Harvey Weinstein's retrial jury struggling with consensus

Some jurors believe the beleaguered movie tycoon and #MeToo poster boy isn't getting a fair trial. 

Harvey Weinstein's retrial jury struggling with consensus

The retrial of Harvey Weinstein continued its third day of deliberations with jurors struggling to decide the former Miramax head’s fate. The Wrap reports that jurors are at a standstill and unable to reach a consensus as jurors attempt to change the minds of the others by discussing information about Weinstein’s past that had not been introduced as evidence. According to transcripts of closed-door court meetings obtained by AP, the jury foreperson warned Judge Curtis Farber that they “feel like [jurors] are attacking, talking together, fighting together.” The foreperson believes the jury is considering Weinstein’s past and using it to push people to “change their minds.” Per Hollywood Reporter, one juror overheard others discussing the trial outside deliberations. That juror asked to be excused and said, “In good conscience, I don’t think it is fair and just.” Another was more optimistic. “Things are going well today,” they said. “The tone is very different. We’re making headway.”

While Judge Farber denied the request for a mistrial, Weinstein’s defense attorney, Arthur Aidala, characterized the trial as “tainted” by a “runaway jury.” “People are considering things not in this trial as evidence,” Aidala said. “It’s not fair. They’re talking about the past.” Judge Farber reread the rules to the jury in hopes of “avoiding a hung jury.”

The retrial focuses on three rape allegations, two from 2006 and one from 2013. Former Project Runway model Miriam Haley and former model Kaja Sokola accused Weinstein of forcing them to perform oral sex on him during separate 2006 incidents. Additionally, actress Jessica Mann accused Weinstein of raping her in 2013. Weinstein had been convicted of the crimes in 2020. However, the conviction was overturned in 2024 due to the court of appeals’ findings that the trial had been prejudiced against Weinstein by relying on “egregious” improper rules, such as allowing women ot testify about allegations beyond the bounds of the case.

 
Join the discussion...