These are serious allegations that Harvey Weinstein is currently having to face in court in several court cases. In his position as one of the most important Hollywood producers, he is said to have forced and raped numerous actresses into sex. Now his defense strategy is in danger of crumbling. Thanks to its unusual genitals.

They are increasingly becoming the subject of the current proceedings, reports "Vanity Fair". The victim of the current process, a European actress, who is only called "Jane Doe" (a standard name for unknown persons in the USA, editor's note) to protect her identity, was asked about his testicles several times. They are considered one of the most important pieces of evidence for the prosecution.

The reason is simple. As the prosecution revealed in October, Weinstein had already had an operation in 1999 that significantly altered his genitals. Part of his scrotum had to be removed due to a bacterial infection, and the two testicles were then relocated to his thighs, as the prosecutor explained. The jury was also shown photos, but these were not released to the public.

Weinstein's surgery is relevant to the case because several women who have accused him of sexual assault or rape have described his genitals as unusual.

For Weinstein, these statements are a huge problem. His defense insists that the alleged rape at the 2013 L.A. Italia film festival could not have happened because the victim was never alone in a hotel room with Weinstein. His lawyer tried to undermine the statement accordingly. The victim tearfully testified that he forced her to "suck his balls." The lawyer questioned this by pointing out that his client didn't have any. And claimed the victim contradicted himself.

But that was what he said. She always said that they "felt like he didn't have any. It was like empty skin," the actress explained. The prosecutor sees it the same way. Chief Prosecutor Paul Thompson asked the jury about exactly that on Friday. "You've seen the pictures. I'm sure if I asked you about it it would be hard to describe. It's just hard to describe if you don't have medical expertise." Thompson's argument: Had Jane Doe not been coerced by Weinstein, she could have had no knowledge of his anatomical peculiarities.

For Weinstein, this line of reasoning could become a huge problem. At least two other of his alleged victims have also made statements about the unusual appearance of his genitals. One said it looked "as if it had been chopped off and then sewn back on. There was just something wrong with it". Another described his penis as "fish-like". "The testicles were kind of disfigured. There was a lot of skin, a lot of skin."

Weinstein's further strategy in the current process does not make him look good either. It turned out that Weinstein's former driver, who testified for him, had had his lawyer paid by the Hollywood mogul. Weinstein's lawyer had also argued that Doe was in a room with festival organizer Pascal Vicedomin at the time and that they were having an affair. However, Vicedomin's statement loses credibility. In an email, Weinstein referred to him as "his hero." And emphasizes that he would lie for him without hesitation.

What: "Vanity Fair"