Before Courts Kept Him Jailed, Prosecutors Passed on the ‘Scrubs’ Producer Three Times
Prosecutors in Los Angeles dropped five sexual assault counts against Eric Weinberg the week his trial opened, the New York Post reported. The cut narrows the case to 23 counts involving seven women. The Post reported that the dropped counts were tied to a woman who alleged an assault in 2018. When charges were filed in 2022, the district attorney’s announcement listed alleged assaults in 2014, 2017, 2018 and 2019, so she was part of the case from the start. The reason for the dismissal has not been made public.
Weinberg, 66, a former co-executive producer of “Scrubs,” has pleaded not guilty. He faces counts of forcible rape, sexual penetration by force, forcible oral copulation, attempted sexual penetration and sexual battery by restraint, according to Courthouse News. Prosecutors allege that between 2014 and 2019 he lured women to his home in Los Feliz, a hillside neighborhood near Griffith Park, for photo shoots and assaulted them there. If convicted, he faces up to life in prison, Los Angeles Magazine reported.
The trial, which opened Oct. 1 in Los Angeles County Superior Court, comes after years in which the justice system had chances to act and did not take them. Women first went to the police in 2014. Over the next two years the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office declined to file charges three times. Weinberg was not arrested in the current case until July 2022, after the women had found one another largely on their own.
The declinations
In 2014 the Los Angeles Police Department arrested Weinberg after a woman reported that he raped her during a photo shoot. In June of that year, a deputy district attorney declined to file. She wrote that the woman said she did not consent, Weinberg said she did, and “there is no corroboration,” according to charge evaluation worksheets reviewed by The Hollywood Reporter. The office declined again in September 2014, after a second woman came forward, the publication reported.
In 2016, Deputy District Attorney David Reinert declined a third case, according to the worksheet the publication reviewed. He wrote that “there is no evidence that the defendant used force, threats or intimidation to overcome the will of the victims.” Reinert, now a Superior Court judge, told The Hollywood Reporter he could not recall the case. Jackie Lacey, then the district attorney, did not comment.
The office’s written policy sets a demanding standard before a deputy walks away from a case. Its chapter on sex crimes directs filing deputies to “verify that all possible investigative avenues have been pursued before deciding to file or decline.” It also tells them to weigh a suspect’s prior sexual assault allegations and any pretext phone calls, in which a victim calls a suspect while police listen. The version posted on the office’s website is undated, so it is not known whether those rules governed in 2014 and 2016. The public record does not show whether the 2016 deputy weighed the two 2014 reports, or whether investigators ever tried a recorded call.
A report that went nowhere
In February 2019, a woman went to police three days after a photo shoot at Weinberg’s home and submitted to a rape kit exam, The Hollywood Reporter reported. She told the publication she never heard back. In her opening statement on Oct. 1, Deputy District Attorney Ariel Anson told jurors that the woman’s case “was never fully investigated,” Courthouse News reported.
Whether the kit was tested has not been disclosed. Under Penal Code section 680.3, police had to log kits collected after Jan. 1, 2018, in a state tracking database within 120 days. That database holds no names, so it cannot be searched for a single case.
The deadlines for submitting and testing kits were “merely recommendations through the end of 2019,” according to the state Justice Department’s 2023 report on the database. They became mandatory in 2020 under SB 22. Cases with a known suspect who claims consent pose a particular problem, because DNA can prove contact but not lack of consent. The same report lists a kit that police did not send to a lab for that reason. LAPD has not said whether it made that judgment in 2019.
What gave him access
No employer gave Weinberg access. The alleged assaults took place in his home, not on a set, so no studio complaint process came into play.
What opened doors, the women say, was his credential. Several told The Hollywood Reporter they followed the usual safety advice. They looked up his credits, set limits by text, brought a friend or spoke with a model who vouched for him. Anson told jurors that Weinberg “carefully created an image of himself” as a successful family man.
Warnings did circulate in the industry, but only privately. In 2016, a talent manager wrote to a client who had walked out of a shoot that he knew of Weinberg’s “reputation,” according to an email The Hollywood Reporter reviewed. A producer told the publication Weinberg had become “unrecommendable.” His television credits stop after 2016.
No public record shows that a studio, network, guild or agency received or acted on a complaint. California law places no duty to report on colleagues who hear secondhand about an adult’s assault. Writers and producers hold no state license that a regulator could revoke.
People outside the system moved the case. In January 2020, a woman asked in a private Los Angeles women’s Facebook group whether others had encountered Weinberg, and hundreds responded, The Hollywood Reporter reported. Hilary Bidwell, his wife at the time, filed for divorce in February 2020. She later gathered sworn declarations from women for the custody case and hired private investigators, the publication reported. In March 2022, a lawyer connected the women with LAPD’s Special Assaults Section, and Weinberg was arrested that July.
The defense says that history is the point. Weinberg’s lawyers have called the allegations a product of “a heavily litigated and acrimonious custody dispute.” Lead defense lawyer Philip Cohen told jurors that Bidwell wanted to “put Eric away” and that the women were “looking for a whole lot of money,” Courthouse News reported. Cohen called his client a “creep” but argued that prosecutors cannot prove force or fear. He said Weinberg “never knew” the women were afraid.
Two speeds
Once Weinberg was charged, the courts treated the case very differently. Judge Victoria B. Wilson revoked his $5 million bail at his arraignment on Oct. 25, 2022, the Associated Press reported. He has been jailed since. According to appellate court dockets, he challenged his detention four times and lost each time.
On March 13, 2023, the Court of Appeal in Los Angeles ruled against him. It found that “a reasonable fact finder” could conclude, by clear and convincing evidence, that his release posed a substantial likelihood of great bodily harm. It also found that no less restrictive conditions would protect others.
The California Supreme Court ordered prosecutors to respond to his next petition. On May 17, 2023, it denied review but expressly left Weinberg free to try again after it decided In re Harris, a pending case on what evidence judges may consider when they deny bail. The court decided Harris on June 27, 2024, holding that judges may rely on hearsay and documents. Weinberg filed again that September, with 1,702 pages of exhibits.
On Nov. 15, 2024, the appeals court found that substantial evidence supported the ruling that his proposed release conditions “do not sufficiently protect the public.” The Supreme Court declined review on Jan. 15, 2025.
Those rulings assessed risk in order to decide on detention; they are not findings of guilt. Still, they stand in contrast to the 2016 decision, which found no evidence of force at all.
The law around the case
California changed several relevant laws while this case unfolded. SB 813, passed in 2016, removed the time limit for prosecuting rapes committed on or after Jan. 1, 2017, as well as older rapes whose deadline had not yet passed. That is why alleged 2014 assaults could still be charged in 2022. Even so, Judge Charlaine Olmedo dismissed three counts as too old when she ordered Weinberg to stand trial in May 2024, Variety reported.
Civil deadlines matter as well. At least 14 lawsuits name Weinberg and his production company. Under AB 2777, adults alleging an assault on or after Jan. 1, 2009, have until Dec. 31, 2026, to file claims that had otherwise expired. AB 250, passed in 2025, opens a further window through Dec. 31, 2027, for some older claims, under narrower conditions.
None of these laws addresses the gap this case exposes. HeroNotZero found no state law or district attorney policy that requires prosecutors to revisit a declined sex crime case when a new complainant names the same suspect.
What happens next
Testimony continues at the Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center in downtown Los Angeles. Prosecutors expect the trial to run until mid-December. The window for civil claims under AB 2777 closes about two weeks later.
Questions remain for the district attorney’s office and LAPD. Was the 2019 rape kit ever tested? Did anyone connect the 2014, 2016 and 2019 reports before 2022? And did the office’s own rules on exhausting investigative avenues apply when it turned the cases down?
Sources
Court records
- California Supreme Court, In re Eric Michael Weinberg on Habeas Corpus, S279160 (review denied May 17, 2023) and S287985 (review denied Jan. 15, 2025): https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/
- California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division 5, In re Eric Michael Weinberg on Habeas Corpus, from Los Angeles Superior Court case BA509407 (petitions denied March 13, 2023, and Nov. 15, 2024): https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/
- In re Harris, S272632, California Supreme Court opinion, June 27, 2024: https://courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S272632.PDF
- W.X. v. Eric Weinberg, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court civil case index: https://unicourt.com/case/ca-la23-w-x-vs-eric-weinberg-et-al-967316
Officials’ releases
- Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, “TV Producer Eric Weinberg Charged With Forcible Rape, Assault,” Oct. 5, 2022 (no longer on the office’s website), as reported by NBC News: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/scrubs-producer-eric-weinberg-charged-rape-assault-counts-rcna50952
- Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, Policy Manual, Chapter 4.01, Sex Crimes (undated): https://da.lacounty.gov/sites/default/files/policies/chapter-4.01-office-policy-manual.pdf
Laws
- SB 813 (2016), sex offenses statute of limitations: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB813
- AB 2777 (2022), chaptered text: https://www.legiscan.com/CA/text/AB2777/2021
- Code of Civil Procedure section 340.16, including AB 250 (2025): https://www.courtrules.net/california/california-code-civil-procedure/section-340-16
- Penal Code section 680.3: https://california.public.law/codes/penal_code_section_680.3
- SB 22 (2019), rape kit testing: https://www.legiscan.com/CA/text/SB22/2019
Reports and data
- California Department of Justice, Annual Report on the Sexual Assault Forensic Evidence Tracking (SAFE-T) Database, 2023: https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/ag-report-safe-t-database-2023.pdf
News coverage
- The Hollywood Reporter, investigation of allegations against Eric Weinberg, September 2022: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/eric-weinberg-alleged-victims-speak-out-sexual-assault-1235209912/
- Courthouse News Service, “Creep or criminal? Sexual assault trial of TV writer begins,” Oct. 1, 2026: https://www.courthousenews.com/creep-or-criminal-sexual-assault-trial-of-tv-writer-begins/
- New York Post, via Yahoo, on the defense opening and dropped counts, October 2026: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tv/articles/scrubs-producer-accused-rape-claims-142439503.html
- Los Angeles Magazine, “Eric Weinberg’s Lawyer Calls Him a ‘Creep’ as Rape Trial Begins,” Oct. 2, 2026: https://lamag.com/crimeinla/eric-weinbergs-lawyer-calls-him-a-creep-as-rape-trial-begins/
- Associated Press, via NBC News, on arraignment and bail revocation, Oct. 25, 2022: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/scrubs-producer-eric-weinberg-pleads-not-guilty-sexual-assault-denied-rcna54023
- Variety, on the preliminary hearing ruling, May 21, 2024: https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/scrubs-producer-eric-weinberg-trial-rape-sexual-assault-charges-1236012164/
- NBC News, on the 2022 charges: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/scrubs-producer-eric-weinberg-charged-rape-assault-counts-rcna50952
React to this story