Harvey Weinstein rape trial ends in mistrial after jury deadlock
Harvey Weinstein’s rape trial ended in a mistrial after jurors failed to reach a verdict on a third-degree rape charge. The judge gave prosecutors 30 days to decide on a retrial, while Weinstein continues serving prison terms in New York and Los Angeles.
Los Angeles: Disgraced Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein‘s rape trial entered deadlocked. This has prompted the judge to declare a mistrial.
After three days of deliberations, the jurors were unable to reach a verdict on a charge of third-degree rape for which Weinstein had been tried twice previously, reports ‘Variety’.
Judge Curtis Farber gave prosecutors 30 days to decide whether to try the case for a fourth time. Weinstein, 74, has been incarcerated since his first rape conviction in 2020.
As per ‘Variety’, he was convicted last June of sexually assaulting Miriam Haley, after the New York Court of Appeals overturned the original guilty verdict. That jury could not reach a verdict on a charge of third-degree rape of Jessica Mann, an aspiring actress, forcing prosecutors to try the count for a third time.
Farber has held off on sentencing Weinstein until the remaining count is resolved. Weinstein was also sentenced in 2023 to 16 years in prison after being convicted of rape in Los Angeles. That verdict is on appeal. Mann testified for five days in this trial, recounting the same allegations she told two previous juries.
She alleged that Weinstein forced her to have sex at a Manhattan hotel room in March 2013. The defense argued that Mann chose to be in a relationship with Weinstein, highlighting friendly notes she sent to the producer, saying things like “Miss you, big guy”, and “Appreciate all you do for me”.
At the trial last year, Weinstein was acquitted of sexually assaulting yet another woman, Kaja Sokola. In the Los Angeles case, Weinstein was convicted of raping an Italian model during a film festival in February 2013. Weinstein’s attorneys have denied that encounter ever took place, and have argued that the trial judge improperly withheld evidence.
