harvey Weinstein involving intercourse in your apartment in 2010 that resulted in you feeling victimized. I recall you telling me that it felt coercive to you and that you didn’t want to have sex with him, but felt you had to as he was a man of power and rank and you couldn’t say no to his sexual advances.”

Our law enforcement sources say the therapist’s recollections do not show a lack of consent sufficient to prove rape. One source said the weaknesses in the case don’t mean she wasn’t raped, but the standard of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is extremely high and prosecutors don’t want to take a case to trial if the proof doesn’t meet the legal standard.

[From TMZ]

This is all so problematic on so many levels. One, imagine going to a therapist to deal with the trauma of being raped twice in your own home. Imagine your therapist’s notes of your sessions becoming public, and imagine those notes being used against you because you didn’t use the right terminology IN THERAPY. Imagine having to associate with your rapist at work functions and being judged on your body language because clearly, yours is the story that needs to be nit-picked. And what’s with all of these prosecutors from here to New York to LA being so shy about bringing charges? Maybe a trial will result in a conviction, maybe not. But all of these women deserve their day in court and they deserve to be heard. It feels like the next big conversation in Sex Predatorgate 2017 is going to be “what changes need to be made in law enforcement and prosecutors’ offices around the country to ensure that victims can come forward freely, and that their cases are prosecuted fully?”

The Art Of Elysium And Samsung Galaxy Present Marina Abramovic's HEAVEN - Red Carpet

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

60 Responses to “Paz de la Huerta’s therapy sessions are being used against her in her rape case”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Snazzy says:

    Oh my god. I don’t even understand how this is possible

  2. Boxy Lady says:

    Hmmmm. Remind me again why so many don’t report sexual assaults and rapes?

    • David says:

      Awful but true. I am a police officer and and the system is stacked.

      • guilty pleasures says:

        @David, me too. I can’t tell you how many sexual assault charges I had stayed because Crown didn’t think there was a likelihood of conviction. This is after I had attended the scene, took the statement from the distraught victim, obtained a SANE (sexual assault nurse exam) kit, the whole freakin’ nine. It broke my heart every time.
        On a different note, when I first saw Paz as an actor in Boardwalk Empire I thought to myself, ‘that woman has sexual assault in her history.’ There is something remarkably sad about her.

  3. Millenial says:

    That’s so sad. I’m also sort of disturbed that her therapists notes could be confiscated by investigators. Did she give permission for that?

    I think we also have to consider that the therapist may be bringing their own interpretation of events to the notes. Therapists are not blank slates and are often not neutral parties, despite how much the profession might endeavor to be so.

  4. Josie says:

    In the U.K. consent has to be given for confidential medical notes to be released in court cases, I would assume the same goes for the US.

    Though the article says that law enforcement “is aware of” the therapist’s notes, wth does that mean?

    • MC2 says:

      In the US, once you accuse someone of rape or assault then you also must give consent for ALL your stuff to be an open book. I went through a rape case & his lawyer subpoenaed my therapy records, doctors records and my diaries. My diaries from when I was a kid that everyone knew I had. It was a “choice” I had to give up all my privacy or the rape case would be over since it showed that I wasn’t willing to be tried myself. Then I’d prolly be blamed when he did it again so I soldiered on & was re-victimized by his attorney in a room full of men in suits & a video camera in my face to record every fantasy (& boy) that I ever had in my diaries. It sucks and is a no f-ing win situation. He did some jail time so I got that feather in my cap but it’s a bleak consolation prize.
      There are no perfect victims, our system is not concerned with the victims & the perp’s attorneys use that over & over & over.

      • Aren says:

        This is one of the most horrible things I’ve ever heard.
        My (poor) 3rd world country judges on clothes and life-style, number of sexual partners and age of first sexual encounter at the most, but journals?!, that’s a whole different level of evil.

      • Rene Besette says:

        That is horrifying for you and for Paz as well, I think that is disgusting that a woman can not have a safe place to talk after a sexual assault. This has to change for women and I hope this is the time to do so. Thank you for your courage for going through that vile trial, know that I, among many think it was brave and honorable. Blessed Be with you both.

      • Wurstfingers says:

        What? The? Fuck? This is simply not okay, that there are no words to express how much this is not okay. I am so sorry that you and others had/have to deal with this. How do survivors even stay human in this world???

  5. AGirlAbroad says:

    Omg poor Paz..this is sickening. She didn’t use the right words and / language? Disgusting to shift the blame to her not using the correct language smfh. I’m still behind her 100%. Victim shaming is not ok.

  6. Milla says:

    We also know that therapist can alter tapes. Or anyone else who has enough money…

    This is so disturbing…

  7. Sky says:

    What I want to know is how the F*ck her therapist’s notes became public. Also why is nothing being done about Law enforcement leaking information to TMZ about a case.

  8. tealily says:

    What? I don’t understand. Did she approve of these notes being released? How is this happening?

  9. MAC says:

    This doesn’t surprise me. I am saddened that the LAW in this country does not apply to everyone. I am tired of the 1% being above the law. I do not want HIM to walk around free.

  10. Betsy says:

    I hope that disgusting therapist is run out of his or her professional associations on a rail.

    Dollars to donuts, Paz had the bad luck to find one of those delightful folk who never believes any woman and wrote their twisted notes accordingly.

    This is maddening.

  11. Annabelle Bronstein says:

    “I recall you reporting to me a sexual encounter with Harvey Weinstein involving intercourse in your apartment in 2010 that resulted in you feeling victimized. I recall you telling me that it felt coercive to you and that you didn’t want to have sex with him, but felt you had to as he was a man of power and rank and you couldn’t say no to his sexual advances.”

    I think the NYPD needs a few lessons on consent. What about this statement could be used against her?

  12. Midigo says:

    Best therapist in town (eyeroll).

    • Veronica says:

      The therapist honestly isn’t doing anything wrong. He/She is being careful to avoid using trigger words like “rape” while attempting to convey the information in as neutral a method as possible. Notice that he/she emphasizes that Paz felt coerced and that the power dynamics did not favor her ability to properly consent. They may support Paz, but they can’t utilize dramatic emotional tactics on the stand unless they want the opposing counsel to argue it should be struck from the record for being biased.

      • Wiffie says:

        Calling rape rape isn’t using “dramatic emotional tactics” jfc.

        Reducing a crime it to technical terms to purposefully NOT elicit emotional response for something that by nature elicits emotional response is a dangerous manipulation. the response to rape is such because it is THAT DAMAGING OF A CRIME. if thinking about it is that difficult, imagine living it.

      • Veronica says:

        You seem to be under the impression that I agree with how she is being treated. I do not. My point is that the therapist may be using neutral language to *protect the client.* I don’t like it, but I can see why they may be doing it to avoid the defense stating that they aren’t being impartial in their responses. For all we know, they may be concerned about Paz herself being triggered in the court room given the stress of the proceedings. Their statement isn’t enough to draw direct conclusions about their motivations, which is why I don’t think the psychologist is necessarily an asshole for their statement.

        Both my mother and my sister are victims of sexual assault. My mother was molested by a stepparent. My sister was raped when she was sixteen. I am not saying this because I find this behavior acceptable or because I think those statements are legitimately dramatic. I am using that terminology to express how I’ve seen defense lawyers manipulate witness statements to use against the prosecution. It’s not fair. It is, in fact, exceptionally cruel. But they are there to a job, and a lot of them do not care how they get it done.

  13. LizLemonGotMarried says:

    Did we decide that all those horrible stories that went around about Paz were being spread by everyone’s favorite Hollywood Predator? I feel so terrible for her that she had her life and career derailed by that f*cker, and now to go through this has to feel like another violation.

  14. Veronica says:

    They’re legally allowed to do it, though. My sister had to drop part of a damages lawsuit for mental health care because the opposing counsel wanted all of her information released in order to verify whether the car accident that disabled her was really the source of her depression. They can’t access the information without approval from the client, but once they’re given permission, they have free access to utilize it. I get why it’s applicable, but it’s still such a massive violation of a person’s private life.

    • CooCoo Catchoo says:

      I had a close friend, a cop, who was killed on duty by a drunk driver. My friend had been taking a prescribed antidepressant at the time of his death. The defense used that information during trial to try and “prove” that Gary’s reaction time was impaired at the time of his death. Never mind the fact that the gentleman who hit him was wayyyy over the legal alcohol limit, as he’d been out celebrating the completion of his training to be a firefighter. Disgusting.

  15. smee says:

    “sexual encounter … that resulted in you feeling victimized.”

    “felt coercive ”

    ” couldn’t say no to his sexual advances”

    If these words don’t equal rape, then we need to redefine it

  16. nicegirl says:

    I am appalled. I actually thought HIPAA protected our private medical information.

    HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) is United States legislation that provides data privacy and security provisions for safeguarding medical information.

    WTF, America??

  17. Pinetree13 says:

    I could rage cry over this. WTF this is so wrong.

    We support you Paz!!!

  18. KBeth says:

    As if the actual assault wasn’t demeaning enough, now the victim has to deal with this nonsense.
    Makes me incredibly sad and angry.

  19. gobo says:

    I don’t doubt Paz, and I admire her fortitude in going to make a statement, but they would have crucified her on the witness stand.

  20. Veronica says:

    Okay, I see a lot of people on here aren’t aware of how the legalities of these sorts of cases tend to work. Let me explain a few things:

    Yes, HIPAA protects your personal health information.

    No, that does not mean that it is completely inaccessible to everyone but you.

    Legally, any company who needs the information for the processing of claims or provision of care can access that information as needed, but only to the extent that it’s related to care. That’s why your health insurance provider can process your claims without having to call for your permission every time they pick up the claim. This is also why your doctor has access to your medical history, unless you specifically request that certain parts of it be removed from access.

    A criminal case is one of the situations in which a court has a right to subpoena healthcare and psychiatric records. Information deemed relevant to the proceedings can be requested by the defense for their reference and potential use within the case. The plaintiff does need to agree to release that information, but you can see how that request is a double-edged sword. You can say yes but have to deal with the fact that your personal information is now available for public consumption. You can say no, but now the defense can argue that you’re hiding something and possibly obstructing justice. This is a tactical maneuver on the part of many defense lawyers as a way of getting plaintiffs to drop parts of the case (such as mental health damages) because they know people don’t want that information out there.

    Suffice to say, it’s legal, but it’s an entirely shitty situation all around.

  21. beanchew says:

    Therapy sessions are privileged and cannot be used in this way nor be made public in this way. Amend the charge to include defamation.

  22. babu says:

    I am friggin incensed, where is there consent in that statement? Where?

  23. Spring says:

    god, I hate that Paz is being victimized AGAIN. Traumatized victims are often self-blaming and confused about the boundary issues of an assault, even more so if past unresolved trauma and preexisting boundary issues were already in play. I can’t know whether that’s true of Paz, but either way, I despise how this is proceeding for her and how it’s played out for generations of so many victims.

    Paz must have okayed the release of the therapist’s notes, though I wonder if she was told she had no choice if she wanted to move the case forward. This is why some therapists keep their notes pretty skeletal — especially when the client is having trouble articulating a situation, needs time to work through it, and may be struggling with intense shame. Any therapist who works with trauma is, in my opinion, committing malpractice if s/he hasn’t invested in a serious, in-depth study of how trauma affects the nervous system and the processing of memory.

  24. Mar says:

    Well it’s enough evidence for me. Harvey Weinstein is a sexual predator.

  25. Aren says:

    Poor Paz probably felt she had to give consent to release all her private info as to not be called a liar.
    I really hope she has the resources to deal with this.

  26. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    There are tens of thousands of rape kits that have yet to be processed all over this country. Hundreds of thousands most likely… just sitting there. On the other hand, children are removed from homes and families torn apart based on heresay and must prove innocence over guilt. My wish is for an overhaul of policies and procedures up and down the chain of command.

  27. AV says:

    The fact that you had to seek medical care for this coercive sex doesn’t prove rape, don’tchaknow? It just shows that you had *almost-rape* sex. Mkay? Cool. Love, America.

  28. Taxi says:

    I’m sorry for her horrible experiences.
    How did Weinstein get into her apartment from the hotel lobby? Hotel staff can refuse entry.

  29. CharlieBouquet says:

    As someone burned by therapy, I am assuming fetal position. The one thing this site has done for me, is knowing no matter how alone I feel in my experiences, I was never the only one.

  30. nicegirl says:

    So then, if this is legal, should we all be requesting ‘NO NOTES’ when it comes to our therapy sessions? To further protect ourselves? Real question.

    I am so sorry this is happening to you, Paz.

  31. RCCgirl says:

    So there’s a reason the DA will only take the strongest cases to trial and that is because suicide rates for victims of sexual violence are highest after trial. Putting a survivor through the horrors of trial knowing the evidence isn’t there for a conviction can be really damaging and traumatic. I say this as a sexual assault victim advocate who works these cases regularly and survivor myself.

  32. Tessa says:

    The law in US is mental

  33. SM says:

    Ok. By far one of the most disturbing sexgate news pieces coming out this year

  34. 42istheanswer says:

    I dare not imagine how utterly devastating it must be for Paz de la Huerta… Unfortunately, I do not see how it could be avoided, legally speaking.

    All crimes, regardless of their seriousness, have to contain two types of elements to be “valid” : factual elements and moral elements. One classic way to illustrate this distinction is with the case of theft : the factual element of theft is the substraction of someone else’s property; its moral element is the knowledge that said property is not one’s own. Therefore, if I mistake someone else’s coat for mine and leave with it, I substract someone else’s property but cannot be accused of theft due to my lack of knowledge or understanding that it was not mine to begin with.
    The same logic applies to all rapes : the job of lawyers is to prove that the accused knew the victim was not consenting. Otherwise, there is no moral element to the case and therefore no crime.

    That is why the topic of consent is such a fundamental one. And why cases like Harvey Weinstein are such a quagmire from a legal standpoint (from a moral standpoint, conversely, they are pretty clear-cut !). How does one prove coercion ? How does one prove that someone did not want to have sex but felt like she had to due to the power held by her abuser ?

  35. Baltimom says:

    Coerced sex is still rape. Too bad the law doesn’t recognize that. Oh wait. The law was written by males. Nevermind….

  36. Ce2495 says:

    My heart breaks for Paz….this is really horrific. HW is a monster and deserves to be rotting in hell.

  37. lasagna_jones says:

    it says correspondence, not therapy notes. maybe they discussed it later via email or something?

  38. Jussie says:

    Prosecutors can’t do much with what they have in these cases. It’s hard enough to get someone convicted for a recent sexual assault. Historical cases are a nightmare. Unless there’s really solid evidence (pictures, video) or excellent witnesses who actually saw it or the immediate aftermath, there’s very, very little chance of a successful case. Prosecutors aren’t going to bring charges if they think they have a minuscule chance of succeeding. Apart from anything else, asking the victim to go through with an emotionally traumatic case they’ll almost certainly lose borders on unethical.

    This is why it’s really important to go to the police and have a rape kit done at the time, even if you don’t think you’ll ever pursue it.