text: So twenty years ago she agrees to take a payout instead of pursue prosecution, and a provision of that payout involved a gag order. Yet, now she's jumping on the "smear Weinstein bandwagon" and talking. Regardless of being forced to have sex with the guy, she made an agreement in which she accepted financial consideration (ie. $$$) to squash everything. She's just as dishonorable as Weinstein (just on a different scale) for breaking the agreement. And, oh BTW, she is NOT allowed to call Weinstein a "rapist" because in this country, everyone is presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty. Until such time, Weinstein is NOT a rapist...period. She can claim that she was physically forced to have sex with the guy, but "rape" is a legal descriptor that requires conviction by judge and/or jury.