A former TV production assistant has told a court she felt “the unthinkable was happening” during an alleged assault by Harvey Weinstein.

Warning: This article contains references to sexual assault

Miriam Haley is the first of the former movie mogul’s accusers to testify at his retrial, which is taking place as New York’s highest court overturned Weinstein’s 2020 conviction.

The former studio boss, 73, has pleaded not guilty to one charge of rape and two of forcing oral sex. He denies sexually assaulting anyone.

Ms Haley, who also goes by the name Mimi Haleyi, today told the court Weinstein held her down and forced oral sex on her after she told him: “No, no – it’s not going to happen.”

She dabbed her eyes as she recalled in court what went through her mind during the alleged July 2006 assault.

“The unthinkable was happening, I just thought any unthinkable thing could happen,” she said. “I just didn’t know where it ended.”

Weinstein, sitting between his lawyers, shook his head as she spoke.

Ms Haley also testified at Weinstein’s initial trial.

She began her testimony yesterday by describing how she got to know Weinstein, saying she had some inappropriate and suggestive interactions with him, while others were polite and professional.

Ms Haley maintains she was always looking to forge a professional connection – not sex or romance – with the Miramax founder.

Read more: What has happened to the #MeToo movement?

Weinstein’s lawyers are yet to question Ms Haley, but the defence has sought, often unsuccessfully, to object to prosecutors’ questions, such as whether Ms Haley had any sexual interest in the then-powerful producer. She said she did not.

The defence has argued that all of Weinstein’s accusers consented to sexual activities with him in the hopes of getting work in show business.

The 73-year-old’s retrial includes charges based on allegations from Haley and Jessica Mann, an actress who alleges Weinstein raped her in 2013.

For the first time, he is also being tried on an allegation of forcing oral sex on a former model, Kaja Sokola, in 2006.

The UK has joined US forces in attacking a Houthi target in Yemen for the first time since Donald Trump was re-elected.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) confirmed the strikes took place on Tuesday as part of the government’s response to Houthi attacks on international shipping in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden.

The ministry said careful intelligence analysis identified a cluster of buildings used by the Houthis to manufacture the sort of drones used to attack ships, located 15 miles south of the capital Sanaa.

RAF Typhoon FGR4s conducted strikes on several buildings using Paveway IV precision-guided bombs.

The planes had air refuelling support from Voyager tankers.

The ministry said the strike was conducted after dark to reduce the likelihood of civilians being in the area.

All the aircraft returned safely.

Defence Secretary John Healey said: “This government will always act in the interests of our national and economic security.

“Royal Air Force Typhoons have successfully conducted strikes against a Houthi military target in Yemen and all UK aircraft and personnel have returned safely to base.

“We conducted these strikes, supported by the US, to degrade Houthi capabilities and prevent further attacks against UK and international shipping.”

Read more from Sky News:
Kneecap’s Eden Project gig cancelled amid ‘kill MPs’ row
Israel releases medic detained after IDF attack on aid workers
Crush fly-tippers’ vans, government tells councils

Houthis a ‘persistent threat’ to ‘freedom of navigation’

Mr Healey said Houthi activities in the Red Sea are a “persistent threat” to “freedom of navigation”.

“A 55% drop in shipping through the Red Sea has already cost billions, fuelling regional instability and risking economic security for families in the UK,” he said.

“The government is steadfast in our commitment to reinforcing global stability and protecting British working people. I am proud of the dedication and professionalism shown by the service men and women involved in this operation.”

Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

US intensifies strikes on Houthis

It was the first time UK forces have struck a target in Yemen since May last year, the ministry confirmed.

The US has intensified its strikes on the Iran-backed Houthis under Mr Trump’s presidency, after his re-election in November 2024.

The group began launching attacks on shipping routes in November 2023 saying they were in solidarity with Palestinians over Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza.

The strike came after a Houthi-controlled TV channel claimed a US strike killed 68 people at a detention centre for African migrants in Yemen on Monday.

Will MPs get a vote on a trade deal with Donald Trump?

It used to be Labour policy, though Sir Keir Starmer didn’t sound keen on the idea at Prime Minister’s Questions.

The PM was challenged, first by Lib Dem MP Clive Jones, who wants a guarantee that parliament has the final say on any trade deal, including one with the US.

“This idea is not new,” said Clive, who used to be a director of various toy companies, and was president, chairman and director of the British Toy and Hobby Association, no less.

“It’s exactly what Labour promised to do in an official policy paper put forward in 2021, so I am asking this government to keep their promise,” he continued.

And, toying with the PM, he complained: “Currently, members of parliament have no vote or voice on trade deals.”

In reply, Sir Keir gave one of those non-answers we’re becoming used to at PMQs, saying rather tetchily: “As he knows, parliament has a well-established role in scrutinising and ratifying trade deals.”

Later, Sir Ed Davey had a go. “Will the government give MPs a vote on the floor of the House on any deal he agrees with President Trump? Yes or no?” he asked.

He fared no better. Sir Keir said again: “If it is secured, it will go through the known procedures for this House.”

Read more on the trade deal:
US ‘positive’ on talks
Deal ‘possible’ but not ‘certain’

So what are parliament’s “well-established role” and “the known procedures”? And what exactly did Labour promise in opposition back in 2021?

The 2021 promise was, in fact, one of those worthy pledges parties make in opposition and then either conveniently forget about or water down when they’re in government. U-turn if you want to.

The policy paper referred to by Mr Jones was: “Labour’s trade policy: putting workers first” – published in September 2021 by Emily Thornberry when she was shadow international trade secretary.

The secretary of state at the time was none other than Liz Truss. Whatever happened to her? Come to think of it, whatever happened to Emily Thornberry?

Back then idealistic Emily declared in her policy paper: “We will reform the parliamentary scrutiny of trade agreements…

“So that MPs have a guaranteed right to debate the proposed negotiating objectives for future trade deals, and a guaranteed vote on the resulting agreements…”

A guaranteed vote. Couldn’t be clearer. And there was more from Emily.

“…with sufficient time set aside for detailed scrutiny both of the draft treaty texts and of accompanying expert analysis on the full range of implications, including for workers’ rights.”

Sufficient time for detailed scrutiny. Again, couldn’t be clearer.

Then came a section headed: Parliamentary Scrutiny of Trade Deals.

“The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRAG) dictates that international treaties (including trade agreements) must be laid before parliament for a period of 21 sitting days before they can become law,” we were told back then.

“At present, a treaty can only be challenged and (temporarily) rejected by means of an opposition day debate, if one is granted by the government within that time.

“The CRAG legislation was agreed by parliament before Brexit was on the horizon. Its procedures for the ratification of trade treaties, which were then negotiated and agreed at EU level, were given no consideration during the passage of the Act, and no one envisaged that they would become the mechanism for parliamentary scrutiny of the government’s post-Brexit trade deals…

“Despite the flagrant evidence of the inadequacy of the CRAG Act to allow proper oversight of trade deals, the government repeatedly blocked numerous cross-party proposals to improve the processes for parliamentary scrutiny and approval during passage of the 2021 Trade Act.

“A future Labour government will return to those proposals, and learn from best practice in other legislatures, to ensure that elected MPs have all the time, information and opportunity they need to debate and vote on the UK’s trade deals, both before negotiations begin and after they conclude.”

So what’s changed from the heady days of Liz Truss as trade secretary and Labour’s bold pledges in opposition? Labour’s in government now, that’s what. Hence the U-turn, it seems.

Parliament’s role may be, as Sir Keir told MPs, “well-established”. But that, according to opponents, is the problem. It’s contrary to what Labour promised in opposition.

👉Listen to Politics at Sam and Anne’s on your podcast app👈

Sir Ed hit back at the PM: “I’m very disappointed in that reply. There was no ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response. We do want a vote, and we will keep pressing him and his government on that.”

And true to their word, Mr Jones and another Lib Dem MP, Richard Foord, have already tabled private member’s bills demanding a final say on any trade deal with President Trump.

Watch this space. And also watch out for Labour MPs also backing demands for a Commons vote on a Trump trade deal before long.