[ad_1]
Former film mogul Harvey Weinstein was convicted Wednesday of one of many prime costs in his intercourse crimes retrial however acquitted of one other, and jurors had been as but unable to achieve a verdict on a 3rd cost.
The break up verdict meted out a measure of vindication to his accusers and prosecutors — but additionally to Weinstein — after the landmark case was thrown into limbo.
Weinstein’s preliminary conviction 5 years in the past appeared to cement the downfall of one in every of Hollywood’s strongest males in a pivotal second for the #MeToo motion. But that conviction was overturned final yr, and the case was despatched again for retrial in the identical Manhattan courthouse.
This time, a majority-female jury convicted the previous studio boss of forcibly subjecting one lady, Miriam Haley, to a prison intercourse act in 2006.
But jurors acquitted Weinstein of one other prison intercourse act cost. It associated to Kaja Sokola, whose allegations of forcible oral intercourse date to 2006 however had been added to the case final yr. And jurors had been to proceed deliberating Thursday on a cost that he raped one other lady, Jessica Mann, in 2013. Under New York regulation, the third-degree rape cost carries a lesser penalty than the first-degree prison intercourse act offence.
Weinstein, 73, denies sexually assaulting or raping anybody.
Jury deliberations had teetered Wednesday because the foreperson once more requested to talk to the choose about “a situation” he discovered troubling.
The man — who complained Monday that different jurors had been pushing individuals to vary their minds and speaking about info past the costs — was being questioned in non-public, at his request.
While the jury was in courtroom to listen to the reply to an earlier request to re-hear the textual content of a rape regulation, the foreperson signalled to Judge Curtis Farber that he needed to speak.
Get breaking National information
For information impacting Canada and around the globe, join breaking information alerts delivered on to you after they occur.
“He said words to the effect of ‘I can’t go back in there with the other jurors,’” Farber defined later. The foreperson was despatched to attend in a separate room, the place he penned a observe saying, “I need to talk to you about a situation.”
When briefly introduced into courtroom, the foreperson stated he needed to talk in non-public. He, the choose, prosecutors and Weinstein’s attorneys then went behind closed doorways.
The dialogue was closed to the press and public, however Farber later stated the foreperson had expressed that he didn’t need to change his place — no matter it could be — and was being bullied.
“He did indicate that at least one other juror made comments to the effect of ‘I’ll meet you outside one day,’ and there’s yelling and screaming,” the choose stated.
Weinstein lawyer Arthur Aidala characterised the foreperson’s considerations extra severely, saying that the person had stated he was involved for his security after his fellow panellist talked about assembly him exterior and added, “you don’t know me.”
“I don’t think the court is protecting this juror. Period,” Aidala stated, occurring to ask for a mistrial.
Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo, nonetheless, stated the foreperson hadn’t appeared afraid or apprehensive, simply “stubborn.”
“He said he’d made up his mind, he didn’t want to change it, and people were pressuring him to change it. That’s what jury deliberations involve,” the prosecutor stated.
The episode was the most recent signal of pressure among the many jurors. On Friday, one in every of them requested to be excused as a result of he felt one other member of the group was being handled unfairly.
Weinstein’s attorneys requested unsuccessfully for a mistrial then, and once more after the foreperson expressed his considerations Monday. The jury stored deliberating and went via Tuesday with out sending any extra messages about interpersonal tensions.
The seven feminine and 5 male jurors began their fifth day of deliberations Wednesday by re-hearing accuser Jessica Mann’s testimony that he raped her in a Manhattan lodge room in 2013. The group wrapped up Tuesday’s deliberations by asking to revisit that testimony.
Some jurors appeared to take contemporary notes Wednesday, whereas others sat impassively as courtroom stenographers learn aloud the requested components of Mann’s days-long testimony. The jury had already reheard a few of the passages final week.
Weinstein, 73, pleaded not responsible to raping Mann and to forcing oral intercourse on two different ladies, Mimi Haley and Kaja Sokola. The Oscar-winning producer and former Hollywood powerbroker maintains that he by no means sexually assaulted or raped anybody, and his attorneys portrayed his accusers as opportunists who accepted his advances as a result of they needed a leg up within the leisure world.
© 2025 The Canadian Press