- Wednesday, June 11, 2025
Tensions are mounting inside the jury room of Harvey Weinstein’s retrial as jurors argue, bring up past allegations, and show signs of division—raising fears of a potential hung jury and mistrial.
By: Vibhuti Pathak
Harvey Weinstein’s retrial for alleged sex crimes has taken a dramatic turn as the jury deliberations appear mired in internal conflict and inappropriate references to the disgraced mogul’s past. Jurors have been in deliberations for three days without a verdict, prompting concern over fairness, possible mistrial, and the emotional intensity gripping the courtroom.
Foreperson Raises Alarm Over Jury Conduct
On Monday (9) morning, the jury foreperson sent a note to Judge Curtis Farber, ominously stating: “I need to talk to you about a situation which isn’t very good.” What followed revealed escalating tensions within the 12-member panel—comprising five men and seven women.
According to court transcripts, the foreperson told the judge that several jurors were bringing up Weinstein’s broader public history—including unproven allegations not included in this retrial—in an attempt to sway others. The foreperson admitted that the jury was “not on the same page,” with some members “attacking” others during deliberations.
Judge Issues Fresh Instructions to Avoid Mistrial
Weinstein’s defense team responded swiftly, filing a motion for mistrial. However, Judge Farber denied the request, choosing instead to re-instruct the jury. He emphasized that their focus must remain solely on the three charges presented at trial, and that no external information—particularly Weinstein’s past allegations—should influence their verdict.
“The evidence introduced at this trial is the only thing that can be used in their deliberations,” the judge reiterated, hoping to curb the growing unrest among jurors.
Previous Complaints, New Warnings
Tensions had already surfaced last week when one juror reported being “shunned” by others and overheard negative comments being made outside the courthouse. Describing the atmosphere as “playground stuff,” the juror asked to be dismissed, arguing that the deliberations were no longer “fair and just.” Judge Farber, however, opted to keep the juror on the panel.
On Monday (9), the jury also asked for the legal definitions of “reasonable doubt” and the proper rules of deliberation—especially in the context of avoiding a hung jury. These requests signaled ongoing uncertainty about the path to a unanimous decision.
Weinstein Faces Lifetime Imprisonment
The retrial follows the reversal of Weinstein’s 2020 conviction after an appeals court ruled that testimony from women unrelated to the charges prejudiced the case. In the current trial, prosecutors have taken great care to limit testimony strictly to the allegations by three accusers: a former TV production assistant, an aspiring actress, and a model.
Despite limitations, the case remains central to the larger #MeToo movement. Weinstein, already serving time for a separate California conviction, could spend the rest of his life in prison if convicted in New York.
As deliberations continue, the jury has requested more evidence and even coffee for stamina—indicating they’re not giving up yet. However, the risk of a mistrial looms large amid the discord.
