Harvey Weinstein’s retrial unfolded amidst a backdrop of intriguing, behind-the-scenes conflicts, leading up to a contentious verdict. Allegations surfaced regarding a juror supposedly being “purchased” by a convicted sexual offender, along with claims that a “sneaky” juror imposed a deadline on deliberations.
The 12 jurors who discussed the situation with the press refuted the assertion from Juror No. 1 that he had been “blackmailed” by others.
“Everything he did was mean,” stated Chantan Holmes Claiborne, Juror No. 10, outside the Manhattan Supreme Court following the trial.
Another panel member, Juror No. 7, alerted the court to instances of “playground” bullying occurring behind closed doors last week. There were accusations that it was suggested the juror was influenced by Weinstein.
This discussion ensued after Judge Curtis Farber asked the foreman on Thursday morning about Weinstein’s ability to discern his guilt regarding the 2013 rape of former actress Jessica Mann.
“No, sorry,” the juror responded.
Weinstein, often seen in his wheelchair, clapped three times when Juror No. 1 declined to revisit deliberations, prompting Judge Farber to declare a juror’s status.
“Sometimes deliberations become more intense. I understand this round has been quite heated, which is, frankly, unfortunate,” Farber remarked to the jurors.
On Wednesday, a jury of seven women and five men found Weinstein guilty of a first-degree criminal act, but not guilty on a second count of the same charge.
On Thursday morning, the earlier decision to dismiss the lesser counts of three rapes concluded an eight-day period of deliberation that had been fraught with dysfunction.
Juror No. 1 reported that another panelist had verbally threatened him, saying, “I will see you outside one day.”
However, several jurors interviewed after the trial dismissed those concerns as “exaggerated.”
According to Holmes Claiborne, the foreperson was “lying” about facing threats and “fabricating” a story.
She indicated that the other jurors were willing to navigate their disagreements, but Foreson clearly articulated that if progress wasn’t made, he would cease deliberations.
“He definitely made it known that we had to reach a vote by 2 pm. If we didn’t, it’d be over,” Claiborne insisted.
“There’s disappointment,” she added. “It’s frustrating to hear that someone said to tell the judge we needed to vote by 2 pm just to wrap things up.”
One juror, who preferred not to be named, remarked that the deliberations were not nearly as problematic as the foreperson claimed.
Claiborne shared that the jury quickly reached a verdict after discussing the accusations from former television production assistant Miriam “Mimi” Haley from 2006.
They also swiftly acquitted Weinstein in connection to claims made by Polish model Kaja Sokola, which Claiborne noted did not carry much credibility.
Sokola testified that Weinstein had forced her to perform oral sex in 2006 at a Tribeca hotel.
The dramatic outcome from this trial led to statements from Manhattan District Attorney Nicole Brunberg about a potential third trial for Weinstein concerning Mann’s allegations.
Weinstein’s attorney, Arthur Adara, requested to dismiss the accusations, but the judge called for a hearing on July 2 to set a trial date.
In a statement, Adara rejected claims that someone on the jury was “bought,” describing such allegations as completely false and calling for an immediate investigation.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg noted that his decision to pursue a retrial sent a message to “survivors” and specifically Mann.
“Harvey Weinstein will face the consequences of his actions regarding Haley, and he is looking at a significant prison term,” Bragg stated during a press conference. “However, the jury couldn’t reach a verdict on Jessica Mann, and she deserves justice.”
Mann expressed her determination to continue fighting for accountability. “I will not give up, and I want my voice to be heard. I’ve told the district attorney that I’m ready to go through this process again,” Mann stated.
Weinstein could face a sentence of up to 25 years for the first-degree criminal act conviction, while the rape charges carry a maximum penalty of four years.
He has also been sentenced to 16 years in California for raping an Italian model at a 2013 film festival.
Weinstein had initially been convicted in a 2020 trial for criminal sex and rape, receiving a 23-year sentence, but a New York court overturned that conviction last year.
Weinstein’s lawyer, who described the disgraced Hollywood mogul as “the poster boy for the #MeToo movement,” indicated that they plan to appeal the convictions.
Adara asserted that there was clear evidence of jury misconduct during this trial.
