Two jurors claim they were bullied into convicting Harvey Weinstein and regret it, his lawyers say
NEW YORK (AP) — Two jurors convicted in June Harvey Weinstein The sexual assault defendants regretted the decision and said they only did it because others on the panel bullied them, lawyers for the former movie mogul said in a newly public court filing.
Weinstein’s lawyers are seeking to overturn his conviction for first-degree criminal sexual conduct, arguing in documents unsealed Thursday that the guilty verdict was clouded by “threats, intimidation and extraneous bias” and that the judge failed to properly deal with it at the time.
In affidavits included in the filing, two jurors said they were overwhelmed and frightened by jurors who wanted to convict Weinstein on the charge that accused him of forcing oral sex on TV and with a film production assistant and producer. Miriam Haley In 2006.
One juror said he was yelled at in the jury room and told, “We’ve got to get rid of you.” The other juror said anyone who doubted Weinstein’s guilt was questioned by other jurors, and if he could vote by secret ballot, “I would return a verdict of not guilty on all three charges.”
“I was saddened by the verdict,” the juror said. “I believe the jury would have stuck with the Miriam Haley charge had it not been for the threat from the other jurors.”
Weinstein, 73, was acquitted on a second charge of criminal sexual conduct involving a different woman, a Polish psychotherapist and former model Kaja Sokola. After the jury foreman refused to deliberate further, the judge declared a mistrial on the final charge alleging that Weinstein raped former actor Jessica Mann.
This was the second time the Oscar-winning producer was tried on some charges. His conviction in 2020 was a turning point for # MeToo movementit was overthrown last year. Now the defense team, led by attorney Arthur Aidala, is fighting to overturn the retrial conviction and forestall another retrial on the undecided count.
Judge Curtis Farber gave Manhattan prosecutors until Nov. 10 to conduct their own investigation and submit a written response before ruling on Dec. 22. That means a decision and possible retrial or sentencing won’t come until Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is up for re-election on Nov. 4.
Jurors said they feared for their safety
In sworn statements in which the names and identification numbers of the jurors were withheld, two jurors said they feared for their safety and that of the foreman. They said when the foreman asked for politeness, another juror got in his face, pointed his finger and told him: “You don’t know me. I’ll catch you outside.”
The belief among some jurors that one of the panel members was paid by Weinstein or his lawyers poisoned deliberations, one juror said. This claim, which is not supported by any evidence, changed the picture jury consisting of seven women and five men “From a 6-6 debate to a sudden unanimous decision,” the juror said.
Some of what was said in the affidavits echoed harsh statements made public during the negotiations. As jurors spent five days weighing the charges, one juror asked: be forgiven Because he thought someone else was being treated unfairly.
Later foreman complained that other jurors were pushing people He said he changed his minds and a juror yelled at him for sticking to his opinion and suggested the foreman “see me outside.”
After the jury reached a verdict on two of the three charges, Farber asked the foreman if he wanted to deliberate further. The man’s decision to say no caused the trial to be misjudged in the case of rape.
After the trial, two jurors objected to the foreman’s testimony. Someone said no one treated him badly. The other said the talks were controversial but respectful.
Juror members spoke to the judge
When jurors voiced concerns, Farber was adamant about respecting the sanctity of deliberations and warned them not to discuss the content or tenor of deliberations in the jury room, according to the transcript. In affidavits, two jurors said they felt the judge was not willing to listen to their concerns.
When jurors were asked if they agreed with the guilty verdict, one juror stated in his affidavit that he paused “to express my discomfort with the verdict.” Later, when Farber spoke to jurors, he said they told him “the deliberations were unprofessional.”
Weinstein denies all accusations. First-degree criminal sexual conduct conviction Potential up to 25 years The outstanding third-degree rape charge is punishable by up to four years in prison; This is less time than he has ever spent.
He has been behind bars since his death first conviction In 2020, he was also sentenced to prison in a separate prison. california caseroom attractive.
