Harvey Weinstein, the fallen movie mogul facing possible life imprisonment for an alleged history of sexual crimes, is making a renewed attempt to have his trial moved out of New York City on the grounds that the opening phase of the proceedings have been sullied by a “deluge” of negative press reporting.

Harvey Weinstein trial: model Gigi Hadid among potential jurors Read more

Weinstein’s legal team produced an 87-page motion on Wednesday that called on the judge at the New York state supreme court in Manhattan to shift the location to upstate New York or Long Island. The motion argues that the change of court would avoid the “carnival-like atmosphere” that it complains has tainted the view of potential jurors since the trial began on 6 January.

Arthur Aidala, one of Weinstein’s defense attorneys, wrote in the motion: “Reporters and camera crews fill the entrance to the courthouse and line the hallways leading into the courtroom, celebrity press conferences denouncing the defendant occur on the courthouse steps, and protests and demonstrations are audible inside the courtroom during proceedings.”

The legal move is a repeat of Weinstein’s attempt last year to persuade the courts to order a change of venue on grounds that he could not get a fair trial in what he calls the “world’s media capital”. That effort failed in October when a five-judge panel of the state supreme court dismissed the request without explanation.

This latest motion is a long shot given the previous failure. The trial judge, James Burke, has expressed his displeasure on several occasions that Weinstein’s legal team has repeatedly introduced motions that have already been dismissed.

But the tactic is an indication of the aggressive approach that the defense team is taking, led by a Chicago-based attorney, Donna Rottuno. The constant stream of motions demanding changes in trial proceedings might also be designed as a way of planting seeds that could form the basis of later appeals were Weinstein convicted on any of the charges.

Weinstein, 67, faces five counts. The two most serious counts of predatory sexual assault carry the most severe punishment of up to life in prison, and he also faces two counts of rape and one of a criminal sex act relating to two accusers.

A total of six women are likely to testify to having been the victims of alleged sexual crimes by the defendant once the trial proper begins next week. Their stories form a tiny portion of the total of 105 women who have come forward to accuse Weinstein of sexual misconduct to a varying degree of seriousness.

So far the proceedings have been devoted to selecting the 12-person jury. A pool containing hundreds of potential jurors has been whittled down to about 175 by eliminating those who have work conflicts or who have said they do not feel able to be impartial in the Weinstein case.

The latest Weinstein motion cites the large number of potential jurors who have suggested that their minds are already made up, calling it “alarming”. The filing says: “We have no doubt that 12 living breathing human beings will be seated in the jury box at the commencement of the trial, but that will not constitute the fair and impartial jury to which Mr Weinstein is constitutionally entitled.”

Prosecutors at the New York trial have so far been disdainful of Weinstein’s legal tactics, which have included a demand that jury selection be held in private. The lead prosecutor, Joan Illuzzi, has called comments made by the defendant’s lawyers to the media outside the courtroom “abominable”.

The second stage of jury selection, known as voir dire, begins on Thursday. In it individual potential jurors will be grilled by both defense and prosecution legal teams in an attempt to flush out any hidden biases.

Each side will be able to block three people from the final jury without justification through “peremptory challenges”.